In The News
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's recent announcement regarding the government's intention to crack down on 'rip-off' degrees has triggered a fierce debate. The cap will be one half of a two-pronged system of reform. The other half will see a series of measures aimed at encouraging young people to look at alternatives to higher education, most notably apprenticeships.
According to the Government’s plan, the Office for Students (OfS) will be tasked with limiting the number of students universities can recruit onto courses that are failing to deliver good earnings and employment outcomes.
Education Secretary, Gillian Keegan, has stated that the cap "sends a clear signal that we will not allow students to be sold a false promise."
OfS figures reveal nearly three in ten graduates do not progress into skilled jobs or further study 15 months post-graduation. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that one in five graduates would be better off financially if they had not gone to university.
Critics, including the Shadow Education Secretary, argue that the policy places a constraint on ambition, particularly on those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
To encourage young people down the apprenticeship path, the government has announced its intention to radically streamline the apprenticeship recruitment process. It also plans to update around 100 apprenticeships in sectors such as construction and healthcare, so that they reflect the latest technical advances.
However, and as we’ll explore more in this edition, some experts are calling for the government to introduce further reforms that will address the issues that, they argue, are preventing apprenticeships from reaching their full potential…
Interview
This month, former Secretary of State for Universities and author of 'A University Education', Rt Hon Lord Willetts, has shared some his expertise on the challenges and potential improvements of vocational qualifications, apprenticeships, and university degree performance.
Many are supportive of the drive to encourage the take-up of vocational qualifications, such as apprenticeships. What needs to change for apprenticeship drop-out rates to reduce?
Apprenticeships can indeed have high drop-out rates. This is partly because recruits, especially younger ones, may find the combination of work and education onerous. They will need to demonstrate that they have reached specific educational levels in English and Maths to complete the apprenticeship if they did not have them when they started.
Additionally, an apprenticeship depends on an offer of employment, and company circumstances may change, leading them to unfortunately shed workers. One way forward could be subjecting apprenticeships to the same kind of detailed scrutiny of performance, employer by employer, that university courses undergo. This would better inform recruits about potential risks they may face.
What steps should be taken to address the negative perceptions that persist among young people and their parents surrounding vocational qualifications compared to traditional academic routes?
I'm not entirely sure there are such negative perceptions of vocational courses. Polling shows that apprenticeships are popular, and politicians and the media often advocate them as a better option than attending university.
However, there is a specific barrier related to gender stereotypes associated with certain apprenticeships. Currently, I am co-chairing an inquiry for Engineering UK on apprenticeships along with Labour peer Jim Knight. We are exploring ways to break down such stereotypes.
The primary constraint on apprenticeships is not so much demand from students but rather supply from employers. Apprenticeships can be quite extensive and are funded through the Apprenticeship Levy, which places limits on available funds. Moreover, industries and trades are not evenly distributed across the country, making access difficult. Unlike residential universities, where students can live away from home, there are few residential apprenticeships, and there's reluctance to finance them through a maintenance loan scheme similar to that for university students. The "no debt" characteristic has become a crucial aspect of the apprenticeship offer, which inevitably restricts access and enrolment numbers.
Why has it taken so long for the government to take the measures it has regarding poor-performing university degrees given that the data recommendations have been based upon have been known for some time?
I fought a lengthy battle during my time as Universities Minister to persuade HMRC to provide this information to researchers. This data relies on tax data for earnings, requiring strict confidentiality and anonymity.
It became accessible a few years ago.
The Office for Students (OfS) already possesses the authority to act based on this data and strives to do so. However, caution must be exercised in interpreting the data. The OfS needs to ensure that it isn't unfairly targeting providers due to the types of students they enrol. Courses at universities with a significant skew towards more privileged students are likely to perform well on various performance metrics due to the advantages these students already possess.
Higher education courses may do well on the teaching excellence framework, but poorly on labour market outcomes
Moreover, placing too much emphasis on outcomes just 15 months after completing a degree might not account for the longer, gradual career progression that many graduates experience, especially compared to job-specific training like apprenticeships that can lead to quicker entry into certain career plateaus.
Should the review of poor-performing degrees be carried out regularly and can those degrees not meeting the threshold face similar caps on funding?
There are several ways to address poorly-performing degrees. The OfS has various intervention methods, including requesting universities to improve employment outcomes for specific courses or suggesting the discontinuation of those courses. However, determining what constitutes poor performance is a subject of debate.
Measures of teaching excellence already exist, and in other educational stages teaching quality is a primary performance measure. Yet, in higher education, a course might score well on the teaching excellence framework but poorly on labour market outcomes.
opinion
MBKB's Chief Executive Mark Bremner proposes a series of reforms regarding wages and the flexibility in apprenticeship provision to overcome poor apprenticeship completion rates.
Last month, the Prime Minister announced that universities offering degree courses with poor graduate employment prospects would see their intake numbers slashed.
"Too many young people are being sold a false dream and end up doing a poor-quality course that doesn't offer the prospect of a decent job at the end of it," Rishi Sunak declared.
To redress this balance, ministers hope to push the take up of vocational forms of education, particularly apprenticeships.
While that move is welcome, it’s also long overdue. For nearly a decade, studies have highlighted the misnomer of the ‘graduate premium’. The reality is that a significant proportion of graduates have been sold a lie and are saddled with debt with little prospect of ever repaying it.
In many cases, apprenticeships offer a more fruitful option to university degrees. They promise higher employment rates and better earnings potential, all without the debt obligations faced by their peers in higher education.
But apprenticeships are not perfect. Indeed, the Government would do well to match its recent higher education reforms with improvements to the apprenticeship system. It is only by waging a war of reform on two fronts that the Government will deliver the apprenticeships revolution and the associated productivity dividends it seeks and the country needs.
Staying the course
One of the most significant challenges that apprenticeships face is the high dropout rate. Over half (53 per cent) of all apprentices fail to complete their qualification. Compare this to 6.3 per cent of students who drop out of university and apprenticeships begin to lose some of their shine.
While significant numbers of those embarking on a university degree may be better off choosing a vocational route, it is worth little to them if they don’t finish the course.
In many cases, apprenticeships offer a more fruitful option to university degrees
Thankfully, however, solutions to poor apprenticeship completion rates are at hand.
Low apprenticeship wages are one significant factor. All too often young people are lured away from their apprenticeship for the promise of better earnings in the short-term from elsewhere. On average, apprenticeships offer just £5.28 an hour, while Tesco pays an entry level wage of £10.20-11.50 for those aged 18-20 years old. Wage disparities make apprenticeships significantly less appealing compared to other entry-level positions, particularly during a cost of living crisis.
In some instances, employers ignore their obligation to pay the apprenticeship minimum wage altogether.
The Government needs to take a more robust approach to ensure compliance with minimum wage laws. There needs to be more stringent adherence checks as well as penalties for those who fail to meet their obligations.
Another issue is that often employers are too lenient in granting leave for their apprentices, while others fail to provide sufficient pastoral care. These factors increase dropout rates when apprentices fail to return to their course. Providing effective support structures and mentorship from employers can help foster positive learning environments. The burden of responsibility falls upon both the employer as well as the apprenticeship provider.
The importance of flexibility
Flexibility in apprenticeship programs is also crucial. The current 12-month minimum duration acts as a deterrent, preventing many from enrolling and completing their training. Rather than introducing greater rigour to the system, it has led to an unnecessary extension of important but low-paid apprenticeships in areas like hospitality.
The minimum duration rule is also proving an ineffective way to ensure quality, which was its primary purpose. Some apprenticeship providers have been getting away with putting learners through higher-level standards at an unreasonably rapid pace. This allows them to maximise their short-term income but with detrimental implications for the learner, employer, and the sector.
Instead of the mandatory 12-month minimum duration across all standards, there ought to be a sliding scale approach where the duration differs by level. Doing so would allow for flexibility and advancement at lower levels, while also ensuring the rigour required at higher levels.
The Prime Minister is right to pursue its crack down on ‘dud degrees’. For too long, too many young people have been pursuing a false promise. Apprenticeships hold enormous potential to offer people a brighter future, but the Government also has an obligation to maximise that potential. Coordinated reform of both higher and further education is the way to deliver this.