Students risk falling through ‘qualifications gap' under post-16 plans
Many young people will be left 'without a suitable pathway' if funding is withdrawn for a number of applied general qualifications (AGQs), such as BTecs, and if the uptake of the Government's technical courses (T-levels) remains low, a coalition of education and employer groups has warned.
A report by the Protect Student Choice campaign warned reducing student choice for post-16 qualifications risks 'reversing' progress in widening access to higher education and it could lead to more young people not in employment.
The coalition – which includes organisations representing students and staff in colleges and schools – is calling on the curriculum and assessment review to recommend 'reversing the ban on AGQ diplomas and extended diplomas in T-level areas' in its final report which is due to be published in the autumn.
AGQs are Level 3 qualifications, which include BTecs, for students who want to undertake a broad study of a specific vocational area.
In December, the Labour Government announced 157 vocational qualifications, which the previous Conservative administration had planned to remove funding from, would be retained beyond July this year until reformed qualifications become more established in the system.
Following a review of Level 3 qualifications that 'overlap' with T-levels, the Government said 57 qualifications in digital, construction and health and science would be funded until July 2026.
A further 100 qualifications in engineering, agriculture, business and creative would retain their funding until July 2027.
The first T-level courses – which are considered to be broadly equivalent to three A-levels – were launched in 2020 in England and they are being rolled out gradually.
Department for Education (DfE) guidance, published in February, has outlined plans to remove funding from 'large qualifications' in a number of T-level subject areas in the future.
An analysis from the Protect Student Choice campaign suggests there could be 52,000 fewer young people studying health and science courses each year if funding is removed for AGQs in this area, and it added that nearly 11,000 fewer young people could study digital courses each year.
It said more than 200,000 students are currently studying AGQs that are 'either being scrapped or have an uncertain future' which makes it 'difficult' for colleges and schools to plan their curriculum, recruit and train the right staff, or to provide appropriate guidance to younger pupils.
The report warned: 'We are deeply concerned that the Government's blanket ban on diplomas and extended diplomas will create a qualifications gap that tens of thousands of students will potentially fall through, leaving many young people without a suitable pathway in the future.'
Labour MP Gareth Snell, chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Sixth Form Education, said: 'Sixth forms and colleges up and down the country know the vital role that AGQs play in helping students to progress to higher education or skilled employment.
'Limiting the choice of qualification in certain subjects to T-levels will leave some young people without a suitable pathway at the age of 16, and some employers without the skilled workforce they need.'
Professor Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, said: ' Qualifications like the diploma and extended diploma in health and social care are highly valued by providers of adult social care in England as a source of introducing younger people to a career in social care.
'Scrapping these qualifications would close off a well-established pathway to entering the profession and exacerbate the workforce crisis in the care sector for a younger population we are keen to promote access to.'
Anne Murdoch, college leadership adviser at the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: 'We strongly urge the Government to retain these popular and valued applied general qualifications.
'We support the introduction of T-levels, but we do not understand why this must be at the expense of other tried and trusted vocational qualifications which work well for many students.
'At a time when we are seeing rising numbers of young people who are not in education, employment or training, it is surely essential that we provide a choice of post-16 pathways rather than narrowing their options and making matters worse.'
A DfE spokeswoman said: 'Through our plan for change we are building a skills system that will drive forward opportunity and deliver the growth that our economy needs.
'T-levels will be at the forefront of our technical education offer. Alongside them, newly reformed qualifications will become available for delivery at Level 3 at the start of the next academic year.
'These are high-quality, aligned to occupational standards in technical routes and offer learners clear routes to higher education or skilled employment.
'The department's position on further plans for reform to Level 3 qualifications will be set out soon, informed by the independent curriculum and assessment review.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Shut down Britain's Ministry of Truth
There is a tendency in British political discourse to overuse the word 'Orwellian'. But there can be no better term to describe the behaviour of the Labour Government in deploying a secretive 'spy' unit to monitor social media for posts critical of asylum seekers or 'two tier' policing – and then request that this content be concealed from public view. Two years ago, the Telegraph revealed that the 'Counter-Disinformation Unit' (CDU) had turned its attention towards those expressing scepticism over the restrictive measures implemented during the pandemic. Its former head stated that it had been in 'hourly' contact with tech companies to 'encourage... the swift takedown' of content. The Government eventually conceded that these firms acted on more than 90 per cent of requests, suppressing views through the use of algorithms or even deleting them entirely. In an open and functioning society, the state does not use its powers to curb free speech on matters of national importance. It does not force healthy debate – including over the actions or competence of those in charge – underground under the guise of shielding citizens misinformation. Yet when this mission creep became public knowledge, the Government did not change course. Instead, it appears to have doubled down. The CDU – or National Security and Online Information Team as it is now known – spent last summer targeting social media posts that risked 'exacerbating tensions'. These included observations that asylum seekers were 'undocumented fighting age males', a photograph of a rejected Freedom of Information request over the location of asylum hotels, and 'concerning narratives about the police and a 'two-tier' system'. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – where the unit is based – is currently facing criticism for its oversight of the Online Safety Act, with further accusations of politicised censorship emerging. A spokesman said that the Government made 'no apologies' for flagging content 'which can result in violent disorder on our streets', while conceding that 'free speech is a cornerstone' of Britain's political system. It is past time that the Government started acting as if it believed in these words. As things stand, the gradual erosion of our freedom to criticise the state could begin to undermine the proper functioning of our democracy.
Times
28 minutes ago
- Times
Just 900 people on top-level benefits joined work coach scheme last month
Only 900 people on the top level of incapacity benefit joined a coaching scheme to help get them back into work last month, new figures show. Since 2022, 14,000 people in the 'limited capability for work or work-related activity' (LCWRA) group of universal credit, the highest level of incapacity benefit, have taken up the voluntary offer of employment support. The numbers represent a tiny fraction of the 1.93 million people in the LCWRA group who have no 'requirement to look for work'. Ministers are facing questions about whether their reforms will succeed in getting the long-term sick back to work after a chaotic retreat last month saw key elements watered down. Previous figures have shown that almost half of people on universal credit, Britain's main working-age benefit, have no requirement to look for work, as rising numbers are signed off sick. Ministers have pledged to deal with the rising numbers being deemed unfit to work, with measures including a £1 billion-a-year boost to employment support scheme designed to help them get jobs. 'These numbers show the urgent need to reform welfare and get people off long-term sickness benefits,' said Sir Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, who uncovered the figures through parliamentary questions. 'Labour's decision to scrap the Conservative reforms they inherited will mean hundreds of thousands more people trapped on these benefits with no work requirements at all, as The Times have previously reported. After their costly welfare U-turn, it's clear the Labour government is failing to turn tough words into action.' • More than a million universal credit recipients are non-UK citizens Ministers scrapped Tory reforms that would have made it harder for people with mobility and mental problems to claim LCWRA even before they had to retreat on their own reform package after a backbench revolt. Those currently on LCWRA will no longer see a cut in income designed to encourage them to seek work and reduce incentives to stay signed off sick, after ministers agreed to apply the cut only to new claimants. Sir Stephen Timms, the disability minister, said that the help from work coaches 'provides disabled people and people with health impairments increased one-to-one personalised support from their work coach to help them move towards, and into, work'. He pointed to changes that will require all those on LCWRA to 'engage' in some way with employment support, ranging from annual chats to intensive work preparation, with pilot schemes beginning this summer. A thousand extra advisers will be hired as part of the scale-up of employment support, and Timms said that those affected by welfare reforms 'will be able to access a conversation about their needs, goals and aspirations; offered one-to-one follow-on support'. Stephen Evans, chief the executive of the Learning and Work Institute, a think tank, said: 'A significant minority of people out of work due to ill health want to work and say they would be able to work. But they are rarely offered help to do so and may not be confident they'll get the help they need from the Jobcentre.' • Labour rebels now know that if they push, Keir Starmer will back down He warned ministers that 'building trust and engagement takes time. Rolling out regular conversations with Jobcentres can help, but health services, local authorities and others all have a role to play. We also need employers to think about recruitment and job design so work can fit with people's health conditions.' Previous official evaluation has found that sickness claimants are reluctant to take up support, fearing that 'the Jobcentre would force them into any work'. However, those who did take part generally found the schemes helpful, particularly people with mental health problems who reported improvements in their conditions 'because of the consistent, empathetic support they received from their work coach — this was often simply due to attending appointments, or through work coaches signposting customers to other mental health support', the evaluation found. Those given work coaching were more likely to find jobs, but still just 11 per cent were in work a year later. This suggests that even if all LCWRA claimants took part in the scheme, just 57,000 extra would find work.
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Who might lead the Green Party – and why it matters
The Greens may be small but they cannot be dismissed as 'fringe'. The Green Party of England and Wales (our focus here, since Scotland and Northern Ireland have autonomous sister parties) now boasts four MPs, three London Assembly members and more than 800 councillors – arguably bigger than Nigel Farage and Reform UK. In Scotland, they were (until relatively recently) in government, and have notably been in office in Germany. Britain's ongoing political de-alignment has opened up opportunities for the Greens, but also some challenges. That's the context for the potentially rather important party leadership election that is now underway. Why is the Green Party having an election? Greens like to be hyper-democratic and have a visceral resistance to 'strong' leadership. They have leadership elections every two years as a rule, and were due for one last year when the general election got in the way. The leader, or co-leaders, elected now will only serve an initial term of one year before having the option of doing it all over again next year. And then again in 2028… Isn't that a bit disruptive? Yes, but it keeps the leadership on its toes, and greatly empowers the membership – and they prefer things that way. 'Party discipline' is a bit of an alien concept to the Greens. Who's running? One of the two present co-leaders, Carla Denyer, no longer wants the job and wishes to concentrate on her role as MP for Bristol Central, having won that seat from Labour last year. The other present co-leader, Adrian Ramsay, MP for Waveney Valley (gained from the Tories a year ago), would like to carry on, and his proposed new co-leader is Ellie Chowns, MP for North Herefordshire (a former Conservative seat). Their outspoken and charismatic challenger Zack Polanski – often described as an 'eco-populist' – could certainly be a more high-profile personality on the national stage than the MPs, even though he is 'only' a member of the Greater London Assembly. He is the current deputy leader, a post to which he was elected in 2022. What's the election about? Where they go next. Former leader and ex-MP Caroline Lucas, who supports the Ramsay-Chowns combo, says the leadership must come from parliament, reform the party's structures and must have climate change and 'environmental and social justice' as the core issue and focus on winning elections. The fear among some is that the party could split unnecessarily on 'culture war' issues and get tangled up with the new Jeremy Corbyn/Zarah Sultana 'Your Party', losing its identity in a Red-Green beetroot-coloured mess. What do they agree on? Greens agree on a surprising amount, at least in principle: anti-austerity, pro-wealth tax, pro-public ownership, anti-racism, pro-Palestine, anti-war, anti-Brexit, pro-refugee, anti-Trump and a devout belief there is a climate emergency. But there are also profound differences of view on issues such as trans rights/gender critical views, antisemitism, the status of Israel, tolerance for the kind of social conservatism that exists in some Muslim communities, and the extent of their respective independence of policy and action in the event of any electoral pacts with each other. What happens if Polanski wins? It sounds as if he will be the more likely to entertain a closer liaison with the Sultana/Corbyn grouping and, being outside the Commons, will necessarily find himself at odds with the parliamentary party, which will require a de facto leader in any case. Public disagreements about radical policy options and endorsing the Corbynites in electoral pacts may be healthy and democratic, but tend to put voters off, especially in the kind of previously Tory-held market towns and villages where the Greens have more recently found fertile ground. Polanski's stance on migration and taxation and his closer association with Corbyn may thus prove an obstacle for the party in the counties at a general election. Polanski, a hypnotherapist in a previous life, also has to cope with having once told female clients that they could have a bigger bust by simply visualising it. He's gay, vegan and lives in Hackney. What about the deputy leadership? Many more candidates here – nine in all. None are MPs or 'household names' (some are not even big names in their own kitchens). That could change. The most high profile is perhaps Mothin Ali, a councillor in Leeds. He came to prominence after his victory speech in the May 2024 election, when he said: 'We will not be silenced. We will raise the voice of Gaza. We will raise the voice of Palestine.' He went on to declare: 'Allahu Akbar!' ('God is the greatest!'). In due course, this drew an apology from him. Should Polanski win as a single candidate for leader, then there will be two deputy leaders, and not necessarily of one mind. What will happen? If all goes well, and they don't split, and they come to some mutually advantageous electoral arrangement with the Corbyn/Sultana party, there could be impressive electoral rewards as the Greens capitalise on Labour's present unpopularity. The first opportunities would come in the English local, Welsh Senedd, and Scottish parliament elections next year; then, in 2028, the London mayoralty (where anything could happen); and the 2028-29 general election. Why, they might even hold the balance of power after the latter. On the other hand, they might split the Red-Green vote and let Labour, the Tories or Reform UK win in their most winnable wards and constituencies, and fight themselves into oblivion. That wouldn't be good for them, the country, Gaza or the planet. When is the result? Ballots are open now; declaration on 2 September.
