Predicted calamitous impact of scrapping BTECs from 2026

[noblegiraffe]

"The DfE wants a streamlined system for students finishing their GCSEs which pushes them to study either A-levels, T Levels, or an apprenticeship from 2025.
Alternative applied general qualifications (AGQs) like Pearson’s popular BTECs will only get funding from this point if they do not overlap with the other qualifications and pass a strict approvals process."

This is absolutely crazy. They're trying to force kids onto T-levels by removing BTEC options but the implementation of T-levels has been patchy (particularly around issues with work experience) and 1 in 3 students who started one dropped out.

Apprenticeships at that level are pretty thin on the ground. What are kids who are not suited to A-level study meant to do?

The prediction is that 155,000 kids will be left without a suitable course. 1 in 8 kids.

This is particularly telling "For example, qualifications like the BTEC foundation diploma in health and social care have been criticised by ministers because “less than 5 per cent” of students progress to higher education.
What officials ignore is that 64 per of students studying this qualification progress to employment and 24 per cent to further education, according to the SFCA."

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/btecs-reforms-risk-155k-students-fall-through-the-gap/

This is terrible. Children who are finding mainstream secondary education's push for academic streamlining difficult need to know there is something on the post 16 horizon that will work for them. Jesus wept.

I am extremely concerned about this.

A Dc needs a 5 in Eng Lang and a 5 in Maths to enrol on a T level, a quick glance at the grade distribution this year tells you how many dc won't meet the criteria, what are they meant to do instead? Sociology A level??

Also the 45 day work placement sourced by the College, is this realistic? This cohort all need to be on work placement at the same time so the timetabling works.

I'm really worried about this, it makes no sense. One of my DCs is not super academic and struggles with organisation but would do well with BTECs. No idea what they will do.

As a parent of 2 DDs who have done BTECs, I think this is terrible.
BTECs have already changed to include exams, so now there isn't anything that doesn't have exams.

I'm not quite so bothered re the 45 days work experience as vocational courses often run 3 full days a week only, so in theory students can do work experience 1 day per week if they can find somewhere .
However more and more places only want over 18s for insurance purposes. Plus additionally there is actually getting there especially in rural areas.

Ultimately it isn't a great surprise if kids who get grades 3-5 at GCSE don't progress to higher education, is it?

So is the government saying that all post-16 qualifications that aren't apprenticeships need to have the goal of leading into a higher education qualification? And if they don't they aren't fit for purpose? One of my DCs is really unlikely to get the grades to do A level and would suit a BTEC perfectly. So this really worries me.

Aren't t-levels very very similar to B-techs?

I teach BTEC. The equivalent T-levels in my subject are unworkable. BTEC isn't great, but it's better than the alternatives, but of course no one is listening to the people at the chalk face saying this, so we either have to hope for a miracle or get on with planning delivery of qualifications which won't suit either the students or the industry. I can see apprenticeships becoming a lot more popular as a result of T-levels simply because they're more accessible and involve earning while you learn.

The work experience element of T level makes them unworkable in many subjects in many areas. We run successful and popular BTEC courses but no way could we facilitate 50 work placements in our small town and rural surrounding area that our students could reasonably travel to. Even when people do work in the industry, many are self-employed and work from home. It’s easier in something like childcare where there are already lots of potential placements and they are used to taking students.

Can you explain a bit more about BTech v T levels and why they're unworkable? (I'm genuinely interested btw, not questioning you!)

Old news, but yes dreadful.

T levels are very new, have a compulsory work experience element which is proving very difficult to source, drop out rates are sky high, and they are 3 A level/BTEC extended diploma equivalent in size. There is no alternative that is a smaller size, so students cannot combine a small vocational qual like one of the one A level equivalent BTECs along side two A levels.

I teach btec. We are resisting t levels for as long as we are funded to keep btec. There are not enough placements and the content is far too narrow. This year we have massively expanded in numbers with students who need resits. If it was just t levels then that would be 200 students with no qual to study as t level and a level all require at least grade 4s. Those students would be offered a "transition level" course which is worthless.

@dorisdoesdidsbury
T-levels in my subject are unworkable because they've been built around the apprenticeship structure that was in place at the time they were being dreamt up. In my industry that means an apprentice can specialise in a number of areas depending on their employer. For the T-level it's resulted in a hugely overstuffed curriculum which covers all the areas and will turn out "professionals" who don't actually know enough about anything to go straight into a decent job. BTEC (and C&G) allows you to tailor the qualification around what works for your students, your setting, your staff and the local context.
That's before you get into the practicalities. I expect we're going to have to find an obliging local employer and lay on a minibus service to cope with work experience as our employers are usually well away from bus routes etc. Also T-levels are mandatory two years. With BTEC you can do a single year of level 3 study, get your qualification and head out to earn money. That really appeals to a lot of 16 year olds! Drop out rates at the end of the first year of T-levels are already worrying.
We'll make it work if we have to, but it's not going to be the level 3 learning experience our students could be having, if they were studying for a qualification written by people who understand vocational education.

Working in FE I can only say we are desperate for a u turn . No way many students can do T Levels and no way employers can or will support the work element . Ridiculous decision by policy makers who don’t understand education

T levels can just work for cohorts of about 20...we currently have 350 on our BTEC. There is no way we can run a T Level for that number of students

@IgnoranceIsStrength makes a good point. We do have small cohorts, but the assessment involved would make it impossible to deliver to even 50 students, let alone hundreds.

@Magpiecomplex as our employers are usually well away from bus routes etc.

Don't I know it! My DD is currently doing work experience at a kennels. They are positively designed to be in the middle of nowhere. She can only get there as DH and I are driving her.

It's awful. My DS is in Y11 this year and I am so relieved he will still have BTecs as an option. We are looking at a T level but having read some of the issues with them I'm not sure. They also seem pretty academic. Without BTec at college it pushes kids into apprenticeships at 16 which they might not be ready for. If you are academic but not sure what direction you want to go into as a career you can do A levels for a couple of years and then decide. If you aren't and there's no Btecs you almost have to decide on a career choice at 16 which is just too young for a lot of students. Why can't the government listen to the people who actually work with and teach young people???

The DfE has spent £1billion on T levels which is why it won't back down.

I've told this story before, but my son spent significant amounts of time in hospital as a child and did not do well at at GCSE. He could not stay at school for A levels but was able to transfer to a local college and take a level 2 BTec alongside maths and English re-takes. Progressed to a Btec level 3 extended diploma in computing, passed and enrolled on a Degree in games design. Graduated and got a job then was made redundant during Covid. Enrolled on a masters, passed and currently studying for a Phd.
Without BTec don't think he would have done any of this. They are really good for students who need a less traditional academic approach.
I think there was a petition to keep them funded - checked and there was. It was debated but the government response was not great. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/592642

You saying it was old news led me to this thread I posted in 2021 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/4402789-Cull-of-BTECs-pushed-back-to-2024

So Gove said they'd be scrapped by 2023 which got pushed back by Zahawi to 2024. At some point, not sure when, it has been pushed back to 2026.

I don't think I've seen Labour say anything about this, or T-levels. One would hope they have the sense to abandon this policy.

I think the issues are there are no level 2 T levels, there are no T levels that are the equivelent of 2 A levels, the work experience bit it difficult to sort. The one we looked at seemed more linear and exam heavy. They also seemed to need higher entry requirements than btech and less combinable with retakes.

I also think the government is not thinking about how people who dont want to go to university get an education and evidence it. I know t levels are vocational but they seem aimed at people who woulkd have done A levels but want something vocational rather than people who would have done something different for all sorts of reasons.

@noblegiraffe Labour being voted in and then repealing the whole T-level thing is the miracle we're hoping for.

I googled to see what Bridget Phillipson has said about it and apparently there's a pledge to "pause" the cull of BTECs and review the situation once they get into power.

I'm guessing any review of the situation would show that a cull is ridiculous so fingers crossed!

https://feweek.co.uk/labour-pledges-to-pause-and-review-btecs-cull/

I have been banging on about this for a while, because this is such a concern. For starters, our local uni accepts BTEC Applied Science for a wide range of courses from healthcare to conservation. They don't accept T-level science at all. For anything. What's the point in offering students a qualification that isn't going to offer them the progression they want?

Obviously I know not everyone wants to go to the local uni, but many of our students do put it down as a choice, and cutting off that progression route would need serious consideration.

We are rural, and many of our students come to us on the bus. We can't arrange transport for individual students to work placements- so how would they get there (and that's if suitable placements can be found)?

We also know from local colleges who have trialled T-levels in our subject that it isn't as well suited to the sort of students who succeed on our BTECs. They trialed T-level Science, and decided that students who were e.g. retaking English or maths couldn't succeed on it. This is exactly the sort of student that BTEC Extended Diplomas suit! AFIAK, they aren't running the T-level course in science this year.

We have had great success with our extended diploma route over the years, with students going on to careers like nursing, radiography, environmental science, geology, lab technicians etc- things that are genuinely useful to society and sometimes shortage skills areas. That's not the only value in a Level 3 course, of course, but some students struggle with exams for all sorts of reasons, but can still be successful in life. Some students aren't suited to A-levels, or had a hard time during their GCSEs, but can do well on a BTEC.

I also don't know what else these students would do locally- there aren't enough apprenticeships to go around, and the local vocational colleges don't offer the sort of course that would interest them.

I don't understand a government who say they want more students to go into STEM, but take away a valuable progression route!