The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC) has responded to the Department for Education (DfE) consultation on Post-16 Level 3 and below pathways that focuses on how to design and implement the new V Levels.
The EPC welcomes the introduction of V Levels at 360 guided learning hours (GLH) as a means of supporting flexibility and breadth, and recognises the importance of retaining a vocational route into higher education (HE), particularly in engineering.
The EPC highlights that engineering progression routes have historically relied on larger vocational qualifications, such as BTECs, which provide time for extended project work, iterative practical development, and deeper engagement with mathematical and scientific principles.
Careful consultation with HEIs will be necessary to ensure the V Level model is neither too broad to be meaningful or too narrow to support progression as the removal of medium-sized qualifications (typically 540–720 GLH) may unintentionally narrow access to engineering HE. Medium-sized qualifications provide an essential bridging function for learners with lower prior attainment, enabling them to build confidence, complete resits, and develop applied competence. Fixing all V Levels at the size of a single A level may introduce material risks, especially in technical disciplines where progression requires both conceptual depth and substantial practical experience and may negatively impact diversity and widening participation – as women, disadvantaged learners and under-represented groups are more likely to enter engineering via vocational routes. We recommend that DfE consider a controlled flexibility mechanism allowing certain subjects, including engineering and manufacturing, to exceed 360 GLH where evidence demonstrates that additional learning time is required to maintain quality and progression value.
In essence, we highlight that:
- vocational qualifications are vital progression routes;
- lessons should be learned from the roll out of apprenticeships and T levels in terms of progression to HE;
- occupational standards should consider HE progression;
- progression into higher education for disadvantaged students and under-represented learners should be supported; and
- a range of Level 3 pathways should be retained during implementation.
You can read the full question level response here.
