T Levels: Govt MUST Inject Life into Technical Qualifications to Address UK’s Skills Gaps

PAC report recommends DfE should enter campaign mode to build critical mass of students
More must be done to ensure more students enrol in T Levels if they are to be a success. In a report on the introduction of T Levels, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) calls on government to articulate its plan to tackle the significant challenges that remain in introducing the new two-year technical qualification.
The Department for Education (DfE) is confident that it can significantly scale up T Level enrolment to 66,100 by September 2029, from 25,508 in September 2024 (significantly fewer than DfE’s original ambition). However, more needs to be done to build awareness of T Levels with only half of year 9 to 11 students having heard of them in 2023. While only a third of employers, who offer industry placements required to finish the T Level, are aware of them. The PAC’s inquiry also found that women and disadvantaged students are underrepresented in some T Level course such as engineering, and that students with special educational needs are less likely to enrol on a T Level than other vocational courses.
The PAC is calling on government to set out its ‘campaign approach’ to increasing student and employer awareness in T Levels for greater enrolment, and address how the curriculum can be tailored to appeal to a diverse student group while meeting employers’ needs.
T Levels have a critical role in equipping young people to address vital skills gaps across the UK economy, but it can take a minimum of 18 months for a T Level to be altered to meet changing skills needs (e.g. government’s February 2025 increase in defence spending to intended to create new jobs, skills and opportunities). The report recommends DfE to consider how to develop and review T Level content quickly to maximise the responsiveness of the qualification to evolving skills requirements.
The report further warns that it has been unclear to students, teachers and colleges how T Levels fit alongside other technical qualifications. The new government paused the last government’s decision to defund qualifications overlapping with T Levels, before announcing in Dec ’24 that funding would continue for some until 2027. Students need clarity on which qualifications best suit their chosen career, and the PAC urges DfE to set out these details publicly to help students understand their route into skilled professions.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said:
“T Levels have the potential to be a significant force for good in equipping young people with everything they need for their burgeoning careers. But without the wider awareness in industry and critical mass of student enrolments, T Levels may remain very much a minority pursuit, when they could become a natural and enriching step in many students’ lives. Many T Levels students have had positive experiences, with seven in ten students feeling well prepared for the workplace. Government must enter campaign mode to inject life into T Levels to build enrolments, focusing in and capitalising on local employment needs.
“Government’s ambitions for the UK’s economic growth and success are dependent upon the skills of this country’s workforce. But the demands of the changing skills landscape have never been more volatile. As well as providing true clarity on what T Levels can offer interested students and employers, government must allow far more flexibility for the qualification for it to be a tool that can swiftly meet needs where they arise. We hope the recommendations in our report help government unlock T Levels’ full potential, as one of the primary means by which the UK can prepare its young people for the changes ahead.”
Sector Reaction
Anne Murdoch, Senior Adviser in College Leadership at the Association of School and College Leaders, said:
“We fully support T-levels and agree with the committee’s call for a campaign to raise awareness of these qualifications among students and employers. One of the biggest barriers to provision is the difficulty in securing the extensive industry placements required as part of these qualifications. We need to see much more support from the government and from industry to fulfil this expectation.
“It is also vital that the forthcoming curriculum and assessment review’s final report provides badly needed clarity on the routes that are available to post-16 students. For far too long colleges and sixth forms have lived with the confusion caused by the previous government’s aim of removing applied general qualifications, such as BTECs, to clear the way for T-levels. We have never felt that jettisoning perfectly good qualifications which provide excellent pathways for many young people is a sensible thing to do and we are pleased the current government has paused this process pending the outcome of the curriculum and assessment review.
“It is essential that applied qualifications are preserved in the new landscape alongside T-levels and A-levels. We need a variety of great pathways for young people to help them achieve their ambitions and go on to fulfilling careers, apprenticeships and higher education courses.”
Catherine Sezen, Director of Education Policy, Association of Colleges said:
“This report rightly recognises the importance of T Levels in providing young people with the technical skills and knowledge required to thrive in the modern workforce.
“Colleges across the country are committed to delivering high-quality T Level programmes. We have seen firsthand the positive impact these qualifications can have on students’ career prospects and their progression into higher education and employment.
“However, as the Public Accounts Committee highlights, it is crucial that the government provides the necessary support and resources to maximize the potential of T Levels.
“Their recommendations on awareness raising, employer engagement, costs, workforce, burden of assessment and supporting a diverse range of students, especially those with special educational needs are pragmatic and welcome.”
Responses