By Kathryn Morgan, Leadership and Workforce Specialist 

There has already been a lot written about the Prime Minister's announcement on technical education, much of it raising important questions about what this might mean for the curriculum, Progress 8, V levels, the age of 14 and the potential implications for different groups of young people.

We've been thinking about it slightly differently. The detail is clearly still to come, and many of the questions being raised may well be questions the government itself is still working through. That makes this an important moment, because there is still an opportunity to shape these ideas with the people who understand what they might mean in practice.

First, the timing isn't great. Most school leaders are now on holiday after what has been another incredibly demanding year. They need and deserve a proper break, and announcing what could be a significant change to secondary education at the end of July feels ill thought-through. ASCL made this point in our response to the announcement, not because we think government should stop thinking about education during the summer, but because if you want school and college leaders to engage meaningfully in reform, it helps if they are actually around to do so.

That said, there is quite a lot in the proposals that we do support. The number of young people not in education, employment or training is deeply concerning, and there is clearly more to do to make sure that all young people can see a route through education and into a fulfilling adult life. Better technical and vocational pathways need to be part of that conversation.

But there is a lot going on already.

Navigating change
At ASCL, we've recently mapped the changes coming down the track for schools between now and 2030. Curriculum reform, qualification reform, SEND, accountability, inspection, employment changes and a whole range of other expectations are either happening or coming. Seeing it mapped out makes you realise quite how much we are asking schools and their leaders to navigate at the same time.

Where yesterday’s announcement eventually fits into that picture isn't yet clear. And perhaps that's the point. Before these ideas harden into policy, there is an opportunity to look across everything already in train and ask how it joins up. 

This isn't an argument for doing nothing. The status quo clearly isn't working for enough young people. But I do wonder whether we need to get better at looking across education policy and asking how all the different parts fit together from the perspective of the people implementing them.

A headteacher doesn't experience SEND reform over here, curriculum reform over there and accountability reform somewhere else. They experience all of it at once, in the same school, with the same staff and the same number of hours in the week.

That's why coherence matters. As the detail develops, we need to understand how any new technical pathways might sit alongside curriculum and qualification reform, accountability, the government's existing plans for work experience and the wider changes already coming towards schools and colleges. And, if this does eventually require schools and colleges to prioritise something new, ASCL's question remains an important one: what will they be asked to do less of? 

We don't ask that question enough.

Focus on ‘place’
There is something else in the announcement that we think is interesting, which is the focus on place and the suggestion that schools, colleges, employers and local leaders should work together to develop routes that make sense for their local communities and economies.

On the face of it, there is a lot to like about that.

We've been thinking a lot recently about civic leadership and what it means for schools and trusts to see themselves as part of something bigger than their own organisation. There is some really interesting thinking emerging around this. 

The emphasis on schools, colleges, employers and local leaders working together is interesting, and there is a real opportunity here to learn from places where this is already happening well. But we shouldn't underestimate what makes those relationships possible in the first place.

Some places already have strong networks and relationships. Others don't. Some have a rich mix of employers, colleges, universities, trusts and civic organisations. Others have far fewer. There is a risk in talking about "place" as though every place has the same capacity to respond.

The question of sustainable leadership 
This also connects to another conversation we've been having at ASCL about the sustainability of school leadership.

The Sustainable School Leadership research published earlier this year is a useful reminder that the job of school leadership has changed considerably. Leaders are dealing with increasingly complex needs and with issues that don't begin or end at the school gate.

If the direction of travel is towards schools playing an even greater role in their places, working more closely with employers and other civic partners, we need to think about what that means for leadership too.

Do leaders have the time for this? Is it something we currently develop and support them to do? Who creates the space for relationships between organisations to develop? And, again, what might leaders stop doing in order to do more of this?

None of these feel like reasons not to pursue the idea. In fact, the fact that so much of the detail is still to be worked through gives us an opportunity to ask these questions now.

There will be plenty of debate over the coming weeks and months about what any new technical pathways could and should look like. That debate matters, but so too does how the policy is developed and how it connects with everything else already in train.

For ASCL, that means involving school and college leaders early, alongside employers, local government, young people and others. Not because the profession will have all the answers, but because leaders understand the reality into which any new policy will eventually land. They will also have important insights into what already works, what doesn't, and where the practical tensions and opportunities might be.

If the ambition is for something genuinely shaped by place, there is a real opportunity to develop it in that way too: with the people who know their young people, their communities and their places involved while the thinking is still taking shape.