England is at a crossroads. We face major national missions – from accelerating housebuilding and delivering critical infrastructure to meeting clean‑energy targets and enforcing the Building Safety Act. Each depends on a skilled, competent construction workforce. Yet the reforms currently proposed for apprenticeships and qualifications risk weakening, not strengthening, the skills pipeline we need.
Earlier this month, the British Association of Construction Heads (BACH) wrote to the Prime Minister and key ministers warning that the direction of travel in construction skills policy is too narrow and insufficiently rooted in how our industry works. We are in danger of repeating past mistakes: reorganising qualifications without rethinking the structure of the system itself.
Designed for an old economy
A most concerning feature of the government’s current approach is the refusal to consider educational models beyond the traditional 16–19 academic pathway. The curriculum and assessment review’s proposals focus entirely on current educational model of GCSEs and A Levels, or similar, missing the chance to explore alternative structures.
This is out of step with most of Europe. Successful technical education systems in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland and Finland typically operate a 14–19 model, allowing young people to specialise earlier in applied and technical subjects with equal prestige to academic routes. These pathways produce young people with competent craft trades such as electricians, civil engineering technicians and manufacturing operatives, feeding productive, internationally competitive economies.
England by contrast continues to treat GCSEs as the central organising point of the entire system for 16 year olds. Young people who would thrive in practical and technical learning are kept in a narrow academic track until 16, then expected to choose between complicated new qualification labels at 16–19. This is not preparing them – or the country – for the labour market we have today.
Successful UK examples already exist. University Technical Colleges (UTCs) such as those in Sheffield prove that earlier technical focus works, delivering strong outcomes in engineering and technical industries. But instead of learning from these models, the current reforms try to retrofit new qualifications into a structure that is fundamentally out of date.
Limited review
The curriculum review should have been a chance to step back and ask how we build competency across industry. Instead, its terms of reference are narrow. It looks at adapting existing provision, not at whether the whole 16–19 framework is the wrong foundation to begin with.
CAR does not sufficiently explore earlier pathways, competency‑based approaches, or practical assessment models aligned to the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS) and the requirements of the Building Safety Act. Nor does it reflect the green and clean‑energy roles now embedded across every construction vertical.
In short: it reviews qualifications, but not the system. That is not enough.
Practical competence, not more classroom pathways
Construction is a competency‑driven industry. Employers need people who can demonstrate the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours required for safe practice. Yet the proposed levels 2 and 3 pathways in the skills white paper are heavily classroom‑based and rely on assessment sampling that risks lowering standards.
At a time when building safety has never been more important, reducing rigour is the wrong direction. A classroom‑heavy approach will not produce the competent workforce demanded by employers, regulators or the public.
A better way
If we are serious about rebuilding our skills base, we need a system that reflects how young people learn and how construction operates. That means:
- exploring a 14–19 technical route
- embedding practical, on‑site learning
- using competency‑based assessment, not sampling
- designing content with employers, not around qualifications
- integrating green skills across all pathways
- supporting FE colleges with sustainable funding and staffing
The creation of a taskforce for construction apprenticeship reform is welcome. But to make it meaningful, government must pause the wider construction proposals in the white paper. Otherwise, we risk cementing flawed assumptions into policy for years to come.
England cannot deliver its national missions with a skills system built for another era. It is time to learn from successful international models – and from our own best practice – and build a structure that gives young people the pathways they need and the country the workforce it requires.
Your thoughts