England’s post-compulsory education landscape is marked by persistent silos between further and higher education, training, research, and innovation, as well as a dichotomic relation between academic and vocational knowledge. Addressing this fragmentation through greater collaboration and coordination within the system has been identified as a key challenge. Recent government reports on the skills strategy emphasise that “Higher Education and Further Education must be brought closer together” (Department for Education, 2024, p. 16). This debate is intensified by policy divergence across the UK: while England’s system is driven by marketisation and competition, Scotland and Wales have shifted toward more coordinated and collaborative frameworks (Hodgson et al., 2019). Against this backdrop, long-standing efforts to create a more integrated tertiary education system have gained renewed traction in the current national policy discussions (Maylor et al., 2024; Phoenix, 2023; Robson et al., 2024).

Tertiary education, which encompasses all forms of post-secondary education, plays a vital role in advancing knowledge, skills, innovation, and economic and societal well-being (OECD, 2008). However, tertiary education systems are inherently complex, often characterised by institutional diversity and stratification, multiple learner pathways, and intricate stakeholder relationships. In England, these complexities are further amplified by significant regional disparities in funding, resources, demographics, and skills demands.

Against this backdrop, this paper explores the possibilities and challenges of adopting systemic approaches in post-compulsory education policymaking in England. It examines debates, experiences and tensions surrounding collaboration, coordination and coherence at both national and regional levels. The study adopts the concept of ‘tertiary education’ to capture the sector’s diverse institutional landscape, all potential learners, and broad definitions of knowledge and skills (Hazelkorn, 2023; Morris, 2024). Drawing on ‘systems-thinking’, it also considers interconnectedness, system boundaries, complexity and contingency within England’s post-compulsory sector (Althaus et al., 2021; Fransman et al., 2021).

The methodology followed a two-stage approach. The first stage comprised an integrative literature review to assess and critique literature from different disciplines and perspectives on collaboration and coordination in England’s post-compulsory education (Torraco, 2005). The second stage involved conducting semi-structured interviews and policy workshops with sector leaders and key stakeholders, including government and public office representatives, associations of higher and further education institutions, further and higher education principals, academics, unions, employers and industry representatives.

Preliminary findings confirm that the quasi-market logic underpinning the regulation of post-compulsory education in England remains a significant barrier to collaboration, coherence and coordination. This market-driven approach exacerbates issues of trust within the sector (Donovan, 2019) , leads to duplication and a narrowing of specialism in the tertiary educational offer (Phoenix, 2023), and reinforces status competition and system stratification (Brown, 2023). Furthermore, the system’s marketisation also shapes discussions on collaboration in the sector by emphasising commercialisation activities and prioritising the economic and pecuniary goals as the core of institutional and individual educational endeavours. Additionally, the interviews reveal that while tertiary education approaches offer a more cohesive and coordinated perspective, they also expose clear contestations over purposes, interests, positions, and values. Discussions on systemic approaches to the post-compulsory sector highlight the inherently political nature of tertiary education, with competing views on its core purposes, institutional roles, coordination and leadership, and system boundaries. Recognising these political dimensions is particularly important as successful cases of collaboration and coordination in England emphasise the role of shared principles, common language, and trust-building. Since systems are mission-driven and purpose is described as the ‘north star’ for changes toward systemic approaches (Maylor et al., 2024), this paper advocates for approaches that acknowledge the interdependence relationships within the system and promote broad and open dialogue. Such dialogue is essential for developing principles, policies, and structures that foster collaboration, coordination, and coherence, align economic and social priorities at the local scale, and balance national goals and regional needs.

Althaus, C., Carson, L., Sullivan, H., & van Wanrooy, B. (2021). Research and education in public sector practice: A systems approach to understanding policy impact. Policy Design and Practice, 4(3), 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2021.1977478 Brown, R. (2023). Neoliberalism in UK higher education: The English higher education neo-market. In Neoliberal or not?: English higher education. HEPI. Department for Education. (2024). Skills England: Driving growth and widening opportunities. Donovan, C. (2019). Distrust by design? Conceptualising the role of trust and distrust in the development of Further Education policy and practice in England. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 24(2), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2019.1596414 Fransman, J., Hall, B., Hayman, R., Narayanan, P., Newman, K., & Tandon, R. (2021). Beyond partnerships: Embracing complexity to understand and improve research collaboration for global development. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 42(3), 326–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2021.1872507 Hazelkorn, E. (2023). Is it time to rethink our model of post-secondary education? Progressing a tertiary education eco-system (Working paper no. 89; p. 27). Centro for Global Higher Education. Hodgson, A., Spours, K., Gallacher, J., Irwin, T., & James, D. (2019). FE and skills–is the ‘UK laboratory’ open for expansive policy learning? Journal of Education and Work, 32(3), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2019.1621272 Maylor, H., Smith, V., & Tully, P. (2024). Further education and skills: Changing system of change. Education & Training Foundation. Morris, H. (2024). What is meant by the term tertiary education? Past developments and recent activity. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 8(2), 122–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2024.2383602 OECD. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society. Special features: Governance, funding, quality (Volume 1). OECD. Phoenix, D. (2023). Connecting the dots: The need for effective skills system in England (167; p. 49). Higher Education Policy Institute. Robson, J., Sibieta, L., Khandekar, S., Neagu, M., Robinson, D., & James Relly, S. (2024). Comparing policies, participation and inequalities across UK post-16 education and training landscapes. Skope, Nufiield Foundation, Education Policy Institute. Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283