High apprenticeship dropout rates would be easier to address if the Department for Education published more detailed data showing exactly when non-completing apprentices leave, an education charity has argued.
In a report called Apprenticeship Completion, EPA and the Role of Employers, the education consultancy Think looked at reasons why “barely half” of all apprentices complete their programme.
Some standards have high withdrawal rates shortly before completion because mandatory qualifications are viewed as “more valuable” and potentially duplicated with end-point assessments (EPAs), the report found.
However, the “single biggest barrier” reported by employers was functional skills, with many “perfectly capable” employees dropping out before completion or declining to start apprenticeships.
In some cases, employers used apprenticeships for “career development and skills add-ons” rather than initial training or a route to promotion, meaning the learner had “little to lose” by dropping out.
‘Insufficient data’
Think, which carried out the research on behalf of the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, analysed apprenticeship data from 2021/22, a freedom of information request to the DfE and interviews with 50 providers and 71 employers.
Researchers concluded that “insufficient data” is published on the number of apprentices who leave after completing most of their training or their mandatory qualifications, and which standard they are studying.
Doing so “would help” to improve apprenticeship achievement rates, which the government hopes to increase from 54 per cent to 67 per cent by 2024/25.
Researchers found that 89 per cent of non-completing nursing associates dropped out in the three months before or after their planned end date.
Non-completing public service delivery officers also dropped out in high numbers shortly after their planned end date, with 58 per cent of 599 apprentices leaving.
The legal financial and accounting and business route had the highest number of standards – 17 of 26 that had available data – with more than 30 per cent of non-completing apprentices dropping out close to their planned end date.
In contrast, the engineering and manufacturing route had only five out of 40 standards with more than 30 per cent of non-completing apprentices leaving in the three months before or after their planned end date.
‘You can’t see why’
The report noted that, while recent Institute for Apprenticeship and Technical Education (IfATE) policy is likely to help deal with dropouts after mandatory qualifications are achieved, there is a need for a “more continuous” picture of which standards are problematic.
Richard Guy, one of the report’s authors, told FE Week: “Everyone would know which standards are the core of the problem for low achievement rates.
“At the moment, you can see achievements are low, but you can’t see why.
“Also, if you publish mandatory qualification achievements and how many apprentices are getting through EPA and gateway, you could tell where mandatory qualifications are being treated as more important than the EPA.”
‘Weak’ EPA interest
Despite the number of dropouts, the report found that independent EPAs are “always supported and valued by employers and apprentices” except when there are mandatory qualifications.
Mandatory qualifications “clearly” take precedence over EPAs and often cause “weak” employer and learner interest, it said.
To address this, assessments should be decided “nationally” rather than by trailblazer groups and EPAs should be integrated into the qualification to avoid duplication.
English and maths requirements should also be linked to the apprenticeship standard, the report concludes.
Other reasons for dropping out
The DfE announced it was launching a new exit feedback tool for surveying apprentices in 2022, but it does not routinely publish its results.
However, in response to a freedom of information request, the DfE told FE Week that, of the 13,450 apprentices surveyed up to March 2024, “I didn’t enjoy the apprenticeship” was the top response, scoring 35 per cent.
Other reasons given in the multiple-choice survey included that the employer was “not supportive enough”, training was of “poor quality” and “other issues with my training provider”.
Only 2 per cent, a total of 70 learners, said “problems with the end point assessment” were a reason for leaving.
The survey appears not to have included any questions about mandatory qualifications.
A DfE spokesperson did not respond to the report’s recommendations.
However, they said: “We welcome this report, and are pleased that apprenticeship assessment is well supported by employers and apprentices.
“We are committed to ensuring apprentices complete their apprenticeship having gained all the skills they need for their career.
“With the launch of Skills England, we will bring together businesses with trade unions, mayors and training providers to ensure we have the highly trained workforce needed to deliver national, regional and local skills needs.”
Simon Ashworth, deputy CEO of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “AELP welcomes Gatsby’s new report which shows apprentices withdrawing at gateway due to English and maths requirements.
“This highlights the need for a change on functional skills policy which – along with changes to end point assessment currently being piloted – would make a huge difference.
“The report also shows the need for more data to be made available – this would give us more insight into when apprentices drop out as well as why.
“At the moment, it is too easy to blame the provider when we know that many non-completions are as a result of issues outside of their control.”
IfATE declined to comment.
I’m not sure the phrase drop-out is that helpful when it comes to apprenticeships.
Unlike non work-based learning, there is an employer involved. It’s employment with training, a three way relationship with apprentice, employer and provider.
Therefore, reasons for non achievement are multi-faceted and to use the term drop out can insinuate it’s the apprentices fault. It’s similar to only having achievement rates for providers, when employer behaviour or simple economic conditions can hit achievement, completely outside the control of providers.
Just asking apprentices for their perspective on non achievement is also a little limiting, don’t you also need the perspective of providers and employers? The way those three perspectives interrelate and overlap would provide a more rounded view (and perhaps a mild headache!).
Further to that, just looking at achievement or drop out in isolation is also limiting. Would you rather have a programme with 50% achievement and 90% of those retained in relevant occupations, or 90% achievement on a qualification with virtually no progression into employment in a relevant occupation?
It also raises questions around the 20% completion payment – If ‘drop out’ on some standards is horribly low, where is the mechanism when IfATE set funding bands that would need to overfund the ‘on programme’ element of funding to make up for all that lost 20% of the funding band that is never earned…
Could not have said it better myself. Totally agree. Employers have a massive input as to whether an apprentice achieves. We have had employers who have been so supportive at the start and then work load increase’s and apprentices struggle to juggle the needs of their employers and the needs of their apprenticeship. No matter what support the ITP can offer the employers needs will come first as this is what pays the wages at the end of the day.
There needs to be accountability from all three parties equally.
For me, consistent delays by my training provider and employers have made it difficult to complete my apprenticeship. I could see why someone in a similar position might just drop out and look for a job elsewhere, prior to EPA completion. The main two issues are my training provider and employer timelines not lining up, meaning my training provider was working towards a September finish, whilst my employer was expecting a July finish. On top of this the trading provider is slow at marking and often loses work due to staff turnover. My employer also has little ability to influence the training provider, whilst delays and issues with projects at work have made it difficult to gain the necessary experience. My employer has been largely unsupportive in trying to find me the right experience, so I had to find it myself.