Source · Select Committees · Education Committee
Third Report - The future of post-16 qualifications
Education Committee
HC 55
Published 28 April 2023
Conclusions (4)
25
Conclusion
Para 90
The Department must publish forecasts on potential industry placement demands and shortfalls as soon as possible, at both national and regional level.
26
Conclusion
Para 91
Scaling up T Level placements could have inadvertent negative consequences for other parts of the skills agenda by reducing employers’ willingness to continue with existing programmes such as apprenticeships, and supported internships which also require placements. The Department must convene an employer-led industry placement taskforce, with particular emphasis on incorporating …
32
Conclusion
Not Addressed
Para 136
We are disappointed that the Department’s equalities impact assessment identifies that students with special educational needs and disabilities, Asian ethnic groups, students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and males are disproportionately likely to be affected by the Department’s qualification reforms. The Department’s ‘expectation’ that its reforms will be “generally positive” for these …
Government Response Summary
The government defends its Level 3 qualification reforms by highlighting issues with existing qualifications, such as low enrolments, lack of employer standards alignment, and poor progression to related occupations or university outcomes, particularly for BTEC students. It does not directly address the committee's specific concerns regarding the inadequacy of its equalities impact assessment.
33
Conclusion
Not Addressed
Para 137
The Department’s equalities impact assessment identifies that some students with protected characteristics may be disadvantaged by the reforms as they may no longer be able to progress to a level 3 qualification. We heard that this could result in a rise in 16–18 year olds who are NEET (not in …
Government Response Summary
The government justified its reforms to Level 3 qualifications, citing low enrolments in existing programs and better university outcomes for A Levels compared to BTECs. It did not address the committee's concern about the unclear number of students who might be disadvantaged by the reforms or the specific equality impact.