Anyone have a DC studying for a T Level?

[user1984778379202]

Our DD is in Y10 and while doing well in class, really struggles with sitting assessments. We're looking at her options for post-GCSE and are coming round to thinking that A Levels might not be the right path for her. She already has a clear idea of what career she wants to pursue, so we're thinking a specific and related T Level course might be a good option with a view to her applying to uni afterwards (the uni courses she's thinking about do accept T Level qualifications).

My concern is that the introduction of T Levels seems to be a bit of a mess – Ofsted came out last summer with a report saying some courses aren't fit for purpose. So, if anyone's DC is doing one, it would be great to hear about their experience, good and bad, so far.

Edited to add: there is an identical BTEC course currently running, but it's on the Govt's list to have its funding removed later this year.

@Octavia64
I so agree with that point!
Its all well and fine to push T levels but I am amazed at how very few places actually offer them.
And to be honest the breadth of what is on offer also seems quite poor.
I have a child who is certainly in between a Btech and an A level and I find there is a serious lack of courses in that space.

When I was looking at the UCAS website, re qualifications and points gained, there are options in the menu for t-level core (yr 1), etc so although you may not get a qualification you do get UCAS points.

A T Level has a core and occupation specialism, so you enter both on UCAS. But if you don’t complete both you don’t get the qualification or the points.

I know this isn't helpful at this stage but I so wish they'd put as much money into what I knew as 'techs' as they have 6th form colleges! BTECs should have been properly funded, promoted and EXPLAINED to the public and HE institutes.

T levels will go the same way, as not-A levels.

At GCSE, DS1 got Ax2; Bx6; Cx2. So rather better than 4 grade 4s.

Y12 (A levels) not successful due to immaturity. A transfer to the Tech to do a L3 BTEC in IT, he scored 160 UCAS points (3xA* at A level was164). The only 2 modules (of 13) he only 'Passed' were the 2 (TWO) examined ones... the rest were assessments and projects.

We'd all readily state 160 UCAS at A level would be harder to attain than the 160 of the BTEC, but I wonder if the T levels with their exams would fall in between?

But, for him, thence onto uni (ex-poly), first class hons in software engineering, with a cruisey first year having already covered the material at BTEC.

Others on his BTEC with lower outcomes became technicians, help desk people etc. But they had options.

My point is what happens with low grade T levels? And getting 4 grade 4 GCSEs should, to my mind, suggest you aren't uni material.

As I said earlier, I suspect they haven't been properly thought through, will be patchily taught and not understood by employers, and be mistrusted by HE.

This will continue until we finally start making companies take on proper apprenticeships and partially wear the burden of their training instead of finding every possible way you can get kids onto useless degree courses, propping up that Ponzi scheme

@Fordian , the long term expectation is that if Rishi's ABS qualification gets taken on by Labour then in the long term T levels will be diluted as maths will be taken along side the T level and this will allow everyone to also dilute the work experience (because this is a sticking point in finding enough placements as T levels expand). Hence a T level will become more like a BTec plus maths.
It's worth remembering that currently more students are studying a BTec in criminology (that is being defunded from 2025) than all T levels combined!

ABS is a good idea BUT it'll fall at the first hurdle: insufficient teachers (could be argued we wouldn't need to study maths 16-19 if it was taught well at 4-16).

It sounds if we want to go 'European' while shunning any 16-19 Ed that doesn't get you into uni.

So we'll have had BTec, T levels, then ABS; while A level sails on unimpeded, (with one 'stab' at bolting on a IB element via the ill-fated 'Extended Project').

Your 'criminology' stat is interesting. First I wonder at but am not surprised at the low T level availability- or uptake??; secondly, sorry, a bit off- topic but pertinent to my belief, that we are misleading our young- but Criminology? To then do what? Forensics at uni, when about 6 jobs a year come up in that field?

We have got to stop titting around with our FE.

Should've MADE real apprenticeships a thing; should have been beefed up, promoted, funded.

DH worked for a huge waste disposal company, paying a high apprenticeship levy. But they gave up offering apprenticeships because the 'academic content' providers were 'ave a go chancers, fly by night charlatans.

T levels and ABS won't address the fundamental snobbery we have about anything that isn't 'uni-enabling'.

I don't really see there was anything wrong with BTECs that a bit of minor tinkering couldn't have fixed. I don't see that they required scrapping and replacing with something that required higher academic ability.

Where are the courses now for the competent but not good at exams? For the ones who can do but aren't so good at putting pen to paper?

I agree entirely with you.

BTECs might've needed a tweak, and A LOT of promotion, but I think they provided several levels of achievement (no one knows they came at L1, L2 and 3) and, as my DS demonstrated, despite not being amazing at exams, he was able to get into a well paying career via a L3 BTEC.

And, as I said before, I think allowing kids on courses, T levels, L3 courses with only 4 x grade 4 GCSEs isn't a higher educational requirement!