The Availability and Clarity of HE Entry Requirement Information for T Level Applicants: The Results of Linking London’s Mapping

T Levels have had their fair share of teething problems, as well as some criticism since their launch in 2020. These include concerns around student retention for some T Level subjects, low levels of awareness amongst employers, as well as some confusion around HE progression opportunities. The last point was picked up in the recent Ofsted T Level Thematic Review which highlighted that T Level students “who wanted to go to university are surprised and disappointed that T-level qualifications are not always accepted as a valid entry qualification.” Our recent Linking London report, mapping UCAS entry requirement information for 2024-25 for 50 English universities covering 16 subjects (totalling nearly 450 courses), reveals that the disappointing surprise of some students, far from attesting to few bad apples among providers, is a sector-wide issue.

The availability of T Levels acceptance information in numbers

We have found that T Level students are confronted with 55.6% courses with no direct information regarding T Level acceptance or non-acceptance on the UCAS Course Search facility.

Admittedly, there are some positive caveats to this rather staggering number. Firstly, 55.6% of courses with no T Level entry requirement information constitutes a progress in comparison to last year, when, as our mapping revealed, 61% of courses had no information. Secondly. 31.6% of courses with no information do include the use of UCAS Tariff points. This, at least in principal, implies that T Level may be accepted, and suggests that T Level requirements can be worked out with the help of the Tariff Calculator. The less positive news is that, as our mapping shows, over 43% of providers don’t use UCAS Tariff points.

Law is the course with the highest percentage of no information regarding T Levels and the UCAS Tariff with 40.6% (although it’s worth noting that the T Level in Legal Services is not due to be rolled out until September 2023), followed by biomedical science (31.9%) and business studies (31.7%). These courses can be contrasted with nursing, occupational therapy, and IT/computing which have the highest percentage of T Level acceptance information: 50%, 44.4%, 43.2% respectively.

Worryingly, in several cases there is an additional A level requirement for T Level candidates. Sometimes, but not always, an A level is expected if the T Level isn’t viewed as covering the subject specific knowledge needed for the course. At its most extreme, as our mapping of engineering demonstrates, 42% of courses mention A levels in addition to T Level entry requirements.

The clarity of information

There is a real variety in terms of the clarity of information provided for T Level applicants. Some courses mention that “other qualifications” and “work experience” will be considered on individual basis; several institutions are committed to considering “a range of relevant vocational level 3 qualifications” and “other new UK qualifications,” presumably implying that T Levels could be accepted. These types of indications are normally coupled with a suggestion to contact the university.

A few course pages state generically that T Levels, alongside other qualifications, are recognised. Then, there are the exemplary courses which specify the grade (including, if required, the expected outcomes for the core component and occupational specialism), the UCAS tariff points (if accepted), and the T Level subjects required. It is possible to come across very detailed entry requirements, which include the awarding body for particular T Levels accepted.

Russell Group and non-Russel Group providers

We also compared the information provided by a sample of four Russell Group (RG) universities with a same-size sample of non-Russell Group institutions (non-RG) across four courses: psychology, engineering, business studies, and biomedical science.

The information provided by those RG institutions which accept T Levels was in the main vague: it was specified that “T Level qualifications are considered for many of our courses”, or that “a range of T Level qualifications” will be considered. However, students were advised to contact the university or consult the entry requirements (presumably listed on the providers website, since they weren’t included on the UCAS page). Furthermore, most RG institutions in the sample make it clear that an A level may be expected in addition to T Levels.

The information in the sample of non-RG providers for T Level applicants was much clearer. The overall grade, as well as the expected outcomes for the core component and the occupational specialism were specified. A list of acceptable T Level subjects was also included.

Where next?

As our mapping demonstrates, the information for T Level students on UCAS webpages leaves a large scope for improvement. On the one hand, this is to be expected considering that T Levels are a relatively new qualification. On the other, and precisely because they are a new qualification, providers should play a role in supporting T Level students by offering clearer and more in-depth information regarding the acceptance or non-acceptance of T Levels. Linking London’s report puts forward several recommendations for providers, awarding bodies, as well as the Department for Education and the Office for Students, which, we hope, will assist with this process.

Jakub Kowalewski: Partnership Officer, Linking London

Linking London partners can access a copy of the full report via our secure Partner Area. If you are not a member of Linking London, a copy of the key headlines from the report can be requested via info@linkinglondon.ac.uk

Apprenticeship Supply and Demand

For a number of years an oft repeated argument has been that negative perceptions of apprenticeships and technical education in general are largely to blame for the low numbers of starts. The finger was often pointed at careers advisers and poor information and advice in general. The argument went that if only young people and their parents released that apprenticeships weren’t just undertaken in “oily rag” occupations, then the low take up would be largely solved. I’ve heard this message repeated time and again in events and conferences, in reports, for example the UUK Future of Degree Apprenticeships report citing that a ‘lack of student awareness’ were holding back degree apprenticeship growth, and listened with growing frustration as the Education Select Committee on Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance earlier this year tied itself up in knots about how we can get more young people to consider this option.

Here at Linking London we have regularly highlighted that the real issue is not that that there aren’t enough young people interested in apprenticeships, particularly at higher level, but rather the lack of opportunities. The results of our mapping of apprenticeship opportunities in London clearly illustrate the point. Since 2017, we have, drawing from several sources, including the gov.uk find an apprenticeship search facility, undertaken regular updates for partners on the number of higher and degree apprenticeship vacancies in Greater London. While, leaving aside the significant dip during the pandemic, we have seen a gradual increase in opportunities, which is of course very welcome, they are still not easy to come by. From the period December 22 – July 23 individual employer postings have ranged from 77 to a peak of 213 (equating to between 146 – 618 individual vacancies). And it’s worth noting that many vacancies are rolled over month by month, so these are not all “new” vacancies. Taking the highest figure, 618 vacancies, this would still only equate to 19 vacancies per London borough.

Two reports published recently, by the Sutton Trust & UCAS and the Careers Enterprise Company (CEC), come to the same conclusion; that the issue of the lack of apprenticeship starts, particularly at higher levels, is a supply rather than demand side issue. On the former report, Sir Peter Lampl, Founder and Chairman of the Sutton Trust, sums up the key issue well: “The big problem with apprenticeships is not the lack of demand by young people but the derisory level of supply which is available”. The report noted that three in five (61%) students previously interested in starting an apprenticeship cited ‘there aren’t any apprenticeships near me’, making it the most common reason for this group. The CEC report cited employers’ willingness to offer (apprenticeship) opportunities as the largest barrier to young people’s transition onto apprenticeship pathways.

Demand for higher level apprenticeships is only likely to grow, as the cost-of-living crisis continues to influence student choice. Recent UCAS surveys of applicants to HE highlights that 430,000 students stated that they are interested in apprenticeships. This compares with starts at Levels 4 and above at around 5,000 for those under 19 nationally, some of which will be existing employees. If we look at data for London for 2021-22, 50% of higher-level apprenticeship starts are, by age group, 25+, and 34% 19–24-year-olds, leaving 5% in the under 19 age bracket (equating to 680 starts). It’s fairly safe to assume that the majority of starts then are by people already in the workplace. While I’m an advocate of employees improving their lot by taking an apprenticeship to progress up the career ladder, especially in shortage areas like nursing, we do have a serious issue around take up by younger learners.

I’m not for one moment suggesting that we dial back on promoting apprenticeships to young people, or adults for that matter, but I do think that the argument that a key sticking point to apprenticeship growth lies with a lack of awareness of them can distract from the far bigger issue of growing the number of opportunities. We need more employers, especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), willing to take on young people, including those that have previously completed an advanced apprenticeship. 99% of UK businesses are SMEs, but of these businesses, 90% have not engaged with apprenticeships at all. The reasons for this are complex and would justify a separate blog, but government needs to take a serious look at the barriers to take up and how we can incentivise these businesses to do so. Cracking this would go a long way to redressing the imbalance between supply and demand.