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

14-19 PATHFINDERS: THE SECOND YEARwere not addressing this theme and there was no evidence that doing so was seen as apriority.14-19 progression routes158. We noted in our evaluation of the first year of 14-19 Pathfinders that an “explicitfocus upon progression pathways was the exception rather than the rule in the pathfinders”and explained this partly by the overall focus on 14-16 rather than 14-19 within thepathfinders (Higham et al., 2004). Progress in the second year was assessed by coordinatorsas follows:More than expected As expected Less than expected Not applicable9 16 3 5Thus this theme was confirmed as important within pathfinders (although it was surprisingthat five coordinators judged that it was not applicable to their proposal). Progress wasidentified, although this was not rapid as on some other themes.159. The overall evidence base suggests that the focus remains on 14-16 withinpathfinders, although this is rather less prominent than it was in the first year. This appears tobe both because of developmental processes in Phase One Pathfinders and a stronger focusupon the whole 14-19 phase among the Phase Two Pathfinders. For Phase One Pathfinders itmay have been that the entry of their first cohort of students to year 11 encouraged a greaterfocus on progression across the post-16 divide.160. The greater attention to progression in Phase Two Pathfinders was partly aconsequence of the focus within several of them upon sector specific 14-19 progressionroutes. This feature was particularly evident in the Islington Pathfinder where considerableattention was being paid to mapping progression routes in health care and social services bothup to and beyond 19. Southwark was another pathfinder which focused strongly uponprogression routes within occupational sectors. Similarly in Sheffield part of the function ofthe sector intermediaries was to work with their occupational sectors and the schools and52