Source · Select Committees · Education Committee
Recommendation 37
37
Rejected
Introduce moratorium on defunding Applied General Qualifications until T Levels prove superior effectiveness
Conclusion
The Department must place a moratorium on defunding Applied General Qualifications. Tried and tested Applied General Qualifications should only be withdrawn as and when there is a robust evidence base proving that T Levels are demonstrably more effective in preparing students for progression, meeting industry needs and promoting social mobility. (Paragraph 141) 52 The future of post-16 qualifications Post-16 apprenticeships
Government Response Summary
The government rejected the recommendation to place a moratorium on defunding Applied General Qualifications. It reiterated its rationale for reforming Level 3 qualifications, stating that many existing programs have low enrolments, are not employer-led, and are less effective than A Levels for university progression.
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
The Government is reforming qualifications at Level 3 because too many qualifications have low and no enrolments, are not sufficiently based on IfATE’s employer led occupational standards, and do not progress young people to related occupations. For example, on the recently published provisional list of 92 qualifications that overlap with wave 3 T levels, we know there were 36 qualifications which had no enrolments and a further 24 had fewer than 100 enrolments in 2020/21 academic year. All too often, young people who have taken a qualification in a particular subject end up in an unrelated field. For achievers of qualifications in 2018/195 there is no clear relationship between most sector subject areas of qualifications and employment in specific industry sectors. For many qualifications, the retail sector is the most likely destination for those in sustained employment. On average, for example learners achieving Agriculture, Horticulture and Animal Care qualifications are more likely to be employed in the retail sector (28%) than in the Agriculture sector (10%). For Construction, Planning and the Built Environment sector qualifications, learners achieving them are also more likely on average to be employed in the retail sector (21%) than in the construction sector (10%). Our reforms are designed to change this. They will ensure that young people study technical education options that have been designed against IfATE’s employer led occupational standards and that give them the skills they need to enter their chosen occupation. We will also be asking for evidence the qualification is valued by employers. Where young people need support to progress to T Levels, they will be able to access the T Level or other Level 3 provision, transition programme, or other reformed Level 2 provision more clearly designed to help them progress. There is evidence that current AGQs are less effective than A Levels when it comes to university outcomes. For example6, research for The Nuffield Foundation found that BTECs provide a route into university for one in four young student entrants from England, and BTEC entrants are more likely to be from disadvantaged backgrounds than their peers with A Levels. However, students who take A Levels are less likely to drop out of university and more likely to graduate with a 2:1 or a first than those with BTECs. Students who entered with just BTECs are almost twice as likely to drop out before their second year compared to similar students who have just A Levels, around 1.7 times more likely to repeat their first year and around 1.4 times more likely to graduate below a 2:1.