9538
NVQs and individuals: barriers and factors influencing take-up
Jonathan Winterton , University of Bradford
Ruth Winterton, University of Leeds
Introduction
Running and funding successful full-time access and foundation programmes is becoming increasingly problematic. Even in less vocational courses, there is more emphasis on work-based and work-related projects and placements. HE is already beginning to explore the NVQ/SVQ and GNVQ routes as a means of achieving target numbers and broadening access. Moreover, some HE institutions are becoming intimately involved in the process of providing both underpinning knowledge and accreditation for higher-level NVQs. All of these developments require that CE is aware of the barriers which individuals face in pursuing NVQs.
This paper reports on research undertaken on behalf of the Employment Department, which considered what factors influence individuals to take up NVQs, what barriers to take-up exist, and what are the strengths of existing arrangements. The research, involving semi-structured interviews with 121 individuals, and 40 training providers, advisors and employers, was undertaken between July and December 1994. The information gathered on factors affecting individual take-up of NVQs is substantial and this paper focuses on those which are most significant and relevant for policy recommendations, particularly as they affect the education of adults, under five headings:
- motivation
- knowledge and information
- advice and guidance
- barriers to individuals
- employer, provider and advisor activity
Background
While recent research has provided some indication of the barriers to adoption of NVQs/SVQs, largely from the perspectives of advisors[1] and employers[2], relatively little is known about factors affecting individual take-up. In order to explore the barriers to individuals, interviews were conducted with 123 individuals engaged in pursuing vocational qualifications, both NVQs and VQs, and with 40 employers, training providers (both FE and private), advice and guidance personnel and TEC staff.
Individuals’ views were analysed with respect to their knowledge of NVQs, sources and quality of information, advice and guidance, their motivation in pursuing a vocational qualification, and barriers which they encountered. These views are compared and contrasted with the perspectives of employers, providers and advisors. The fieldwork, involving face-to-face interviews with all respondents, was undertaken between August and December 1994 in four TEC areas in England. The issues raised may be equally relevant to SVQs.
The research had two broad objectives:
- to establish in detail the practical arrangements which need to be in place to encourage more individuals successfully to take up NVQs;
- to recommend how actual and perceived deficiencies in the arrangements can best be remedied.
In addressing these aims, complementary research questions considered what factors influence individuals to take up NVQs, what barriers to take-up exist, and what are the strengths of existing arrangements. The research generated substantial new information about factors affecting individual take-up of NVQs. This article focuses on those which are most significant and relevant for policy recommendations, reviewing the key findings and summarising recommendations under five headings:
- motivation
- knowledge and information
- advice and guidance
- barriers to individuals
- employer, provider and advisor activity
Motivation
Individuals perceived the main benefits of NVQs in terms of a nationally-recognised qualification which is competence-based and job-related, and employers, providers and advisors recognised the same attractions to individuals. Individuals expected to gain in terms of personal development and job prospects, while employers, providers and advisors emphasised improved job prospects, personal development and job satisfaction. Overall, 67 per cent of NVQ respondents felt that the NVQ had lived up to their expectations, as did 65 per cent of employers, providers and advisors, with providers most convinced and advisors least convinced of this.
Individuals perceived the main drawbacks with NVQs to be the low level of public awareness and doubt over acceptability to employers, while employers, providers and advisors believed drawbacks for individuals were the time and commitment required, lack of support from providers and reservations about the status of NVQs. Employers influence an individual’s decision to work towards an NVQ and their choice of NVQ and level. Individuals tend to select an occupational area and then investigate an appropriate qualification to pursue, rather than specifically choose to work towards an NVQ. The majority of individuals successfully pursuing an NVQ at one level intended to continue training at the next level, but some individuals had been unable to pursue NVQs, especially at levels III and above, through lack of availability.
There is a need to build public awareness of NVQs and to develop their acceptability to employers. In marketing NVQs, the benefits of a nationally-recognised qualification which offers personal development and job prospects should be emphasised. Marketing material should be occupationally specific and emphasise ‘kitemarking’ of competence-based and job-related qualifications. Publicity should be targeted at both individuals and employers in parallel to create ‘push’ and ‘pull’ effects. If the marketing initiative is to be successful, the infrastructure needs to be in place to meet expected demand, especially in relation to availability of NVQs at levels III and above.
Knowledge and information
The vast majority of individuals (94 per cent), both NVQ and VQ candidates, had heard of NVQs, but 49 per cent of NVQ candidates were unaware of the status of NVQs and 24 per cent were unaware of their competence-based nature. It was not obvious to individuals where information on NVQs could be obtained, although few experienced difficulty in obtaining information, mainly from FE Colleges, employers and the media. Employers, providers and advisors expected individuals to obtain information from FE Colleges, private providers and employers, and, to a lesser extent, from Careers and the TECs. Employers and providers tended to emphasise their own roles. Some individuals experienced difficulty in understanding information because of the language used and others found that information was not relevant to their needs. Many individuals would have liked more information on the status of NVQs, the time and effort involved and the costs. Candidates pursuing NVQs independently received less information than those working towards NVQs through arrangements with their employer.
These findings suggest that while advertising initiatives via the media have succeeded in raising awareness of NVQs, there is now a need to build on this awareness and develop understanding of the status and competence-based nature of NVQs. Detailed information should be provided on the time and effort involved in pursuing an NVQ, assessment procedures and costs, even where individuals are not paying in order to reinforce the value of NVQs. Literature should be produced in plain English, involve as little technical language as possible and be targeted at specific audiences, occupational sectors and particular delivery initiatives. Leaflets, brochures and information packs should be more widely available for individuals through libraries, benefit offices, Job Centres, Careers Service, other guidance centres and employers. Information sources for NVQs should be established inside organisations, through training or human resource departments.
Advice and guidance
Overall, 11 per cent of individuals, and 26 per cent of those pursuing NVQs independently, had received no advice or guidance, and a further 38 per cent described the advice and guidance received as ineffective. Nevertheless, the majority of individuals who had been given advice and guidance found what they received essential or very helpful. Advice and guidance is most likely to be provided by the parties close to delivery: employers and providers. While there are advantages to this arrangement, it is also evident that there are insufficient sources of impartial advice and guidance available to individuals, and that sources which do exist are not widely known. Among those who had received advice and guidance, 67 per cent of individuals had an individual interview and 57 per cent were provided with written information. Advice and guidance involved a Training Needs Analysis for 68 per cent of individuals and the identification of a suitable NVQ and level for 74 per cent. Initial and follow-up individual interviews were regarded as the most effective forms of advice and guidance. The most important substance of advice related to practical aspects of doing the NVQ, such as interpreting standards, preparing for assessment and developing portfolios.
Employers, providers and advisors should extend the provision of individual interviews to establish training needs and provide candidates with ongoing advice and guidance. In addition, independent advice and guidance centres which are accessible to individuals should be established and widely publicised. Regular advice and guidance should become an integral part of employer, provider and advisor NVQ activities. A wider support system should be established inside organisations implementing NVQs, with central advice and guidance, mentoring and support networks for individuals.
Barriers to individuals
The major barriers to individual take-up were perceived by all parties to be jargon and the amount of time and effort. The vast majority of individuals experienced no difficulty in accessing NVQ assessment. On-the-job (OTJ) assessment was reported by 50 per cent of employers and providers, and available for over 50 per cent of NVQ candidates overall but was unavailable to 67 per cent of those pursuing NVQs independently, the majority of whom would make use of it, if available. Accreditation of prior learning (APL) services were reported to be available by 50 per cent of employers and providers, and 47 per cent of NVQ candidates; 43 per cent of those for whom APL was unavailable would make use of them, if available. Of those individuals who paid some of the costs of their NVQs, 28 per cent were not made fully aware of all the costs beforehand, and 46 per cent of those who received financial support would have been deterred if they had to meet all the costs themselves. The majority of NVQ candidates (73 per cent) committed personal time towards the completion of their NVQ, and while for the majority this averaged 4-8 hours per week, 24 per cent of individuals spent in excess of 10 hours per week. About half the individuals were unaware of the extent of the personal time commitment beforehand.
It was recommended that OTJ assessment be made more widely available through promoting the training of workplace assessors and that APL services should be made more extensive through promoting the training of APL advisors and assessors. Assessment procedures should be simplified and the language of assessment made more accessible, and more support and guidance should be provided on assessment for candidates. Candidates should be given accurate estimates of all the costs of pursuing an NVQ, an opportunity to pay by instalments, and some guidance on the extent of personal time commitment required beforehand.
Employer, provider and advisor activity
Employers predominantly obtain information, advice and guidance from the TECs and private providers, while TECs, FE and private providers receive information and advice from NCVQ, lead bodies and awarding bodies. Adequate information had been received by 75 per cent of respondents on the key areas of the NVQ structure and implementation, but a smaller proportion commented on the inadequacy of information on the market value of NVQs and the time and effort involved. Specific guidance on practical implementation issues was valued more than advice or information, and 23 per cent of respondents were unable to recall any information, advice or guidance which had been particularly helpful. TEC staff play a pivotal role in providing information, advice and guidance on NVQs, with employers, providers and individuals, while guidance staff work almost exclusively with individuals. TEC staff, guidance personnel and FE Colleges provided advice on NVQs in general, whereas employers and private providers tended to focus on their specific provision.
Information supplied by NCVQ, lead bodies and awarding bodies to employers, providers and advisors should focus more on providing specific guidance on practical implementation issues. General information for individuals should emphasise the benefits of the practical, competence-based nature of NVQs and their status as national qualifications endorsed by employers. Advice and guidance services should be expanded, so that individuals can obtain advice which is independent of employers and providers. Employers and providers should focus on specific guidance activities associated with practical implementation matters, after individuals have been able to access independent advice and guidance. TECs should focus on providing information and advice to employers and providers, refer individuals to guidance services, and provide relevant training for guidance staff.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the Employment Department for funding this research, and to all the individual candidates, employers, providers and advisers who collaborated. Copies of the full report, Implementing NVQs: Barriers to Individuals[3], are available from Jim Bennett, Individual Commitment Branch, Department of Employment, Moorfoot, Sheffield.
[1] Crowley-Bainton, T., and Wolf, A. (1994) Access to assessment initiative. PSI report published