Collaborative Approaches to 14-19 Provision - Communities and ...

14-19 PATHFINDERS: THE SECOND YEARthis committed localism had been forged through socio-economic and educationaldisadvantage, which the 14-19 Pathfinder was seen as helping to address. This strong senseof local commitment and identity should not be under-estimated as a driver of collaboration.It sometimes linked to broader programmes of socio-economic regeneration which furtherhelped to develop a sense of local empowerment.67. The structures of 14-19 provision exerted considerable influence upon collaboration.Generally speaking collaboration between schools and colleges was easier where schools didnot have sixth forms and thus were not in competition with colleges for post-16 students.However, as the Coventry case study shows, there could be excellent collaboration evenwhere there were school sixth forms. In some pathfinders we were struck by the sheercomplexity of the institutional structures. In Southwark, for example, there were 11-16schools, 11-18 schools, a further education college, two recently opened city academies and aCity Technology College. Voluntary-aided faith schools also often had their own networksof partnerships which sometimes only partially over-lapped with pathfinder boundaries.There were also structural variations in Connexions partnerships since some were directproviders while others sub-contracted the service. In Southampton, for example, theConnexions service was sub-contracted to three different providers with responsibility fordifferent functions. An absence of structural relationships among training providers couldalso inhibit their participation in collaborative activities. In some localities training providerstended to be small, isolated and to have no common voice, all factors which madeparticipation in collaborative networks more difficult.68. Transport resources inevitably impacted on collaborative approaches. This was aparticular factor in rural pathfinders where the absence of viable public transport meant that ifstudents were to travel between institutions either school minibuses would have to be used orcommercial operators employed. The latter were expensive and not always reliable, theformer imposed significant capacity limitations. Some roads could also be particularlyhazardous. The A66 in Cumbria, for example, was a notoriously busy, dangerous roadsubject to poor weather. Transport could also be problematic in urban and suburban areassince bus routes tended to run into town and city centres rather than between suburbs. Thusalthough distances between partner institutions might not be great it could take some time totravel between them using public transport.23