No abstract

Partnership working between institutions and organisations is currently commonly seen as providing solutions to meeting multiple, interrelated needs in areas of social policy including health, social welfare and education. This article examines and discusses the policy and practice of such collaboration in an educational context. Drawing on studies of state‐funded interventions into 14–19 provision in England it offers insights into why and how schools, colleges and other organisations involved in education and training collaborate. It concludes that partnership is highly locally contingent. National policy on partnership working, which is itself not consistent, is strongly mediated by local contextual factors, institutional values and interests, personal missions and careers, pragmatic opportunism, ad‐hocery and happenstance. The interplay of these factors is highly dynamic and changes over time.

No abstract

This article traces and analyses some of the key features of 14-19 education and training in England over the 30 years since such a phase was first mooted. It does this through an introductory narrative outlining the key policies and initiatives and the development of six themes drawing on analysis of a body of research and policy. The themes are: the waxing and waning of policy in relation to a 14-19 phase; policy imperatives driving 14-19 education and training; curricular commonality, differentiation and unification; pathways and progression; qualifications-led curriculum change and partnership, institutional autonomy and competition. The article concludes by outlining the implications of the analysis for the current political and policy context in relation to education and training for 14-to 19-yearolds.

This article explores the policy and practice of choice, flexibility and differentiation within the 14–19 curriculum in England. After first locating these issues within contemporary curriculum policy it adopts a historical analysis tracing perspectives and practice since 1945. This narrative exposes complex oscillation in policy and practice in relation to curricular choice and differentiation, especially for 14–16 year olds. The paper ends by raising parallels between current and past policy and practice and suggests the need to engage in a more fundamental and informed curriculum dialogue in relation to choice, flexibility and differentiation.