Labour's education policy already receiving criticism

As part of its Post-16 Education and Skills white paper, the government has announced a new vocational qualification called a ‘V level’. They’ll offer a more vocationally oriented path for students, sitting alongside A levels, T Levels, and apprenticeships.

Labour hopes that V levels will simplify the currently over-saturated array of GCSE/A-level-equivalent qualifications on offer. However, education industry professionals have warned that the shakeup will do little to fix the root issues challenging vocational courses.

A levels, T levels… and now V levels

Currently, a T level is the equivalent of three A levels. The government launched them back in September 2020. They typically last 2 years. As such, they usually require that the prospective student already has a good idea of the field they want to end up working in.

Like apprenticeships, T levels are made up of a mixture of classroom and vocational training. However, the T level is 80% classroom-based and 20% field, whereas an apprenticeship is the reverse.

By contrast, a V level will be roughly equivalent to one A level. It’s meant to provide vocationally focused options to students without locking them into a certain trade like a single T level might.

The white paper suggests that V levels would allow young people to explore key sectors like engineering, agriculture, digital or creative. After V-level study, they could then go on to choose a specialisation. A student could even take a mix of V and A levels, if they wanted to keep their options open.

The press release accompanying the white paper gave the following example:

a student wanting to get into either the creative arts or media industry could choose to do a mixed V Level and A level study programme, by taking two V Levels (one in Craft and Design; and one in Media, Broadcast and Production) and one A Level in Music. Or, a student wanting to get into either the health or fitness industry – but also wants to learn more about digital – could do three V Levels (in Sport and Exercise Science; Digital; and Health and Care services).

As things stand, there are around 900 equivalent level 3 (A level) vocational qualifications. This can sometimes mean that potential employers don’t really know what they’re looking at on a CV. Labour is hoping that condensing them under the banner of V levels will help streamline this confusing landscape.

However, as useful as this might sound in theory, the plan has a couple of glaring flaws.

‘Significant qualification gap’

Whilst the new V levels are developed, the government has already announced that it will begin to defund other Applied General Qualifications (AGQs – things like BTECs).

The smaller end of these qualifications includes courses with 420 guided learning hours or less. Those that were set to lose support in 2026 or 2027 will instead be funded until the equivalent V Level is in place.

The government suggests that students should do a V level if they want a large qualification. However, the mid-sized AGQs look set to be replaced with smaller V levels. This category comprises courses with 421 to 719 guided learning hours.

James Kewin – deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association – criticised the loss of qualifications that are being rolled into the V level banner. He stated that the government’s defunding of medium-to-large AGQs will create a “large qualifications gap”.

In an interview with FE Week, he said:

In July, the Protect Student Choice campaign published a report that showed tens of thousands of students would be left without a pathway to higher education or skilled employment if the government did not reverse its ban on diploma and extended diploma size AGQs in subjects where there is a T Level. The consultation document published today is clear that the government will not reverse this ban.

As a result, colleges and schools will not be able to enrol students on well-respected AGQs in subjects such as health and social care, applied science and IT next year. That will leave a significant qualification gap, particularly as the government’s new V levels will not be available until 2027 at the earliest.

UCU reaction

The University and College Union (UCU) has stated that the rollout of V-levels won’t get young people into work and training unless the government puts its money where its mouth is. The union wants a significant pay rise for the college staff who will be expected to plan and deliver the new qualification.

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said:

Tearing up the current post-16 qualification framework and asking already overworked staff to create completely new courses will require substantial investment from the government.

Ministers must set out a clear road map that shows how colleges will recruit and retain the skilled further education staff needed to deliver the new V-level qualifications. Believing you can use colleges to get more young people into work and training without increasing staff pay is just pie in the sky thinking.

Grady didn’t mince words about the crisis currently afflicting the college-level education. Staff turnover is massive, and their pay is out of line with that seen in school-age institutions:

Further education has been subject to a brain drain with one in two staff leaving within three years of joining. As it stands, the salaries offered by colleges are not nearly competitive enough with schools and industry to recruit, let alone retain, staff.

We now need to see a joined-up skills and workforce strategy backed by big increases in funding for V-levels to be a success.

The crisis in further education is so great UCU is currently balloting around 10,000 further education staff. The government can show it is serious by helping deliver pay parity with schools, bringing in national bargaining and ensuring workloads are manageable.

Clarifying the often-confusing field of qualifications for 16+ year olds is not unwelcome. However, this will require significant administrative effort in the short term, as hundreds of courses are converted to a either V or T levels.

College-level staff are already over-worked and under-paid. Piling on more work and calling it a simplification simply won’t fly. If Labour truly wants to see improvements in the vocational qualification landscape, fantastic. However, they’re going to need to reach into the public purse and fund it.

Featured image via Unsplash/Nathan Dumlao