Edge response to the Education Select Committee Inquiry on ‘The Future of post 16 qualifications’

The Education Select Committee have launched an inquiry into the future of post 16 qualifications to explore:

1. The strengths and weaknesses of post-16 qualifications, including Government’s proposed reforms to the post-16 landscape
2. Proposals in the Skills and Post 16 Education Bill
3. Views on T-Level delivery
4. The benefits and drawbacks of introducing a baccalaureate style system for post 16 and
5. International examples of successful post-16 models

At Edge, we have considerable experience in the post-16 space, and our response to the Education Select Committee is founded on our strong research base, evidence we have collected from our delivery work, our work around skills shortages and the underlying principles supporting vocational and technical education philosophy.

In our response, we acknowledge Government’s efforts to consult on the complex post 16 qualifications landscape in order to streamline and ensure the highest quality qualifications remain. We also acknowledge the benefits of the current system which provides a degree of choice to learners, as well as offering recognised and established branding.

However, we have highlighted areas of concern, and where further thought is required.

Concern over Government’s proposed changes to post-16 qualifications

Firstly, we have already seen rapid change in the qualifications landscape in recent years and we are concerned that additional reforms will add another layer of complexity.

Second, the proposals risk re-enforcing the binary divide between vocational and academic, and at Edge, we support opportunities for students to blend academic and vocational study.

Finally, we are calling for any reforms to consider the impact on Level 2 qualifications as upskilling at higher levels should not come at the expense of basic skills.

Mindful of students from diverse backgrounds

In our response, we highlight concerns around how the reforms will impact particular groups of students, such as those from low socio-economic backgrounds, students with Special Educational Needs, and students from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Our concerns are particularly focused on students who may be impacted by the proposed defunding of Applied General Qualifications. We continue to work closely with the #protectstudentchoice campaign to raise these concerns.

We also highlight accessibility concerns around T levels and the challenges of T-level industry placements which risks excluding some learners.

Weaknesses within the current post-16 landscape

Our main concerns highlight:

1. The inflexible nature of the system which promotes a binary choice between academic and vocational
2. The complexity of the landscape and the lack of work experience for young people

A possible alternative system would propose a baccalaureate model, which we have called for consistently in our research reports, policy reports and policy responses. This would support more blending of academic and vocational routes, the integration of transferrable skills, and opportunities for integrated work experience.

International good practice

Lastly our response presents examples of good international practice in the post 16 space, looking at Austria, France and Singapore. At Edge, we also strongly believe in the importance of policy memory.

So we have developed a “Learning from the Past” series which explores a number of previous policies in the Technical and Vocational Education and Training space. Our hope is that by learning from the past, we can ensure better policy making in the future.

Read our full response to the Inquiry here.