Three case studies of vocational assessment reform from the last thirty years were analysed to understand why vocational education policy is an intractable problem in England, known for churn and instability, considering this in the context of England as a liberal market economy in comparison to the coordinated market economies of northern Europe. The research takes a long view on developing and implementing policy in this area, by considering the examples of General National Vocational Qualifications from the 1990s, the 14-19 Diploma from the 2000s and T Levels from 2016 to the present. The OECD has recently acknowledged that England is not alone in facing issues with 16-19 education, with how young people transition from education to work of key interest internationally. The paper therefore aims to provide a framework for future policymakers through a deeper understanding of qualification reform as a policy instrument.

A multi-case analysis is used to conceptualise qualification reform to better understand it as an instrument that governments use to effect change, looking at the challenges and opportunities that reform of this nature presents. The paper looks at how qualification reform is being used, why, and with what effect, to understand whether and why it has become prevalent as a tool for policy makers, and what has driven that. It considers what we can understand from this to contribute to our knowledge of how education policy gets initiated, interpreted and implemented, and its links to economic policy. The paper asks how qualification reform contributes to a toolkit of skills policy interventions used internationally to drive productivity. It looks at this issue critically, testing the assumptions made about the role of employers in shaping policy direction and their role in the development of vocational qualifications and qualification systems and governance, and how and whether these interventions can really contribute to economic growth. The paper seeks to shed light on, and potentially explain, approaches to educational change at this particular juncture.

The analysis considers a set of lessons learned that could be applied to qualifications reform generally, reflecting on the features of high stakes assessments. Building on principles set out by Raffe in 2014, the argument updates them to inform current thinking. It supports Raffe’s argument that the evidence base for change needs to be further developed, and therefore purposefully sidelines the perennial refrains from the political rhetoric. It looks at balancing different qualification purposes in the context of ambitious policy intentions, and the importance of cohort analysis as a policy tool. It observes the multiple actors involved in the vocational qualifications system, and the need to manage different requirements and interests. Finally, it considers Raffe’s principle that the process of change is as important as the change itself and proposes that evolution of qualifications is more effective than revolution.

This project is being carried out by an insider researcher, as I am Executive Director, Vocational and Technical Qualifications at Ofqual, a non-ministerial government department in England which regulates the exams system. Ofqual plays a central part in delivering qualification reform programmes for the UK government. The research comprises a multi-case design, identifying parallel data for each of the case studies to identify themes and patterns. It draws on key policy documents and texts, dialogue with policymakers and practitioners, and publicly available data sets, as well as an extensive secondary literature, as sources of evidence to substantiate the arguments made. Data utilised includes the context for each case and stated policy intent; the stated purpose of each type of qualification and associated design principles; overall programme structure and positioning in the educational landscape; cohort analysis including prior attainment data; achievement rates and completion rates; information about governance including the roles and responsibilities of the key government agencies involved; the market structures underpinning each reform; and funding, accountability and other key drivers. Evidence about motivations, tensions, relationship dynamics and the key sentiment surrounding the programmes was also captured as part of the data collection. Sources of evidence were identified through departments of state, government agencies, regulators and awarding organisations, and archives such as those held by the Institute of Education in London. The grey literature was considered to draw in commentary and analysis from the wider field. Data drawn on includes official data sets published by the UK government such as Ofqual’s Register of Qualifications and Annual Qualifications Market Report, Ofqual’s Analytics data sets including qualification outcomes over time, the Department for Education’s published ‘Explore Education Statistics’ online and predecessor publications available in digital archives, and data published by the Joint Council for Qualifications. Parliamentary records were also an important source of material.

Conclusions can be drawn about both the individual case studies and in consideration of the reforms as a set and relate back to the concept of a ‘VET toolkit’ which has been used internationally to drive productivity and economic growth. Key themes include the role of employers in the design, development and approval of qualifications; how qualification content is underpinned by occupational standards and how these have shaped reforms; approaches to assessment that are aiming to signify occupational competence and the part this plays; the particular role for training provides and educational institutions in a ‘supply and demand’ model; and the role of the individual student as a productive member of the economy. These aspects are all key features of a vocational qualification system. They can all be looked at critically and must be, to thoroughly understand how qualification reform is being used as a policy instrument at this particular juncture in history. Other key themes include the importance of considering qualification purpose, and how this in turn impacts qualification design, and the importance of considering the prior attainment of students potentially sitting the reformed qualifications. Organisational change, policy instability and churn also emerges as a theme specific to the English context. The process of change and how it is brought about is an important theme in this work which will be drawn out in the presentation.

Allais, Stephanie Matseleng. 2022. ‘Beyond “Supply and Demand”: Moving from Skills “Planning” to Seeing Skills as Endogenous to the Economy’. Journal of Vocational, Adult and Continuing Education and Training 5 (1): 19. https://doi.org/10.14426/jovacet.v5i1.246. Baird, Jo‐Anne, and Liz Lee‐Kelley. 2009. ‘The Dearth of Managerialism in Implementation of National Examinations Policy’. Journal of Education Policy 24 (1): 55–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802382938. Brown, Phillip, Hugh Lauder, and Sin Yi Cheung. 2020. The Death of Human Capital: Its Failed Promise and How to Renew It. New York: Oxford University Press. Esmond, Bill, and Liz Atkins. 2022. Education, Skills and Social Justice in a Polarising World: Between Technical Elites and Welfare Vocationalism. 1st ed. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003049524. James Relly, Susan. 2021. ‘The Political Rhetoric of Parity of Esteem’. Oxford Review of Education 47 (4): 513–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2020.1866522. Keep, Ewart, and Susan James. 2012. ‘A Bermuda Triangle of Policy? “Bad Jobs”, Skills Policy and Incentives to Learn at the Bottom End of the Labour Market’. Journal of Education Policy 27 (2): 211–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2011.595510. McGrath, Simon. 2012. ‘Vocational Education and Training for Development: A Policy in Need of a Theory?’ International Journal of Educational Development 32 (5): 623–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.12.001. Musset, Pauline, and Simon Field. 2013. A Skills beyond School Review of England. OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264203594-en. Ozga, Jennifer. 1999. Policy Research in Educational Settings: Contested Terrain. Open University Press. Pabst, A, and A Westwood. 2021. ‘The Politics of Productivity: Institutions, Governance and Policy’. The Productivity Institute. https://www.productivity.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/WP015-Politics-of-Productivity-FINAL-131221.pdf. Pring, Richard, Geoffrey Hayward, Ann Hodgson, Jill Johnson, Ewart Keep, Alis Oancea, Gareth Rees, Ken Spours, and Stephanie Wilde. 2012. Education for All: The Future of Education and Training for 14-19 Year-Olds. 0 ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203873595. Raffe, David. 2015. ‘First Count to Five: Some Principles for the Reform of Vocational Qualifications in England’. Journal of Education and Work 28 (2): 147–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.1001334. Raggatt, Peter, Steve Williams, and Peter C. M. Raggatt. 1999. Government, Markets, and Vocational Qualifications: An Anatomy of Policy. London: Falmer Press. Thelen, K., and M. Busemeyer. 2008. ‘From Collectivism towards Segmentalism: Institutional Change in German Vocational Training: 08/13.’ MPIFG Discussion Paper. Wheelahan, Leesa, Gavin Moodie, and James Doughney. 2022. ‘Challenging the Skills Fetish’. British Journal of Sociology of Education 43 (3): 475–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2022.2045186. Winch, Christopher. 2023. ‘Learning Outcomes: The Long Goodbye: Vocational Qualifications in the 21st Century’. European Educational Research Journal 22 (1): 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211043669.