§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Garel-Jones.]
3.20 am§ Mr. James Paice (Cambridgeshire, South-East)Obviously, at this late hour, it is difficult to be grateful for everything, but I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to present this short Adjournment debate to bring to the attention of the House a matter which I believe is of great significance for a small number of people, who are, in their own way, very important. I refer to young people on youth training schemes who suffer from severe dyslexia, a malady which has been researched in some detail, but about which a great deal is still to be discovered.
Before explaining the problem more fully to the House, I should explain that the initial impetus for my inquiries came from problems experienced by a company of which I am a director, and which operates a managing agency for the youth training scheme.
Although I wish to approach the general aspects of the problem, I shall refer to a specific example and I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) and to my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Central (Mr. Lord) for their agreement to my using information pertaining to their constituencies.
One of the great strengths of the youth training scheme is the amount of effort that has been put in by the Manpower Services Commission, now the Training Commission, in ensuring the provision and the promotion of equal opportunity for all young people in YTS, and particularly the comprehensive range of special help which is provided for people with disabilities so that they should be able to achieve the same advantages from YTS training as their peers.
The commission's definition of disability includes moderate or severe learning difficulties, however, caused. The information which I wish to draw to the attention of the House and my hon. Friend the Minister shows that the highly commendable objective of the commission and the Government is being thwarted by the intransigence of at least one vocational examining body.
There are a number of occupations which are purely practical in nature and which a dyslexic worker could fulfil just as well as any other individual. Obviously, in terms of future advancement in the industry, illiteracy due to dyslexia can become a hindrance, but at the craft level, the ability to obtain and to practise the skills is unaffected by dyslexia.
The problem is that in some cases the vocational qualifications to demonstrate the skills can be achieved only by written examination. For example, I have here a total of four question papers put out in June 1988 by the City and Guilds of London Institute for an agriculture phase 2 exam. There is a total of 10 hours of written examinations.
I have read carefully every single question in those papers, and it is extremely difficult to conceive of a time when a working person would ever have to read one of those questions, let alone write down the information required, other than for the purposes of passing that examination. As my hon. Friend the Minister is aware, in 231 agriculture the City and Guilds phase 2 is recognised as the appropriate qualification at craft level and was the final qualification under the agricultural apprenticeship offered by the Agricultural Training Board.
What is essential for the trainee and for a future employer is that the young person has demonstrated the level of knowledge and skill required. Obviously, an employer would wish to know if there are problems of illiteracy, but that is a matter separate from the assessment of skills.
The example I shall give demonstrates that all that could be achieved under this system is a failure of the examination paper with the result that any potential employer would almost certainly jump to the conclusion that the examination had been failed through ignorance rather than because of a fundamental problem of dyslexia, which is totally unrelated to the knowledge and skills involved in the occupation.
I should like to refer to the example of a young lad named Ian Hurren. He is a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Central. Ian has just completed a two-year youth training scheme in agriculture but he has not achieved any national vocational qualification, despite the view of the managing agent and staff of the agricultural college he attended that he is a student of exceptional ability. I have with me a catalogue of documents, including several letters. I have one from his original school, in which the senior teacher says:
throughout his time at the school, he suffered from a form of dyslexia which presents him with considerable reading and, therefore, learning problems.I also have a letter from the senior educational psychologist of Suffolk county council which states—this is significant—On a short form of the Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale, Ian's sub-test scores show wide variation. This can be readily attributed to his reading deficiency as those sub-tests which are more directly related to this are scored lower whilst the others are scored much higher. Indeed, on the block design sub-test, a measure of ability to analyse and synthesise, he scored maximum points and well within the allocated time limits. If this had been repeated throughout, Ian would be intellectually outstanding.That demonstrates that that young lad has an inbuilt difficulty but that it would be totally unjustified and unwarranted to associate that with any lack of overall ability or intellect. That letter demonstrates the opposite. The same letter goes on:I recommend unreservedly that Ian is given some dispensation for formal academic examinations. There is a need for questions or instructions to be read to him for practical tests with the opportunity for repetition on request (perhaps pre-recorded magnetic tape) otherwise, an amanuensei is necessary.Armed with information such as that, one would have expected notice to have been taken. Requests from the managing agent, the agricultural college and the Training Commission at headquarters level to the City and Guilds of London all met with a nil response. In a letter to the college it stated:I am afraid that our current policy regarding students with differing disabilities of dyslexia is quite firm in not permitting readers or amanuenses.Yet the regulations of the City and Guilds of London state:in general the employment of readers or amanuensis is not permitted except where such activity could be shown to be a normal aspect of the job being examined. It is, however, 232 usually possible for a candidate who is suffering from a temporary handicap such as a fractured wrist to be permitted the assistance of an amanuensis provided medical evidence is available.In other words, if young Ian Hurren had conveniently broken his wrist the week before the examination, he could have taken it, had an amanuensis and nobody would have been any the wiser. Because he had a different problem, that was not allowed. No help was available other than the offer of extended time for the examination. The Dyslexia Association has told us that that is of no value to somebody who is genuinely suffering from dyslexia.The House will not be surprised to note that, as a result of that intransigence, Ian did not take the exam formally. However, he sat it informally, with an amanuensis, under the auspices of the agricultural college. On the four papers to which I have referred, he achieved marks of 77 per cent., 69 per cent,, 73 per cent., and 69 per cent.—a clear illustration of his ability.
That is but one example. I do not wish the House to believe that I have come to the debate with just one problem. I considered that I should illustrate the problem and bring it to the attention of the House and in particular of my hon. Friend the Minister.
I am aware that, because of the level of intransigence regarding the provision of amanuenses, it has been the practice of certain examination centres to provide an amanuensis and not to tell the City and Guilds of London. Many would say that that is a dishonest practice, but, in the circumstances, it is an understandable reaction.
I look forward to hearing what my hon. Friend says in reply. It is important to remind the House of the policy of the National Council for Vocational Qualifications. It is totally endorsed by the Training Commission in its codes of practice. The council states:
key criteria for national vocational qualifications, of particular relevance to trainees with special needs, is that they should be based on the assessment of standards, free of definition of mode, place or pace of learning".It goes on to state:any valid method of assessment which demonstrates that the competence under test has been achieved to the specified standard should be encouraged, for example, it may be possible to substitute oral questions for written ones.Again it states:where a trainee's performance can be assisted with the use of mechanical aids such as typewriters or tape recorders, these should also be permitted".As my hon. Friend knows, I have a total commitment to the youth training scheme and to the Government's efforts to provide opportunities for all young trainees, regardless of their backgrounds or personal problems. YTS has come a long way since it began. The advent of the National Council for Vocational Qualifications has added great depth and meaning to many qualifications that are available through YTS. It is now policy that, under the NCVQ, assessment must not become a barrier to achievement. I am sure that that view will be shared by all hon. Members. Sadly, though, as I have explained, there are individuals for whom it is very much a barrier.Although there are practical occupations, it is absolutely essential that we have a vocational qualification system that allows skills and knowledge to be accurately assessed without them being hidden by other problems such as dyslexia. I am well aware that dyslexia is sometimes used as a means of hiding a lack of academic ability, but there are several genuine cases in which the 233 lack of an effective means of assessment—I have demonstrated one—can jeopardise a young person's career.
The charge of ignorance is often laid at the door of the dyslexic. I hope that the House will agree that that charge is totally unwarranted. The example that I quoted demonstrates that point. It is essential that we remove that slur from the dyslexic's existing list of problems.
I have quoted just one example from one industry. I have discussed the matter with the National Council for Vocational Qualifications. It assured me that it is a genuine and important problem across a whole range of practical occupations. It is important, not only to the lad to whom I have referred but to many other people, now and in the future, who embark on training within and outside the YTS, who will look to a form of assessment of their genuine skills. I hope that such opportunities for forms of assessment exist in future and that my hon. Friend will be able to give me some encouragement.
§ The Pariiamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Patrick Nicholls)Despite the lateness of the hour, I compliment my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-East (Mr. Paice) on choosing this subject for debate, for the way that he has introduced it and for the detail that he has given us. I am grateful to him for his courtesy in giving me a detailed idea of the sort of material that he would be bringing before the House.
It might help the House if I outline briefly where the youth training scheme programme stands and then try to pick up the points that my hon. Friend has made in the time that remains available to me. We can all agree that the YTS has been a remarkable achievement. We spend over £1 billion a year on YTS, and 70 per cent. of 16-year-old school leavers and a growing proportion of 17-year-oids who leave school are involved in the scheme. In many parts of the country, and for many industries, YTS has become the normal route into work for those who do not go into some form of further or higher education. The YTS offers a sustained and well-structured vocational training course with on and off the job training and the opportunity to study for relevant vocational qualifications.
The figures show that the scheme is working. For example, 80 per cent. of young people who have been trained through YTS say that they found it worth while, and over 75 per cent., when we follow them up three months later, say that they are in a job or going into some form of further education.
An important development in YTS is the provision for YTS trainees to work for nationally recognised vocational qualifications. That is at the heart of tonight's debate. All trainees on two-year YTS have the opportunity to work for nationally recognised qualifications or, at the least, a credit towards one, and 98 per cent. of trainees who have gone on to a second year in YTS went in for a qualification in their first year. It is the aim that trainees with different needs and abilities should be able to proceed at their own pace. That brings me on to young people on YTS with disabilities and special training needs.
From the start, YTS has always made provision for young people with disabilities. "Disabilities" is widely defined, and includes those who suffer from dyslexia. There are a number of ways in which special help is made available on YTS to enable such young people to take full 234 advantage of the opportunities that are offered, and to compete on equal terms with their peers. We are much aware of the need to ensure equality of access to vocational qualifications. We established the National Council for Vocational Qualifications in 1986 to reform the qualification system and make qualifications more relevant to work. The council is addressing this task: by giving its kitemark—the NVQ—only to qualifications that reflect competence to do the job.
It is a corollary of that that those who are competent should not be prevented from gaining or even taking a qualification because of a disability which is irrelevant to their chosen occupation. Where an examination is intended to measure a practical skill, the NCVQ may well ask the examining body to consider testing techniques other than a written examination to ensure equality of access to the qualification.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-East will understand that I cannot comment specifically on the particular instances that he has in mind. However, the relevant awarding body has submitted the qualification in agriculture to the NCVQ for accreditation and the council has given the qualification a conditional accreditation at level 1 of the NCVQ framework. Conditional accreditation means that the qualification substantially meets the NCVQ's criteria but that certain improvements need to be made to bring the qualification fully into line with the council's requirements. I understand that the conditions in the case to which my hon. Friend referred relate to whether the qualification is a valid measure of competence in the job.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-East will understand also that I cannot preface my remarks by talking specifically about the case that he has in mind that involves the NCVQ, but there are a number of points, subject to that caveat, to which I can helpfully draw attention.
My hon. Friend mentioned amanuenses, and quoted from a letter written by the City and Guilds of London Institute, which stated, in effect, that it is not current policy to provide amanuenses. Perhaps my hon. Friend derived some comfort from that. That use of "current" suggests that there might be the possibility of change.
My hon. Friend spotted in the correspondence, as I did, the reference to it being possible to provide extra time in most instances. Without commenting on the particular case, it may be that because of the disability, as my hon. Friend said, the provision of extra time is wholly inapplicable. One can imagine, without stretching credulity too far, being given an extra half an hour to sit an examination in Spanish, which is not much use if one does not speak Spanish or wish to learn it.
I had a look at the various examination boards that deal with academic subjects. Until now, it has not been the practice of the Oxford and Cambridge board to allow the use of an amanuensis, but it intends to do so from 1990. The northern examination board already provides for dyslexics to be able to use its facilities. There might be the rather bizarre result that somebody could do their O and A levels on the northern examination board, go to university, use the facilities of an amanuensis there, graduate with a first-class degree in ergonomics or agriculture, go to the finest agricultural college in the land —Seale-Hayne, in my constituency—leave it with a first-class examination qualification, be competent to get a job running a substantial estate, but, because of dyslexia, 235 be incapable of being an agricultural craftsman. That may be reductio ad absurdum, but it is a point that one should bear in mind.
Without commenting on the merits of the case that we are discussing, it might be said that a farm worker should be sufficiently literate because of the requirements of the health and safety legislation. If we were to say that no one should be entitled to work on a farm unless they were literate to that extent, I am not sure what it would do to agriculture, but I certainly have my suspicions. It would be bizarre if a graduate manager were able to work on a farm but not an agricultural worker.
My hon. Friend made two telling points. He mentioned the ludicrous proposition that if Mr. Hurren had broken his wrist he would have been able to avail himself of the services of an amanuensis and pass his examinations. My hon. Friend said that this young man had a trial run and passed with flying colours. Mr. Hurren is a young man of proven ability in his chosen job. He is of substantial intellectual ability that is incapable of being measured in conventional terms. He has secured the support of the college where he studies, and I understand from my hon. Friend that he has secured a job. He was obviously capable of convincing his employer that he was capable of operating at a high level.
My hon. Friend is concerned that facilities that would be available to those in middle-class cerebral occupations —where one might have thought that the necessity for literacy would be greater—are being denied to somebody 236 who is in a more manual occupation. It is no secret that hon. Members who have made substantial contributions to our deliberations over the years—sometimes in government—have suffered from dyslexia. In a middle-class way, they have been able to compensate for their disability and have made a substantial contribution.
I prefaced my remarks—I make no apologies for doing so—by saying that it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the circumstances of this specific case. I cannot fail to be impressed not only by the way in which my hon. Friend advanced his case but by the struggles that this young man has had, and the creditable efforts he has made to equip himself for life. I have tried to say something to my hon. Friend other than mere pious platitudes and compliments. As a result of the debate, I shall readHansard and write to the City and Guilds of London Institute telling it of my concern about the debate and drawing it to its attention. I shall ensure that the Training Commission and NCVQ understand the concern that has been expressed in the debate.
Certainly, even at this late hour—or it may be an early hour—if the effect of the debate is to ensure that such young people have the ability to qualify for tasks that they are obviously capable of doing, the fact that one or two of us may have slightly blurry eyes will be a small price to pay.
Once again, I thank my hon. Friend for giving us the opportunity to consider this subject.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at sixteen minutes to Four o 'clock.