The government has confirmed it will axe English and maths functional skills exit requirements for adult apprentices with immediate effect.
Ministers have also revealed that the minimum duration of apprenticeships will be shortened from 12 to eight months from the next academic year.
Education secretary Bridget Phillipson announced the major reforms today to mark National Apprenticeship Week, claiming that the changes slash red tape that will lead to a conservative estimate of 10,000 more apprentice completions a year.
FSQs out for adults but stay for 16-18s
As first revealed by FE Week last week, ministers will end the current requirement that apprentices aged 19 or older must pass level 2 functional skills courses to complete their apprenticeship.
The exit rule will be made optional for adults from today and can be applied to existing apprentices currently on-programme as well as new starters.
The DfE told FE Week that employers and providers will have until April 1, 2025 to “agree with their existing adult apprentices whether to continue or discontinue studying towards English and maths and will need to update their training plans accordingly”.
“We will be publishing updated funding rules shortly which set out more details regarding the policy change,” the department added.
There will be no change to the rule for 16 to 18 apprentices, who will still be required to pass level 2 functional skills exams to complete their apprenticeship.
Ministers have been warned by the Association of Employment and Learning Providers that not relaxing this exit requirement for young people risks making apprenticeships for this age group, which have plummeted over the past decade, even more “less attractive” to employers.
A DfE spokesperson said the change to English and maths rules for adult apprentices means “more learners can qualify in high demand sectors such as healthcare, social care and construction, helping to drove growth and meet government targets in key areas such as housebuilding”. They estimate this could mean “as many as 10,000 more apprentices per year will be able to complete their apprenticeship”.
The DfE added that this “does not mean that apprentices won’t be assessed on core English and maths skills relevant to their occupation, but it does mean that apprentices will be able to focus more on their paid work”.
Ben Rowland, chief executive of the AELP, said the functional skills exit requirement is “one of the biggest barriers providers, employers and apprentices face within the apprenticeship system, and has caused significant stress and missed opportunities for learners, meaning less progression and locking out many individuals from being able to access an apprenticeship opportunity”.
He added: “While good literacy and numeracy are important in work and life, it is right to remove this as an arbitrary requirement for adults.”
Jill Whittaker, co-founder and executive chair of hospitality apprenticeships provider HIT Training, told FE Week that removing the exit requirement for adults puts apprenticeships “on a level playing field with other post-16 programmes”.
However, she added that the sector must not “throw the baby out with the bathwater”. Providers must “continue to offer high quality English and maths support to those who want and need it”.
New 8-month minimum duration
The DfE first announced plans to shorten the minimum duration of apprenticeships during the Labour party conference in September.
The department today revealed that the current 12-month minimum will be reduced to eight months from August 2025, but this is “subject to the legislative timetable”.
Three “trailblazer apprenticeships” in key shortage occupations will look to “pioneer” the new shorter apprenticeship approach, with apprentices in green energy, healthcare and film/TV production set to be able to take on these new courses, according to the DfE.
The three standards are: level 2 dual fuel smart meter installers, level 2 healthcare support workers, and level 3 production assistants- screen and audio.
The DfE added that one of Skills England’s first orders of business will be to identify which apprenticeships would be best served by the shorter duration approach.
Skills England, which had its leadership team announced today, will “prioritise key shortage occupations as per the industrial strategy, helping to boost growth under our Plan for Change”.
Phillipson said: “Businesses have been calling out for change to the apprenticeship system and these reforms show that we are listening. Our new offer of shorter apprenticeships and less red tape strikes the right balance between speed and quality, helping achieve our number one mission to grow the economy.”
Federation of Small Businesses executive director, Craig Beaumont, said the flexibilities announced today “should help SME employers fill skills gaps faster”.
John Lewis Partnership’s executive director of people, Jo Rackham, added: “Gaining GCSE maths and English qualifications can be a significant barrier to starting or completing one and we believe it will help more disadvantaged people, including those who leave the care system or those with learning disabilities, make a career for themselves.”
Clarity needed. Will learners still be doing maths and English but without formal assessment at the end?
From what I understand, yes, it’ll be embedded in their Apprenticeship with no summative assessment. However, the requirements from OFSTED will ensure FE Colleges are documenting it.
I think it is terrible. The standard of basic English and Maths in this country is declining. This change will mean even those with a level 5 qualification will not need basic English and math skills.
I believe the issue with Functional Skills was when the Reforms came in, and they removed the functioning element of Functional Skills and made the qualification more like GCSEs. This was unnecessary.
Eventually, our reputation of having one of the best educational systems will diminish.
100% agree with you on this.
Completely in agreement with you both
I agree. I don’t really understand why more people aren’t concerned that a lack of English and maths skills are preventing people from achieving. I also agree that the changes made to reform Functional Skills, made them substantially less functional. I feel something needed changing, but don’t agree that the answer is to just to accept that these skills aren’t important for the development of our workforce.
I agree with you, i think removing English and maths doesn’t address issue with labour market, based on experience after apprenticeship people will still struggle to get employment because not all employers offer jobs after completing apprenticeship. The reality at the moment is with both English and Maths one still struggles to get a job. I think they resolve the issue with employers who are playing god with their recruitment process.
In a nutshell, sacrificing quality for volumes because Treasury skims off levy receipts.
Meet the new, same as the old.
Functional Skills thrown under the bus again – first, when colleges could choose to have FE learners achieve one grade higher in GCSE maths and English rather than get an actual valid qualification, now because, rather than look at what constitutes a functional amount of maths and English, they’ll just throw the whole lot out. One size fits none, get it right in mainstream or suffer from employment immobility for the rest of your life. What a freaking sick joke, played on teachers and students alike.
This is disgusting, as a functional skills tutor with a passion for English and Maths, removing it from the course puts thousands of us out of a job, has the government considered this? Maths is challenging, so what? remove it entirely? why even bother teaching Maths in school when you don’t need it for anything? effectively removing maths from the entire syllabus because certain individuals find it challenging. All this is teaching our society is that when things are challenging we get rid of them. Damaging move yet again by a crumbling and failing government.
Agree completely
This change will mean that childcare practitioners and teaching assistants will not be required to have any basic Maths and English skills.
They will be ‘teaching’ your children!
Surely, this change should be assessed via sectors?!
be interesting to see what sectors might be considered as not needing maths and english. Does this mean we can have illiterate Drs or Dentists or the person coming to build your extension does not know about force when calculating the amount of bricks and lintels you need in your new room? I feel they all need to keep them but more support to help people to achieve, think differently other than exams? It worked for COVID as people were awarded their certificates based on coursework.
Excellent action to scrap functional skills for every apprentice – however consideration needs to be made for which apprenticeships require maths or English as a requisite. Eg Engineering must have Maths before starting. Make the rule applicable to the apprenticeship.
I can see how it will increase access, which is good, but it will decrease literacy and numeracy and strand people in roles and/or positions. Also, in a climate where we don’t know what the employment market will look like by the end of the year, let alone the end of the decade, the only qualifications that will be universally required will be maths and English. This is not just threatening the livelihoods of everyone responsible for delivering functional skills, but the livelihoods of goodness knows how many apprentices to come. All because no-one could be bothered to look at the reforms made to the functional skills qualifications and determine what was ‘functional’.
Clarity need on what happens if you start your apprenticeship at 18 but complete it at post 19
Either way it’s creating a birthdate lottery.
If it’s based on age (16-18) at start, then employers may consider age as a factor in their recruitment practices (i.e assessing the risk or benefit of non-completion), in a way that they currently do not.
If it’s based on age at the end of the programme, then your birthdate in relation to the duration could also affect employer recruitment practices in a way that it currently does not.
Perhaps the Equality Impact Assessment will be published along with further guidance, spelling out how this is cutting red tape. (or just U turn and have sensible pre-requisite entry requirements for each standard, with signposting to progression pathways to remain inclusive)
Brilliant point made, we need these young people to be in the jobs pipeline but this will make it harder for them. This will also affect the drop put rates for the apprenticeships as they wont be able to cope with the course content if they cannot complete the requirements.
Absolutely ridiculous that the government would opt for such a short-sighted and desperate tactic. I understand that it is “removing barriers,” but surely the positionality of maths within a vocational programme should be addressed first before scrapping the qualification all together? Surely this will have a more lasting impact on learners from all sectors.
As mentioned below, I wholeheartedly believe that the positionality was lost when Functional Skills was reformed and became mini-GCSE. A terrible shame which will ultimately be paid with an immobile workforce hampered by the decisions of the disconnected. For shame.
The announcement will undoubtedly be welcomed by many training providers, but it also raises important questions about the rationale behind the DfE’s decision.
Functional Skills qualifications are designed to cover essential maths and English skills. While they are often referred to as GCSE equivalents, they contain only about a third of the content and focus on practical, everyday applications rather than abstract concepts like algebra. These qualifications equip individuals with the fundamental skills needed for real-world tasks, such as writing clear emails or best buys in the supermarket.
Placing the responsibility for maths and English attainment on training providers in this way has been a significant burden, exacerbated by years of underfunding. Understandably, this has led to frustration within the sector. A more pragmatic approach would have involved increased funding, support, and greater flexibility.
One point that both sides of this debate can likely agree on is the lack of clarity in the government’s announcement. The failure to provide crucial details on funding allocation, future provision, or meaningful guidance for providers and apprentices demonstrates a concerning disconnect. Once again, this appears to be a headline-grabbing policy shift with little practical consideration, highlighting the wider challenges within the UK education and political systems. Surely those who were lobbying for this didn’t expect such a poorly thought through plan?
I feel the people who are saying this is a bad thing have never seen the disappointment of an apprentice who is gateway ready but has had to be failed in their apprenticeship because they cannot pass Maths or English!
Yes, English and Maths are important and as a provider we will continue to offer it to all but it should not be the be all and end all of an apprenticeship.
Agree, this is why it needs to be a pre-requisite before starting but this also needs to be adapted to the Level of the Apprenticeship and support offered to help them to achieve. Never met a builder yet who does not need to calculate materials and costs so maths is essential, healthcare is the same when measuring observations, weights, fluid balance and also what about calculating the right amount of a drug! We are heading for disaster if we are not careful.
I teach Functional Skills and live this disappointment, and I find it massively frustrating when I see a learner who has developed their skills to meet the criteria and then still can’t pass the exam. However, the skills they develop are useful and do help them in their life and career. Some lack the very basics of maths and the development is always positive and needed. I would argue that the issue is with the reforms made to the qualifications, the over complicated exam question and that they are not fully imbedded into apprenticeships, for example the learning hours do not count in the 20% off the job training, so learners find it difficult to do both alongside a full time job (adapting the length of programme dependent on need could be an option). The qualifications are poorly funded, so are usually ran at a loss for providers. A revamp was needed to prevent Functional Skills from holding people back; a ban was needed on providers refusing to take on learners that needed functional skills (IA dependent), but to make a decision that these skills are just nor relevant is short sighted in my opinion.
I agree with Toni. The main problem has started since the functional skills were reformed, especially maths which became much more difficult and ‘wordy’ with tasks which were far from what would be found in everyday life.
“Our new offer of shorter apprenticeships and less red tape strikes the right balance between speed and quality”.
Is that trying to say we’ve sacrificed some quality for speed? In which case, isn’t it peculiar that achievement rates will go up as a result of sacrificing quality.
I wish it did work like that. I could withdraw funds from my bank and my balance would go up! (instant remedy to the FE wages conundrum right there…)
Dear Mr provider, please spend even more off my valuable apprentices time out of the job teaching them English and maths said no employer ever….
People forget that embedding English and maths is a fundamental part of an apprenticeship and it still will be as its written in the Ofsted framework. But it means we can do so without the significant emotional burden of sitting exams and learning things that have no relevance to their career and starting the whole programme with a negative from day one.
This will massively reduce the amount of breaks in learning, past end dates and increase achievement rates across the board. Not to mention it will save funding which can be used to address other skills gaps.
My only issues is that it should have been blanket including 16-18 and providers now have to try and deliver what for many provider will be a small proportion of FS learners. In many cases the 16-18s on represent 25% of their apprentices and only 10% of their FS provision.
Small providers will struggle to bring in enough funds to justify a full time FS tutor so you may even see much higher entry requirements at 16-18 in the professional business world.
I am however very sorry for existing FS tutors as trying to sell FS to older apprentices is going to be almost impossible to make jobs work with increased NI.
I agree with the ruling on F/Skills within apprenticeships as it should not be a condition of achieving what is a vocational qualification. However, it’s now a worrying time for many F/Skills tutors, providers and Awarding Organisations who deliver and provide these qualifications. As always the government making decisions immediately with no regard to the impact! They should have given time to prepare and plan for this. The question everyone should be asking is why at 19 years old after 11 years of schooling do young people not have adequate English and maths qualifications or levels? If they can’t achieve within 11 years, why does everyone expect them to do it within a year of an apprenticeship! The problem is within schooling and should be looked at first and foremost!
Because Children from right the start are being taught by people who are not fully educated, not having passed Maths and English! Continuous circle of failures.
This is a disgusting way to make things easier. in fact why don’t we just offer qualifications without actually bothering to attend at all, that would make it really easy. Does the government not want healthcare staff to be able to calculate drugs being given out, interpret blood results or clinical measurements to be able to recognise a deteriorating patient? Where does it stop?
Why, is a question I find myself asking, and the answer is clear- money. Don’t for one minute think this is about the student or their future , this is purely money focused. If you think about it, if functional skills are not part of the apprenticeship programme then the funding will be reduced and then the provision of maths and English, which will still be required in some form or another come squarely on the training provider or employer.
We should be proud of out apprenticeship programme and it should have merit and be able to stand toe to toe with other qualification and forms of study , this is where the value to students and employers is.
As a last thought what about all the talented functional skills tutors who will be lost!
I just hope the Ofsted and EPAO’s have taken this all into their considerations. While a lot of adult learners will find this as good news I do this just cutting it off with immediate effect does not take into consideration those who have been studying their FS and are about to take their tests or are in the middle of them. Surely it would have been better to bring this in for any new starts?
FE Association: “Hey DfE, this one size fits all approach isn’t working”.
DfE: “Do you have a better idea?”.
FE Association: “Well yes actually, how about this one size fits all approach”.
DfE: “OK then”.
Film Producer: “Hey investors, we have an idea for a hilarious movie about policy making in education systems”.
Investors: “So it’s a comedy?”
Film Producer: “Not exactly, it’s more of a farce”.
Investors: “OK, talk to us about the financials”.
Film Producer: “Of course, my level 5 Post production engineer apprentice will take you through the numbers…” (fidgets nervously)
Investors: “Is this some kind of joke?”
Apprentice: “Not exactly, it’s more of a farce”.
will someone be updating all of the standards to explain this? we still have Level 2 standards asking for Level 2 attempts at FS and EPAO’s not letting learners go through unless they attempt even though it is no longer a requirement. I can see this whole thing causing massive issues as it is rushed through. I wonder what the Intent was? How they plan to Implement it and what the Impact will be. Oh yes- Intent – Greed more apprenticeship starts! Implementation – leave that up to the people who have to deal with the learners/employers (not their problem) Impact – lots of unemployed functional skills tutors, lots of confusions between providers and EPAO’s!!!
What about initial assessments, will they still be required to assess what level the apprentices are working at? or is the Government getting rid of that requirement too?
This idea of dismissing the importance of Functional Skills for those on apprenticeships, is just further expanding a poorly educated workforce. If we don’t give their education importance then why would they!
As an adult educator myself, I have taught many learners, and it never ceases to amaze me how the education system has let them down. I am seeing 17, 18, 19 year who struggle to calculate basic arithmetic, have no idea about fractions, have no notion of punctuation or basic grammar and are unable to hold a general conversation or debate. This is down to the UK education system that is not giving our children the basic skills needed to succeed, and why Functional Skills is so important.
Can anyone confirm this? The DfE helpline tells me ‘no information or advice is available as this has not been implemented yet’, and there is no timescale for its implementation. So the article above says this change is implemented with immediate effect for current and new apprentices, but the DfE will not confirm, deny or comment on this. Is there a formal statement or policy document available anywhere please?
As a Functional Skills Co-ordinator & Gas Apprentice Teacher myself, the issue lies with the fact Functional Skills English & Maths Level 2 is not relevant anymore.
English & Maths are embedded in our Level 3 Electrical & Gas Apprenticeships, where candidates are required to complete accurate quotes, emails and deliver classroom presentations as well as calculating costs, working out room volumes and percentages.
Abolishing Functional Skills for over 19s will put more pressure on training providers to embed English & Maths, making it more relevant.
The world is changing and we must keep up with it.
I think it’s a welcome move, whilst I appreciate some of the comments I’ve read so far.
For employers looking to use their Levy and have a high number of international employees – the change is positive. Our employees are to the most part, highly educated, have degrees etc in their native land – but want to upskill in their roles in England – and having to do the FS is a barrier – especially if they have the equivalent/higher education certs from their countries, which are not always accepted.
Apprenticeship providers should always be assessing the learners level of English and Maths – and could encourage completing the FS if their level is poor.
We will end up with two teir Apprenticeships with future employers favouring those who completed the apprenticeship with maths and English over those that didn’t!