16-19 Study Programmes Annual Review

22 March 2017

The EFA has published its second annual review of 16 to 19 study programmes using the most recently available data which is for 2014/15. In general, the EFA is pleased with the way study programmes are meeting its original aims. There has been an increase in the proportion of full-time students and a decrease in part-time students, as well as in the numbers studying for maths and English GCSE, or for stepping stone qualifications. There has also been an increase in the proportion of students participating in work experience. However a number of areas of the study programme were still found to be inconsistent across the country - it may be worth checking your study programmes are getting the following areas right:

  • Recording EEP/work experience hours
    All work experience hours that are an essential part of the qualification hours (i.e. when work experience is a requirement to achieve a qualification) must be recorded within the qualification hours and not as EEP hours.

  • Recording multiple core aims and/or a high number of learning aims
    Too many institutions are recording too many aims. All study programme must be challenging to the young person so modular delivery and multiple aims should only be offered if this supports the specific needs of the student.

  • Progression in courses offered
    All study programmes should offer a programme that is at a higher level than their prior attainment (only in exceptional circumstances, this will not be the case and if so, clear evidence and rationale should be provided if necessary for any funding audit).

  • Recording vocational core aims whilst on a predominantly academic programme
    If a young person is on a predominantly academic programme, the core aim must be an academic qualification, even if one vocational qualification offered is larger than each individual academic qualification.

  • Apportionment of planned hours across two years
    Planned hours for two-year programmes must be apportioned over two funding periods. The hours entered must be realistic and deliverable to each individual student and for the academic year in question. Institutions must ensure that this can be evidenced if necessary to any funding auditor.