to see wider access to standards, shares this anxiety. It has, therefore, concentrated its attention
on broadening advanced level programmes of study and creating more flexibility at Key Stage 4
so that disaffected and underachieving students can undertake vocational education programmes
(Hodgson & Spours 1999).
In the longer term, however, it is possible to see greater progression through the general route if
more learners could be encouraged to continue their studies beyond 16. To achieve this, the
education profession has long argued for the formation of a coherent, progression-orientated and
modular 14+ qualifications system (e.g. Finegold et al. 1990, NCE 1995, Labour Party 1996,
Hodgson & Spours 1997, Hodgson & Spours 1999). First and foremost, the aim of such a system
would be to overcome the GCSE 5 A*-C barrier which potentially demoralises over half the
cohort who fail to reach this standard by 16. There are a whole number of reforms which could
be undertaken to create a more flexible ladder from 14+ to encourage a larger number of the
cohort to continue in some form of education and training after the age of 16. These might
include the creation of vocational GCSEs; creating more modular and credit-based qualifications;
making AS a genuine stepping stone between GCSE and A Level; bringing AS levels down into
Year 11; constructing three rather than two-year post-16 programmes to bring slower learners up
to advanced level; ensuring that any credit gained in full-time education could be transported to
the work-based route and, ultimately, the development of a graduation/overarching certification
system which recognises breadth of study as well as depth and is not so strictly age-bound as
current qualifications for this age group.
This, we would argue is essentially a longer-term strategy to encourage participation in higher
education beyond the 50 per cent mark and to take us towards levels enjoyed by other higher
performing advanced industrial countries.
Rationalising the broad vocational route
The broad thrust of policy related to reforming the broad vocational route during the 1980s and
1990s has focused on the creation of more vocational provision producing a plethora of
qualifications, most of which do not achieve a high public profile. The vocational route needs to
be rationalised so that it develops clear and acceptable qualifications which meet the needs of
employers and provide progression to further study. Over the last two decades, this role has best
been met by traditional vocational qualifications, such as BTEC National Diplomas, which
offered both breadth and depth of study and became respected by employers and higher education
admission tutors alike.
The development of clear products in the vocational route could and should be connected with the
development of overarching certification. If the various qualifications in the vocational route
were connected by the development of a high-profile advanced level diploma which was accepted
in higher education and which led straight into HND-type provision, it is possible that half the
young people in this route could progress to higher education either full or part-time. This could
double the current throughput of the vocational route as a whole and, in the process, encourage its
expansion by making it more attractive to high achievers. This is one of the measures with most
potential to aid the achievement of the Government’s higher education participation target.
Progression from the work-based route for 16-19 year olds and qualification in the
workplace
18