Guardian article claims "vocational courses are failing students"

Posted by: Graeme Hall Oct 6, 05:57 pm Comment on this articlePermlink

A recent article in the Guardian highlighted the research findings of the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) which compared the success of applications, staying on and achievement rates of students with different entry qualifications.

The article concluded that Vocational Courses are failing students and that the research showed that applicants with traditional A-levels are more likely to be accepted by top universities and to succeed once they get there.

HEPI director, Bahram Bekhradnia is claimed to have said that “it may be that vocational qualifications may not be a particularly good basis for subsequent HE-level study.”

The article goes on to express concern that if vocational qualifications are a poor preparation for HE then the new Diplomas may raise the same concerns.

The findings of the report may well be correct but the conclusions drawn by HEPI’s Director and the Guardian are not.

Across England, Lifelong Learning Networks (LLNs) have been working hard to ensure that the curriculum and teaching methods offered by our University partners is as appropriate for vocational learners as those entering with A-levels.

Vocational learners do learn in a different way and may be used to different styles of teaching and learning – different not wrong.

Vocational learners joining programmes which are designed to cater for difference and do not assume that “one size fits all” do equally well as A-level learners.

All learners, A-level or vocational, should expect that their background and skills are valued equally by those designing and delivering HE – the LLN experience is that increasingly this is the case and that the view expressed by the article are out of date and quite simply, poor journalism.

The Guardian article: Vocational courses are failing students.

Your Comments

  1. Good link. I have been working with students doing both A levels and vocational BTEC. I know from experience that a vocational student achieving 3 D’s certainly comes out with different skills, and will not get 3 A’s at A level. Their skills are different and they are not really prepared with sufficient exam techniques. Vocational students – say the ones doing IT for example, will certainly come out with far better skills in IT and fare quite well at university with the practical skills compared to an A level student going into a degree in Computer Science. They tend to fall at the exam stage.

    The good vocational students who have got the independent skills to get Distinctions do quite well at university. We are introducing more and more “test” conditions for vocational students to get through certain grading criteria. I think the “teaching” of the vocational content needs to be looked at with a better mixture of testing and assignment work. The subject content of vocational subject is good. Some deliverers of vocational quals support their students beyond what is reasonable in order to get them through which A level students being assessed mostly on exams don’t get.

    Posted by: Manju Patel · Division Manager Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College Oct 9, 04:06 pm

  2. I fully endorse what Graeme Hall (6 October) has said.

    Posted by: Larry O'Carroll · Academic Co-ordinator, Department of Professional and Community Education Goldsmiths, University of London Oct 8, 09:50 am

  3. I’ve read this article and agree that the conclusions drawn from these findings are disappointing, but not surprising. If learners on vocational courses were finding progression to and through HE simple and straight forward, then Lifelong Learning Networks would not exist. We cannot expect that a survey of vocational learners at this time will show complete equality with traditional academic learners. The work of the LLNs to help improve progression for vocational learners is still ongoing and we must expect that change will be gradual.

    On another point, I disagree that this article is poor journalism. It simply isn’t. We may disagree with parts of it, but it is balanced thanks to the comments from Bill Rammell. Perhaps your blog should also link to the article?

    Posted by: Mary Stone · Communications Officer HI-LLN Oct 7, 11:09 am

Comment on this article