- The Education Committee has raised concerns about 'scaling-up' T-Levels before their full roll-out and ahead of evidence they are a good alternative to applied general qualifications (AGQs), such as BTECs.
- Its report highlights current issues with T-Level roll-out, awareness, take-up and accessibility.
The Education Committee’s new report on the Future of Post-16 qualifications outlines concerns over plans to withdraw funding from AGQs, such as BTECs, before there is sufficient time for the evaluation and roll-out of T-Levels, the recently introduced technical alternative to A-Levels.
The report, which follows on from an inquiry into post-16 qualifications, flags the following concerns surrounding the qualification, including:
- T-Levels being 'less accessible and less manageable' for some groups, including lower attaining students, ethnic minority students, and students with SEND.
- A lack of employer T-Level placements. It says there are also many areas of the country where there are not yet enough employers near to colleges in regional, rural and ‘left behind’ areas to accommodate learners on placements – something which needs to be addressed ‘urgently’.
- Uncertainty around progression options for T-Level students. The committee states that ‘T-level students may find they are eligible for a very limited range of higher education courses due to the specialised nature of their qualification.
- Some universities requiring an A-Level alongside a T-Level for entry onto degree programmes. ‘DfE guidance on whether an A-Level can feasibly studied alongside a T-Level appears inconsistent, and the Department must clearly set out its position on this’.
- Lack of awareness of the qualification.
The committee is calling on the DfE to improve recognition of T-Levels among students, parents and employers with an awareness campaign to raise the profile of the qualification. It warns that without addressing awareness, the success of T-Levels will be impeded.
The MPs' report refers to a 2021 DfE survey that showed just under a quarter (24 per cent) of employers were unaware of T-Levels, along with other research that found 63 per cent of young people had not heard of the qualification.
'We have concerns about the feasibility of scaling up T- Levels'
Education committee chair Robin Walker MP said, ‘We welcome the Government’s ambition to declutter the post-16 landscape and raise the status of technical qualifications. The Prime Minister was right when he hailed further education as a silver bullet that could boost productivity by giving workers the right skills for an evolving economy.
'We were also buoyed by evidence that T Levels are proving successful. But it is essential that DfE promotes them among students and the thousands of employers needed to supply work placements, or else T Levels will fail to make a meaningful difference.
'We have concerns about the feasibility of scaling up T Levels, and as it stands, the planned withdrawal of AGQs will constrict student choice and could deepen the skills shortages that these reforms are meant to fix. We call for a moratorium on these reforms until T Levels are fully rolled out and there is robust evidence to show they adequately replace AGQs.’
Its report also covers the role of apprenticeships and proposals for requiring 16- to- 18-year-olds to study maths.
Apprenticeships
The Committee recognises that the 19 per cent increase in apprenticeship starts among under-19s between 2020/21 and 2021/22 is a positive step, however says all too often older, more highly qualified workers are prioritised for apprenticeships rather than young people trying to get onto the ‘career ladder’.
It states, 'The Department must set out how it will address the long-term decline in apprenticeship starts among young people, and ensure apprenticeships are the gold-standard earn and learn option for school and college leavers.’ It recommends an independent review be commissioned.
Walker added, ‘We call on DfE to reverse the sharp decline in apprenticeship starts and address the perverse situation where the majority of apprenticeships are being given to older, already highly qualified adults at the expense of young people, and the taxpayer.’