Krisztina NAGY
Original paper: Edge Foundation: Degree Apprenticeships in England: What can we learn from the experiences of apprentices, employers, and education and training providers?, 2025
Authors: Andrea Laczik, Josh Patel, Kat Emms, Dana Dabbous, Olly Newton, Aunam Quyoum, Jim Hordern, Kevin Orr, Liz Polding, Jane Wormald, Susan James Relly.
An apprenticeship (Hungarian: „tanoncképzés”) combines classroom education with practical training in the workplace. Unlike previous university courses that focused on traditional professions, industries are now increasingly interested in the DA type of practical, apprenticeship-based higher education. This format, advertised for both young people and adults, can provide a skilled workforce for today’s and tomorrow’s economy. It aims to reduce shortages of higher-level skills, support national economic growth, and create channels to supply skilled labor. DAs include UK level 6 programs leading to a bachelor's degree and level 7 programs leading to a master's degree. There are currently 161 approved training programmes, nearly 50,000 students, and more than 100 universities involved. The training directly reflects employers' needs. Students gain practical experience during working hours with employers, who participate in developing, evaluating, and implementing the curriculum. This supports the company's workforce development. Training participation is time-consuming; programs usually last 3–6 years, depending on the field (e.g., engineering, IT, healthcare, finance). Students must work full-time and study at university simultaneously, which can be a significant burden. The level and implementation of training vary between institutions, making uniform quality difficult to ensure.
Similar to dual training in Hungary, students sign an employment contract with employer organizations providing practical training. Students complete 30 hours of practical training and work per week and spend at least 6 hours per week learning at a higher education institution. Training is free for students and is financed through the Apprenticeship Levy, which employers pay into a digital fund. Employers with an annual wage bill over £3 million pay 0.5% of their wage bill into this fund, which the government supports with a 10% monthly supplement. DA courses are developed in partnership between the higher education institution and the assigned professional economic organization.
Between 2022-2023, Andrea Laczik and her colleagues examined the first results of the new training system introduced, seeking answers to the questions of how the stakeholders of the new training, the employers undertaking practical training, universities and students, and policy makers, think about the new training. Conducted the study, they used a qualitative, semi-structured online interview method (n=92), enabling a comparative examination of partners' opinions across different industries (engineering, healthcare, digital technology) and the exploration of individual experiences. The analysis was carried out using a deductive and inductive approach, thematic content analysis. The researchers used NVivo software to organize the data. The procedure followed the steps of the Braun and Clarke model, with particular attention to identifying and interpreting patterns. The research team extended data collection to the entire territory of England, most of which was conducted in the digital technology, construction, and engineering sectors.
When reviewing the 73-page study divided into 10 chapters, the reviewer focuses on the main experience of the introduction of DA training in England, similar to the Hungarian dual training, from two perspectives:
• What are the motivations of the interviewed representatives of the university, employers providing practical training, and students?
• What are the first experiences, what works well, and what obstacles make the implementation of the training difficult? To what extent do DAs fit the needs of local employers and the needs of the national economy, and how can they support social mobility and social equality upward?
The fourth chapter is about the development of training. The central dilemma is the relationship between practical training and the academic, university-based assessment. In other words, it is possible that students receive their diplomas before the final practical assessment is completed. The design of training courses is shaped not only by professional standards but also by resource, capacity, and organizational aspects, which is why development, planning, and implementation are often blurred in practice.
The fifth chapter examines differences in the implementation of training courses across institutions and programs. For example, the implementation of learning outside the workplace in an online or in-person format, the extent to which the workplace is considered a priority, and the kind of learning environment and supporting infrastructure that accompany the learning process. The chapter emphasizes that, given the specificity of DAs, participants are primarily employees rather than students. Consequently, the design and operation of programs are often aligned with the employer's priorities. The effectiveness may be further worsened by the practice of higher education institutions, for cost-effectiveness and organizational reasons, merging small DA groups with larger, non-apprenticeship student groups, which causes numerous learning problems. Training institutions also strive to ensure that instructors consciously take into account the time and workload constraints arising from their status as employees.
Chapter six, which deals with motivation, confirms that the main motivating factors for students are career and advancement hopes, the benefits of practice-oriented learning, and financial considerations. The study of students’ motivations shows that the opportunity to obtain a degree is attractive, that it is a more practice-oriented, work-based form of learning than traditional university education, and that this brings financial benefits. An important motivating factor is therefore the avoidance of student loans and the possibility of studying while earning money, although the level of salary does not always provide adequate financial security. The overall level of satisfaction among participants is high, especially regarding career opportunities and professional development, but perceptions of the quality of the training and institutional support are mixed. Reconciling work, study, and private life is a significant challenge, especially for older students with family responsibilities.
Employers offering internships are motivated by the opportunity to “train” a skilled, adaptable, self-directed workforce. For them, collaborations with universities, expanding the network of contacts, and the opportunity to share knowledge in the field of work-based learning are strategic. The problem was that the employer’s information and the program information were incomplete. Employers offering internships say the Apprenticeship Levy fund did not achieve the goals the government hoped for, because companies paying contributions interpreted it as a kind of “tax” and did not necessarily spend the full amount on DAs. According to the study, several employer interviewees emphasized that DAs work better for larger organizations because of the organizational capacity and administrative requirements required to operate the program. Concerns have been raised that training is not very adaptable and slow to keep up with changes, and that it focuses more on future skills shortages than on meeting current needs. Based on interviews, several employers indicated that degree apprenticeship programs are often used to develop existing employees, rather than for new young entrants or career starters. This can be problematic because the program's original purpose was partly to provide an alternative route into higher education and the labor market for new entrants. As the study says: „There are concerns that increases in expensive DAs normally taken by employees already in the workforce are to the detriment of resourcing and support for apprenticeships to help young people enter the workforce.” (Laczik et al., 2024, 5).
As a motivating factor for higher education institutions, the program represents both an opportunity and a challenge: it strengthens industrial partnerships and work-based learning, but it also increases administrative burdens and the need for organizational adaptation.
Chapter seven highlights that the effectiveness of DAs depends not only on the quality of the curriculum, but also on the organization of partnerships, the accessibility of communication, and the incentives for resource allocation. The implementation of partnership relationships in collaboration is very mixed: in some cases, a strong relationship of trust is typical and long-term cooperation is established; in others, the relationships are weak and in need of development.
The eighth chapter of the study deals with the integration of learning and work. It states that the quality of learning during DA training is determined by the extent to which its implementation aligns with the curriculum, workplace expectations, and the student's living space. The chapter points out a fundamental tension between the accelerated training time of DAs, the high expectations, and the logic of workplace production. Only strong employer support and flexible organizational frameworks can manage this.
The ninth chapter of the study, summarizing the ten-year history of DAs in England, examines the research findings in the context of higher education, vocational training, and labour market policy. The chapter offers both positive assessments (DAs as flexible, work-based learning pathways) and critical reflections (regulatory overload, communication deficit, unequal access, sustainability risks). Areas for improvement include:
Low awareness and misunderstandings
Limited availability
Administrative burdens
Quality and consistency
Time-consuming programme
The following expectations are formulated for the programme:
contribute to national economic growth and address low productivity levels
contribute to addressing higher-level skills shortages
facilitate social mobility
contribute to a more diverse workforce.
The tenth, concluding chapter, then translates the previous empirical findings into concrete educational policy intervention proposals. It suggests three main directions: coordinated labor-market partnership (not institutional competition); a balance of flexible standards and stable quality assurance; and strengthening information and mentoring infrastructure.
In summary, the program's introduction aimed to ensure that DAs play a significant role in supporting workforce diversity and providing wider access to higher education. Employers' motivation is to obtain a workforce with knowledge and skills beyond traditional university education, aligned with industry needs, thereby increasing organizational performance. The knowledge acquired in practice includes, on the one hand, soft skills, business approach, work experience, and integration skills, on the other hand, technical knowledge, while participants are also able to apply the acquired theoretical knowledge in practice.
The study is of interest to Hungarian higher education institutions that face the practice of dual education, but the English experiences may also be important for Hungarian practical training organizations. It is important to note that a quarter of a century after the change of regime, the period that has passed is perhaps sufficient for researchers in the science of andragogy to draw general theoretical and practical conclusions from an andragogic perspective, so I recommend the study to their attention as well.