Labour must not endanger the independence of end-point assessments

Government must be mindful that the independence of assessments is essential to the quality and credibility of apprenticeships, writes Dame Julie Mellor

Government must be mindful that the independence of assessments is essential to the quality and credibility of apprenticeships, writes Dame Julie Mellor

5 Oct 2024, 5:00

While ministers are right to consider reforms of end-point assessments (EPAs) in apprenticeships, the independence of the assessments themselves is the cornerstone of employer confidence in the system and must be maintained.

EPAs validate an apprentice’s hard-earned knowledge, skills and behaviours, boosting their confidence and providing a clear pathway into future employment.

For employers, it is crucial that these assessments are fair and rigorous. Without an independent assessment system, the trust employers have in the competence of employees – and in the apprenticeship system as a whole – would be severely undermined.

We recognise that the system is not without its challenges. Many apprenticeship providers have reported difficulties with EPAs. These include the availability of assessors, the consistency of end-point assessment organisations (EPAOs), the complexity of the process and the inclusion of mandatory qualifications within certain apprenticeship standards.

However, EPAs have provided a rigorous, outcome-based method of assessment since their introduction in 2017. As DfE begins to roll out pilots, here are some of the suggestions making the rounds and why each involves substantial risks.

Pilot 1: Provider-led EPAs

We understand that one of the options under consideration is for apprenticeship providers to carry out their own EPAs. The Association of Colleges argues that colleges could maintain the necessary rigour and independence, but this approach poses a number of challenges.

First, if providers are required to gain Ofqual recognition as EPAOs, this doesn’t necessarily streamline the process and could add more bureaucracy. There’s also potential for confusion stemming from colleges and ITPs administering EPAs alongside EPAOs.

Moreover, colleges deliver less than one-fifth of apprenticeships (17.4 per cent in 2022/23), and for smaller independent training providers (ITPs), setting up as an EPA organisation may not be feasible.

Then, there’s the significant risk of conflict of interest. With growing pressure to boost achievement rates, how can we ensure objectivity if those training apprentices are also responsible for assessing their competence?

And finally, we already have a shortage of assessors with the appropriate level of technical expertise, and provider pay lags behind the private sector. Therefore, they are unlikely to recruit and retain the staff they need to assess, in particular in emerging sectors such as technology and green energy.

Pilot 2: Employer-supported assessment

We understand that the pilots may also include the option to transfer assessment of behaviours from EPAOs to employers. This has some intuitive appeal; after all, employers see their apprentices in action daily and could be well-placed to judge workplace behaviours.

However, employers may lack the expertise required to measure them against apprenticeship standards, or at least would need significant support to carry out this role effectively.

More critically, placing this responsibility on employers risks introducing inconsistency across the system. It opens up the possibility of businesses applying varying standards, which may call into question the credibility of apprenticeship assessment.

Pilot 3: Simpler KSB assessments

One further option under consideration is to reduce the number of knowledge, skills, and behaviours (KSBs) that must be directly assessed. But while streamlining assessments could make the process more efficient (and should be considered) a one-size-fits-all approach risks undermining quality.

This is especially true for high-risk sectors such as science, technology, and engineering, where competence is critical to safety and performance. Employers in the science and technology industries have in fact argued for more – not fewer – assessment methods.

In short, simplifying the assessment process cannot come at the cost of protecting safety and competence.

The EPA system has evolved significantly since its introduction and, if reforms allow, will continue to do so. Proportionality and flexibility are key – streamlining where possible without sacrificing quality.

Testing new proposals with employers and sector skills bodies is also essential to ensure that changes work across their sectors.

But above all, preserving the independence of assessment is crucial. Independence ensures objectivity and upholds high standards; without it, we risk losing the confidence that makes apprenticeships such a vital part of our skills landscape.

Latest education roles from

Chief Education Officer (Deputy CEO)

Chief Education Officer (Deputy CEO)

Romero Catholic Academy Trust

Director of Academy Finance and Operations

Director of Academy Finance and Operations

Ormiston Academies Trust

Principal & Chief Executive

Principal & Chief Executive

Truro & Penwith College

Group Director of Marketing, Communications & External Engagement

Group Director of Marketing, Communications & External Engagement

London & South East Education Group

Sponsored posts

Sponsored post

Supporting the UK’s Transport Decarbonisation Plan Through Skills

The UK Government’s Decarbonising Transport: A Better, Greener Britain strategy sets a legally binding path towards a net-zero transport...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Project power: ASDAN expands its qualifications portfolio

From 2026, ASDAN’s planned Foundation and Higher Project Qualifications will sit alongside its Extended Project Qualification[CM1] , creating a complete...

Advertorial
ATAs

Spotlight on excellence: Nominations now open for the Apprenticeship & Training Awards 2026

Nominations are open for the 2026 Apprenticeship & Training Awards, celebrating outstanding employers and providers with national recognition, a...

FE Week Reporter
Sponsored post

Funding Adult Green Skills

New sources of funding are available to finance the delivery of green skills to all learners. Government policy is...

Tyler Palmer

More from this theme

Apprenticeships

Revealed: DfE’s special payments to providers after funding blunder

Wheels in motion for convoy of claims after unprecedented payouts

Billy Camden
Apprenticeships

Lindsay Conroy appointed Association of Apprentices CEO

The former UCAS apprenticeships lead will replace Emily Rock

FE Week Reporter
Apprenticeships, Politics

Badenoch: I’ll double apprenticeships budget by slashing uni degrees

Leader of the opposition would reintroduce student number controls for 'poor quality' uni courses to fund apprenticeship boost

Shane Chowen
Apprenticeships, Politics

Starmer swerves a deadline for headline ‘two-thirds’ target

'If there’s no date for people to work towards, then it’s just a vague aspiration', says ex-SpAd

Billy Camden

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

3 Comments

  1. Grant Chapple

    It’s clear that EPA and standards have faced resistance from colleges since their introduction. A significant issue is that colleges are still not proactive in setting up EPA arrangements, and many struggle with predicting accurate planned end dates, which makes it difficult for EPA organisations to manage scheduling effectively. These are challenges that could have been avoided with proper planning and provision from the start.

    I believe a national EPA booking system, perhaps integrated into the DAS, would help hold both colleges and training providers accountable for better EPA planning. This would also make it easier to organise assessors efficiently. Additionally, seconding subject specialists who are actively working in the sector to EPAOs could bring valuable expertise and further streamline the process.

  2. Providers are already both trainer and assessor in those disciplines where a Diploma runs alongside the Apprenticeship. Surely internal and external quality assurance can ensure standards are maintained in a world of provider EPAs?

  3. KAREN BAILEY

    EPAs are not suitable for all apprenticeships and the assessment criteria should be set up and agreed by the employer groups or sector skill bodies for some it would be better to have on going assessment or demonstration of the skills as they build in complexity over time. Has anyone actually gathered any actual evidence over whether EPAs are giving better quality? If so what are you basing the measures of ‘quality’ on? Surely it would be that we have more people able to do the jobs that we need and if that is the case we have failed.