Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Britain’s growth plan will fail without level 4 and 5 skills

Only one in 10 UK adults have the higher technical skills that modern industry desperately needs. Last spring, the government’s industrial strategy laid out a plan to boost eight key growth sectors, including advanced manufacturing.

It rightly recognised that expanding employers’ access to investment in skills training is crucial – yet evidence shows the UK still faces a critical “missing middle” of level 4 and 5 technical skills.

The demand for higher-skilled roles will continue to grow over the next decade and beyond, making it essential that the skills system supports rapid, scalable investment in higher technical skills to maintain competitiveness and unlock growth.

Make UK’s research has found that manufacturers are increasing investment in upskilling and retraining existing staff, with a growing focus on higher-level training.

Around 28 per cent report prioritising skills development at levels 4 and 5, and nearly half anticipated doing so within three to five years. While economic pressures may have tempered overall training spend, the underlying demand for higher technical skills remains strong.

This is reflected in Skills England’s analysis of occupations in demand and sector skills needs for advanced manufacturing, as part of its work on the industrial strategy.

While the overall size of the advanced manufacturing workforce may not change dramatically, its composition will – shaped by an ageing workforce, the push for net zero and increasing digitalisation, all of which heighten the need for higher technical skills and the right upskilling options for workers at all levels.

The report Responding to Higher Technical Skills Needs, published by the Gatsby Foundation and Learning and Work Institute in November, set out the crux of the issue for employers.

There is a higher proportion of skills-shortage vacancies in manufacturing than most other sectors, and the skills system must evolve to enable investment at levels 4 and 5.

Many manufacturers hire young people on level 2 or 3 engineering and manufacturing apprenticeships, or use T Levels to build a pipeline of new entrants into critical roles. They are also hiring more graduates for professional engineering roles, reflecting growing demand in occupations such as electrical and process engineering.

But the sector’s skills challenge cannot be met through youth routes alone: there is rising demand for level 4 and 5 technical skills yet employers frequently report that provision is hard to navigate and not flexible enough – especially for SMEs and their employees.

Current policy change presents an ideal opportunity to address this. The government’s commitment to implementing the lifelong learning entitlement (LLE) from next year, alongside greater flexibility for the growth and skills levy to fund shorter-form training, could support progression into higher technical roles.

However, the Gatsby and L&W report highlights that the LLE may have limited impact on upskilling adults in work unless it is accompanied by sufficient, relevant career guidance.

Make UK’s Industrial Strategy Skills Commission, noted in the Gatsby/L&W report, recommended that a skills covenant is drawn up between government, industry and the education sector to resolve the challenges faced by employers, providers and workers.

Beyond high-level funding and resource questions, there are key areas where a difference could be made.

Initiatives such as sector skills passports – hinted at in the industrial strategy and post-16 education and skills white paper – and existing programmes like local skills improvement plans (LSIPs) could boost employer involvement in the design of new level 4-5 provision ahead of the LLE rollout and levy flexibility.

At a critical time for skills policy, improving employers’ access to higher technical skills should be a priority. Industry stands ready to collaborate with the education sector and government to ensure that employers can invest in the skills they need.

Teachers need work experience too if new pathways are to succeed

Our post-16 education landscape has long needed simplification to ensure meaningful options for all learners, so the government’s aims in introducing new pathways at level 3 and below are welcome.

With routes including V Levels being developed, we have an opportunity to shape qualifications that could make a real difference to learners’ lives and their progression, while also supporting the government’s industrial strategy ambitions.

We know vocational pathways are most effective when they are coherent, credible, rooted in real labour market demand and inclusive of the needs of all learners. So these should be guiding principles during their development and implementation.

However, the success of these pathways will depend not only on their design but on ensuring the FE and skills workforce is equipped to deliver them with confidence and expertise.

Meeting skills needs

The government’s planned V Level subjects reveal an intent to cover a range of study areas that align with priority sectors in its industrial strategy (including manufacturing, digital and finance), while encompassing the creative and service industries that make significant contributions to local economies (such as hospitality, retail and hairdressing).

These subject areas represent sectors where applied technical knowledge, practical skill development and work-based learning are essential for progression into skilled employment, apprenticeships or higher technical study.

As industries rapidly evolve and skills needs change, maintaining the relevancy of content is an ongoing challenge. This means we need systems in place to review and update content.

The Department for Education should future-proof qualifications as far as possible by focusing on key economic drivers such as digitalisation, green skills and automation across subjects.

A coherent, integrated system

It is also important that V Level subjects and new T Level subjects fit coherently within the broader landscape of technical and vocational qualifications to avoid duplication and confusion for learners, parents or carers and employers.

For learners, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, coherent pre-level 3 pathways and qualifications provide essential scaffolding to build confidence, core skills and occupational identity. Getting these pathways right is central to widening participation and addressing longstanding skills and opportunity gaps.

System coherence is vital for providers and employers too. Evidence from ETF’s delivery of the T Level professional development programme shows that where curriculum intent, qualification design, workforce capability and employer engagement are aligned, providers report greater confidence in delivery and stronger employer partnerships.

Workforce development as a priority

This points to a critical consideration: the successful delivery of V Levels and other pathways will depend on a highly skilled FE and skills workforce.

Leaders need access to strategic support and system-wide networks to facilitate the successful rollout of new pathways and qualifications across the sector.

Meanwhile, teachers and trainers must be strong dual professionals, combining high-quality teaching with current industry expertise.

Regular, structured opportunities, such as relevant industry placements, should be available to teaching staff to update their subject knowledge and industry practice.

Workforce development must also support the accessibility of qualifications, particularly for learners with SEND. We recommend that specialist continuing professional development in inclusive pedagogy, neurodiversity and adaptive vocational teaching should be routinely available for the whole workforce to support this aim.

The development of our post-16 education pathways represents a pivotal moment for our sector and for the diverse learners it serves.

Embedding workforce development, professional standards and CPD planning throughout development and implementation are key to successful integration into a coherent system.

Only by placing workforce development at the heart of qualification reform can we ensure these pathways genuinely meet learner needs and employer expectations.

The blitz on leadership training is daft policy that drains growth

In May last year I described as ‘daft’ the decision by the education secretary to only fund level 7 apprenticeships for apprentices aged 16-21.

The move to defund leadership and management apprenticeships – which should be a cornerstone of England’s vocational education and training offer – represents another short-sighted policy that will undermine both opportunity for young people and the nation’s long-term productivity. The term ‘double daft’ seems appropriate here.

The government’s determination to withdraw public funding from a range of management apprenticeships caused alarm amongst apprenticeship stakeholders, including employers in the run up to the announcement made on Monday.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith had already signalled that apprenticeships which ‘resemble continuing professional development rather than discrete occupations’ may no longer be regarded as appropriate for public funding.

The now-confirmed decision removes programmes that have become vital progression routes into management roles for learners of all ages, including ambitious school and college leavers.

Her position and the government’s rationale appear to be one of financial reprioritisation – targeting more money at front-door apprenticeships for young people at the lowest levels and reducing investment in higher-level programmes.

This creates a false dichotomy: you cannot meaningfully increase social mobility and opportunities for young learners while stripping away the very programmes that develop them into our future leaders across all sectors and professions.

Consider the wider workforce context. Census data for England and Wales categorises roles by occupation and age, showing a stark under-representation of young people in managerial positions.

For too long, the narrative around management apprenticeships has been dominated by myths that they are executive perks for older employees. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Apprenticeships like the chartered manager degree apprenticeship (CMDA), the most popular at level 6, are engines of inclusion.

Employers and training providers report that around 30 per cent of roles generated through the CMDA pathway go to those aged 24 or under.

They provide a vital bridge into management for young people, many of whom would not otherwise access or be given the opportunity for formal leadership training or qualifications. They act as a recognised bridge to higher-paid careers and a route to the professions that was first mooted by the last Labour government.

Pipeline matters. As funding is removed from these apprenticeship standards, thousands of talented young people will be stopped from progressing into positions as they invariably age and fall out of funding favour.

Management apprenticeships have demonstrable impact. Business-facing apprenticeship starts have been climbing at higher levels as demand grows, highlighting employer appetite for leadership and management development.

Yet, future successes will be removed amid policy shifts. When senior leadership and management routes are diminished, so too are the pipelines into strategic roles that underpin business growth.

Defunding now compounds a systemic challenge. Youth unemployment and economic inactivity remain, rightly, substantial concerns in our UK labour market. Removing investment in leadership training for those early in their careers will not tackle these issues; it will compound them.

Culturally, we must reframe leadership training as part of the solution to the UK’s social mobility and productivity goals – not as expendable in policy terms.

This is the aim of both the Chartered Management Institute and Institute of Leadership & Management petitions to government.

In a global economy where nations are competing on innovation and productivity, reducing our investment in leadership skills undermines our competitive edge. Countries with strong vocational and leadership development systems see a correlation between management capability and organisational performance. Skills England’s own early research as well as the history of labour market analysis draws the same conclusions!

The Westminster government should be positioning the nation alongside them – not retreating.

In the month in which we’ve showcased and celebrated the very best of apprenticeship and skills training at this year’s apprenticeships and training conference (ATC), let’s hope for a public policy U-turn at some future point.

Until then, I’ll remain less bewitched and more bothered and bewildered.

It pays to be playful when launching new technology

You’re standing in front of a class ready to try an exciting new piece of tech, and it doesn’t work. Blank faces stare back at you.

This is the moment we all dread when experimenting with something new. You were promised time saving and higher engagement, but instead are left with an awkward silence as you move onto the next part of your lesson.

Technological fragility or the fear of breaking the system is a key barrier in digital CPD. With a wealth of tools at our fingertips, and new revolutionary systems being shouted about in every corner of the internet, we have never been so equipped to tackle this new digital revolution.

However, due to the time constraints teaching staff face it’s difficult to provide them with confidence and security as they explore new tools. So new technologies are more often than not seen as more tight ropes to walk and boxes to tick.

I’m sure you’ve been presented with a tool in a digital CPD and told to click here, there and up there to save yourself 10 minutes of admin time, only to not truly understand what the tool is, how it works, or the plethora of features it has to offer. Leaving you scratching your head about how to implement this into an effective workflow.

Maslow’s foundation

During our training we probably all learnt of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and the need for a sense of safety to comfortably attain and innovate.

If a teacher feels threatened by a new system, whether from a fear of the unknown or of breaking something and looking silly, they cannot reach the self-actualisation level required for creative teaching and understanding the technology.

When a teacher is in survival mode, they cannot innovate. Their confidence must be established before we can expect curiosity.

Gabor Maté talks about play being a biological necessity for learning and how this must come from a threat-free environment. He defines play as “activity with no consequence”.

The same is true for learning new technologies. We must create an environment where staff can play with a system free from fear, angst or worry.

Digital CPD sessions must facilitate a sandbox environment where teachers feel safe to fail, where they can click all the buttons and find out how a system works.

We don’t need more ‘how to’ guides, we need more ‘what if’ spaces. How can we truly facilitate the space and time for play and how does this change the approach to a digital CPD session?

I propose a no-stakes session, where staff are given a tool and the time to play, understand and make links directly to their curriculums.

In practice, this means flipping the CPD script. Instead of a ‘click-along’ webinar, we should be creating ‘break-it’ sessions. In these spaces, the goal isn’t to produce a resource by the end of the hour, but to explore the boundaries of the software.

When we give staff permission to explore without a looming deadline or a required ‘output,’ we’re building their digital resilience. They learn how to troubleshoot, adapt, and crucially they learn that the ‘undo’ button is their best friend.

Investing in resilience

It’s clear that the biggest barrier will always be time. But from a management perspective we need to be patient and provide the time, space and confidence for practitioners to be curious.

Transformation will happen one confidence boost at a time. When we provide a structure for play we move from a culture of caution to one of innovation.

Time to play is not lost time but rather an investment in resilience, something we all need more of in this digital era. I challenge you, at your next CPD day, don’t just provide instructions on a million tools. Provide the space, safety and time to cultivate the one thing that actually matters: a confident practitioner.

WCG exits intervention

Warwickshire College Group has exited government intervention after making “tough decisions” to secure its finances.

The midlands college has been subject to government intervention since 2024 and almost entered insolvency last year before a last-minute government bailout.

Warwickshire College Group (WCG) now has government loans totalling £3.9 million and has put its Evesham campus up for sale – the latest in a series of controversial campus sell offs.

After finalising an apprenticeship claim funding audit that left it with a £5.4 million clawback bill from the Department for Education (DfE), the college’s financial notice to improve has now been lifted.

Principal Sara-Jane Watkins, who joined the college in September 2024, said: “Moving out of intervention is a pivotal moment for WCG. It demonstrates the Department for Education’s confidence in our recovery and our strategic direction.

“This progress is the result of an incredible collective effort from our new executive team and staff across all our campuses.

“We have moved at a rapid pace to address inherited financial issues, making tough decisions to ensure we have a sustainable foundation.”

Changes at the college since Watkins joined include introducing a new leadership team and appointing a campus principal to each site to “drive excellence” while maintaining group-wide stability, the college said.

The sale closure and planned sale of its Evesham Campus last year drew criticism from some local politicians and followed the controversial sale of its Malvern Hills campus.

Both campuses were part of South Worcester College, which it merged with in 2016. The proceeds of both sales will contribute to repaying government funding clawbacks.

The college can once again access targeted government funding and development opportunities that were restricted due to its intervention status.

Officials including the FE Commissioner’s team will continue to observe WCG via a post intervention monitoring and support plan.

FE Week also understands that the government is expected to publish a formal investigation outcome report which should detail what funding breaches led to the £5.4 million clawback.

WCG has more than 11,000 students at five campuses across Warwickshire and Worcestershire.

Gill Clipson, chair of the corporation, said: “I am delighted that the college has moved out of intervention and supervised status.

“This milestone is a testament to the leadership of our new executive team, whose drive and tenacity enabled us to make such rapid progress in very challenging circumstances.

“By swiftly assessing our financial position, rebuilding our finance and data functions, and redesigning our quality cycle, we have ensured the organisation is both effective and efficient.

“We now have a strong board and an even greater opportunity to shape and sustain a thriving, successful college for the region.”

The DfE did not respond to a request for comment.

Could clear workforce roles help attract and retain more FE teachers?

Strengthening teacher recruitment and retention is a critical challenge facing post-16 education, with high rates of unfilled vacancies in key sectors such as construction and engineering. This has only been exacerbated by a large pay gap between FE and secondary school teachers which is currently at its widest since at least 2010 . As part of its manifesto commitments, the government pledged to deliver 6,500 additional teachers in schools and colleges over the course of this parliament. With the number of 16-18-year-olds set to continue increasing rapidly over this period, assuming some of this growth is picked up by the FE sector, many of these new teachers will be needed in FE. To date, measures announced by the government to support recruitment and retention in the workforce include reforming FE initial teacher education, new programmes to support professionals’ transitions from industry, a range of financial incentives aimed at improving recruitment and/or retention and enhancing professional development opportunities and training.

However, efforts to address barriers to recruitment and retention in FE may be challenged by the complexity and variety of job roles across the sector. Efforts to target support towards particular roles may be more challenging when organisations have more varied staffing structures.

Our new NFER report, funded by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, explores this by delving into the current structure of the FE workforce drawing on the Further Education Workforce Data Collection (FEWDC). While we refer to the ‘FE workforce’ as a shorthand, we focus on teaching and support staff on fixed-term or permanent contracts working in General FE colleges only.

The current structure of job roles in FE

Our analysis shows there is significant variability in the job roles and sub-roles reported across colleges. For example, less than half of colleges report having trainers (49 per cent), instructors (49 per cent) and expert teachers (39 per cent). These differences were also apparent across sub-job roles. For example, tutors (54 per cent), advanced practitioners (39 per cent) and practitioners (22 per cent) are only reported in a subset of colleges. These differences did not appear to be driven by subject offering across providers. While most settings are likely to require staff who fulfil similar functions, the extent to which colleges report having different roles points to the potential to have more consistency in how job roles are structured and described across the sector.

How salaries differ between job roles

Salary differentials between roles and sub-roles suggest there may be clear starting points for simplifying the structure of the FE workforce. For example, staff recorded as teachers and lecturers in the FEWDC have comparable earnings on average. However, they also highlight the careful thought needed to ensure coherence in any new structure. Practitioners typically earn less than teachers and lecturers, although there is a wide range of salaries among individuals in this role. This suggests that there would be merit in further developing our understanding of how the practitioner role varies across providers. Producing a clear and comprehensive set of job descriptions for roles in the FE workforce could be a first step towards achieving this consistency.

A more streamlined approach could support recruitment and retention

The FE workforce has a complex and varied structure. Our analysis suggests there may be scope for greater streamlining of roles across the sector which could provide clearer progression pathways and help attract new teachers to the FE profession. While not a substitute for other critical measures to address recruitment and retention pressures, such as providing sufficient funding to enable FE providers to pay teachers more, this may support government efforts to deliver on their pledge for 6,500 additional teachers.

DWP caps new starts on defunded apprenticeships to stop recruitment rush

Training providers delivering apprenticeships earmarked for defunding will face limits on new starts to prevent a last-minute recruitment surge that could blow the budget.

Work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden announced this morning that the government will remove funding from 16 apprenticeship standards – including popular management courses – that do not to support young people or the government’s industrial strategy ambitions.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said the “baseline” plan is for defunding to take effect from September 1, 2026, although notice periods could be “extended by exception” where providers face a significant impact.

However, letters sent to multiple training providers and seen by FE Week show that defunding will kick in immediately for providers that do not currently deliver the standards being axed.

“Providers who did not deliver the standard in 2024-25 or have not reported starts in 2025-26 will not be permitted to begin new delivery,” the DWP wrote.

For providers that are already delivering the affected apprenticeships, funding will cease on December 17, 2026, the letters added.

Until then, new starts will be capped. Each letter seen by FE Week so far shows the limit will be set at 75 per cent of the volume each provider delivered in 2024-25 for every standard being withdrawn.

It is unclear whether the DWP will introduce different transition arrangements – such as alternative defunding dates or cap levels – for individual providers.

The department said the caps are intended to ensure removing the standards “deliver the savings needed to invest in new opportunities elsewhere in the programme, whilst still allowing a reasonable level of delivery so that providers can manage the transition and make orderly arrangements”.

It added that start limits will be set in a proportionate way to a providers recent delivery on each of the standards being withdrawn to ensure a “fair and consistent approach across all providers and prevents the surge in recruitment that has occurred previously when standards were announced for withdrawal without controls”.

The move follows a surge in level 7 apprenticeship starts in the months before funding was withdrawn for those aged 22 and over, which added further pressure to England’s already stretched apprenticeships budget.

Jill Whittaker, co-founder of HIT Training that forms part of The Opportunity Provider, said it was “refreshing to see” the government has recognised and learned from the “mistakes” of level 7 by applying a cap to the apprenticeships earmarked for defunding.

“I think it makes sense. It means a few challenging conversations with clients that have 12-month plans, but nothing we can’t work through,” she added.

The DWP stressed the restrictions apply only to new starts, with no change for existing apprentices.

“All learners already on programme must continue to be supported through to completion, and funding will remain available for this,” the department added.

DWP confirmed that this means if a provider has a 75 per cent starts cap on a standard, they start from 0 from today and can take on 75 per cent of their total starts from 2024-25 up until funding is switched off.

First apprenticeship units limited to ‘strong’ providers

A limited group of “strong” apprenticeship providers will be eligible to deliver the first apprenticeship units when they launch next month, the government has announced.

Officials have also confirmed that each unit will last between one and 16 weeks, can only be taken by employed people aged 19 and over, learners will need to pass a “skills test” validated by their employer – with independent assessment optional, and providers will be paid on two milestones.

D raft funding rules can be read here. Here’s what we know so far.

7 units to start

Apprenticeship units are new short courses to be funded through the reformed growth and skills levy for both large and small employers.

This is the first time levy funds can be used for non-apprenticeship training – a move that was promised by Labour in the party’s 2024 general election manifesto.

The government announced last night that from April 2026, apprenticeship units will be available for delivery in seven areas:

AI leadership
Electric vehicle charging point installation and maintenance
Electrical fitting and assembly
Mechanical fitting and assembly
Permanent modular building assembly
Solar PV installation and maintenance
Welding

The government said the content for apprenticeship units comes from the knowledge and skills from existing apprenticeship occupational standards “needed to address specific critical skills gaps”.

Details of each apprenticeship unit, including content and assessment requirements, are available on Skills England’s website here.

A ‘controlled’ rollout

Initial delivery will be restricted to a “targeted group” of existing apprenticeship providers that already show “strong performance” in the occupational standards linked to the units.

Providers must have delivered the apprenticeship standards or sector subject areas from which apprenticeship units are drawn in 2024-25, be on the apprenticeship provider and assessment register (APAR), not have any indicators rated as ‘at risk’ on the apprenticeship accountability framework and have no contractual funding restrictions.

Officials said they will carry out a “verification check against the published eligibility criteria” and then contact eligible training providers at the end of March to invite them to indicate their interest in delivering apprenticeship units.

The government said this phased approach enables the new offer to be introduced in a “controlled way”, ensuring “consistent implementation” and early insights before scaling up.

Apprenticeship units will be accounted for in the apprenticeship training provider accountability framework, with officials tracking the ratio of starts to completion and average durations, without setting intervention thresholds while the offer is in its early development phase.

Subcontracting of apprenticeship units is forbidden.

19+ age restriction

The government said apprenticeship units will only be for employed learners aged 19 and over whose employer has “identified a need to upskill them quickly to meet business needs and remain competitive”.

Units will not be eligible for learners “seeking to start a new career or occupation”.

Funding bands and durations TBC

Funding bands and delivery hours are still being tested with “critical stakeholders”.

Final figures are expected to be published from April 1, despite the units launching next month.

Officials have confirmed, however, that units will involve 30 to 140 hours of training, delivered over one to 16 weeks.

Delivery hours can include in-person and virtual teaching of theory, practical training, project work and one-to-one tuition. However, if both the tutor and learner are not present at the same time, the activity cannot count toward delivery hours.

Non-levy employers will be fully funded, while levy payers can use their levy funds.

2 milestone payments

Funding for an apprenticeship unit will be paid on two milestones to providers.

The first will be made once the learner has been successfully onboarded and completed 30 per cent of the planned delivery hours. This payment will “reflect 30 per cent of the price up to the funding band”.

The second milestone payment will be made once the learner has completed 100 per cent of the planned delivery hours, and achieved a “successful outcome” – described in the funding rules as when they have “passed their skills test and once the provider, learner and employer has confirmed that the training plan has been delivered”.

This payment will reflect the remaining 70 per cent of the price up to the funding band.

Independent assessment will be an option

There has been widespread concern that providers will be able to deliver apprenticeship unit training without an element of independent assessment.

The government suggested today that this approach will be the go-to, but an option for independent assessment will be available.

Officials said learners will need to pass a “skills test” for each apprenticeship unit. This test will be delivered by the training provider to demonstrate the learner has “acquired the skills and knowledge”. The result will then be “validated” by employers.

If an employer or learner “feels external independent assessment is needed, for example to meet regulatory requirements, they can work with their training provider to arrange this”.

There are no standalone English or maths requirements.

What you missed in the post-16 consultation response

V Levels and the new Level 2 pathways remain broadly unchanged, but there’s more than meets the eye to this response document. So, if you just had a chance to skim read it, or only managed to read the summary articles, what might you have missed?

Double V Levels?

V Levels are the small qualification for a mix and match programme. T Levels are the big qualification for single-subject delivery. But what about the 720GLH ‘double BTEC’, often paired with one A Level in sixth forms? Are they truly gone forever?

The concept of ‘partner V Levels’ has appeared in the Government response – here’s the lowdown straight from the text: “In a limited number of exceptional cases, we can see that study of more than one subject within the same employment route would be beneficial to students. Therefore, we propose that students should have the option to study two closely associated ‘partner’ V Levels (for example, in the way A Level students can study Maths and Further Maths) in the same employment route. This means that students could focus on a single employment route for 720 GLH.”

But what are these exceptional cases? Earlier in the response we can find a clue in the statement that “representative bodies suggested that, for some higher education routes, including science, engineering, sport, social science and creative degrees, a larger volume of applied subject learning was important for preparation and admissions confidence, and that 360 GLH alone might not provide sufficient depth.”

So, can we expect partner V Levels in subjects leading to these degrees? It remains to be seen, but this appears to signal that flexibility within the system is being considered, which would be a welcome development.

Where has Criminology gone?

The original white paper listed 23 potential V Level subjects, and teachers will have been pleased to see things like ‘Animation, games design and visual effects’, ‘Music and music performance’, and ‘Criminology’. The latter is one of the most popular vocational subjects in FE and was left out the last reforms.

So, in the outline timetable for reform set out in the response, there was much dismay to see that these subjects had all disappeared. Where are they? It was widely reported that this timeline showed the 18 new V Levels to launch, but this was not the full picture.

The confusion lies in the fact that the response document set out the V Level routes, not the subjects, and it clearly states that “the government aims to have only one V Level in a subject” but that “there could be more than one V Level subject in a route”.

So where’s Criminology? Whilst it’s not officially confirmed yet, it’s likely to be one of the subjects in the Protective Services route, launching in 2029/30.

A safety net for T Level learners?

T Levels really are going to be the only large option, so are there changes on the horizon to help grow to meet the demand for large qualifications? Three words came out loud and clear in the response: accessibility, manageability, and scalability.

The DfE outlined several practical solutions, particularly around managing down the size of T Levels to remove “unnecessary content and complexity”. The big one, which will hopefully be music to the ears of providers is “reducing the staff hours required to deliver and administer assessments”.

Another hugely welcome change, particularly for those subjects with age-restricted work experience, was the introduction of more flexibility in industry placements such as “group projects” and “remote working opportunities”.

Something which went largely unnoticed though, was the creation of a new T Level improvement group to “consider whether we have struck the right balance of recognising the performance of students who complete some, but not all, of a T Level”.

Are we about to see a safety net after year 1? Could it function just like foundation diplomas underneath an extended diploma? We will wait and see.

What next?

There is still much to understand, but with a first teach of September 2027 planned, we’re going to have to move quickly if we are to ensure the best outcomes for learners and those that teach them.

For the latest updates and practical guidance on post-16 reforms, visit NCFE’s dedicated support page. You can also book a curriculum consultation with the NCFE team to explore what these changes mean for your organisation and how they may affect your delivery.