The future of the UK’s economy hinges not just on the skills we teach but on how we define and keep them updated. As we grapple with rapid technological change and shifting industry demands, it’s clear that our current approach needs a fundamental rethink. Redefining the relationship between vocational education and vocational training is key.
At Pearson, we have made this case in our evidence submission to the Lords’ industry and regulatory select committee’s inquiry on future skills needs. For too long, these two terms have been used interchangeably, muddling policy decisions and diluting the effectiveness of our skills system.
Vocational education is about laying a foundational understanding of an industry – imparting the core concepts and skills that are at its very heart and change slowly over time. This is particularly important for younger learners just beginning their careers.
Vocational training, on the other hand, is dynamic and responsive, focusing on current industry practices, tools and techniques. It’s what people of all ages already in the workforce need to stay relevant in rapidly evolving sectors. (Me included, as I work with my team to embed the rapid developments of Gen AI into our daily work).
By conflating vocational education with vocational training, we risk failing our young learners and our existing workforce. This distinction is not just semantic; it has profound implications for how we design our education system and prepare for the future.
Our recent Skills Map of England showed that by 2027, automation and augmentation do not necessarily mean fewer jobs – but different jobs. While 390,000 new jobs will be created in England in total, around 2 million people will need to reskill or upskill.
These aren’t just numbers. They represent workers across the country who must adapt to new roles and industries. The jobs of tomorrow are not the jobs of today, and our skills system must reflect that reality.
So, how do we bridge this gap? It starts with policy that recognises and supports the unique roles of education and training at different stages in people’s lives.
This distinction has profound implications
We need to revisit the development of occupational standards to allow for a stable national core, flexible regional adaptations and evolving skills needs over time. This means utilising data to create a common skills taxonomy, enabling qualifications to be tailored to diverse needs while maintaining national coherence.
Moreover, government intervention should shift from managing qualification design to setting overarching strategies and empowering local institutions to do what they do best: using their expertise to identify and deliver the provision that best meets the needs of young learners, those in work, and those seeking work for the first time or returning to it.
The system as a whole should be simpler by integrating funding streams like the Adult Skills Budget, Lifelong Learning Entitlement and the proposed Growth and Skills Levy. Unified funding mechanisms would effectively serve learners, providers and employers. Greater transparency will ensure that everyone involved understands the system and can navigate it effectively.
Apprenticeships are one example of a programme that, with an appropriate level of support and flexibility, can provide individuals with a broad, foundational education to kickstart a career.
The government’s ask of employers to invest more in younger workers is welcome, as is the introduction of foundation apprenticeships which could also help reverse the decline in 16-19 apprentices.
Employers play a crucial role in this system. By incentivising them to invest in young apprentices and adjusting rigid requirements like 20-per cent off-the-job training, we can make apprenticeships more accessible and effective for those starting their careers.
Experienced, mid-career, individuals who require more immediate and specific upskilling can then reap the benefits of shorter, more focused apprenticeships and more flexible training models.
The challenge before us is preparing people for a transformed world of work. This requires an adaptable workforce capable of lifelong learning and reinvention to ensure individuals are not left behind by technological change but are empowered to drive it.
By clearly distinguishing between vocational education and vocational training – and designing policies that respect and support both – we can build a skills system that’s responsive, inclusive and fit for the future.
Your thoughts