New NAO Report says DfE MUST Increase T Level Student Numbers

• 16 of 21 new T Level courses introduced to date were delivered on time. 
• 25,508 students started a T Level in September 2024: 42% of DfE’s November 2022 estimate, but 1% higher than estimated in October 2023.  
• DfE has taken steps to increase the availability of industry placements but that, and student awareness, remain a challenge to scaling up T Levels.
• 71% of students completed their two-year T Level course in summer 2024 (provisional data).

The Department for Education (DfE) must address issues surrounding student take-up, awareness and industry placement numbers to cement T Levels as the main technical education qualification for 16 to 19-year-olds, despite making progress since their introduction, according to a new National Audit Office (NAO) report.

From September 2020, students have been able to enrol on T Levels, which DfE sees as critical in addressing skills gaps across the economy. Courses offered cover skills including education, engineering, digital and health.

To date, DfE has introduced 21 T Levels, in phases, with 16 delivered on time despite an ambitious timetable. DfE significantly overestimated student demand initially, but has since revised down its estimates, meeting its most recent estimate for student numbers in September 2024. More widely, it has reduced its enrolment ambitions, which fell from 100,000 by September 2025 to 70,000 by September 2027.

Lower-than-expected student numbers, the announcement of the Advanced British Standard (now reversed) and delays defunding overlapping qualifications have impacted market interest from organisations contracted to award individual T Levels,with some having made a financial loss. Low student numbers have also meant that DfE expects to spend £0.7 billion less introducing T Levels than its June 2021 estimate of £1.94 billion.

DfE has recognised that a lack of awareness is a barrier for students, and has introduced various measures to address this. It has also considered a shortage of industry placements as a potential future constraint on student numbers, although in March 2025 it downgraded this risk for the current year. Of the students completing a T Level in summer 2024, 98% had undertaken an industry placement. DfE has various initiatives to help expand placements but no longer provides employers with financial incentives.

Fewer students complete their T Levels compared with other level 3 qualifications, with pass rates declining year on year, although DfE reports that this is in line with expectations. T Levels are also more expensive than other level 3 qualifications due to the cost of additional teaching hours and industry placements, as well as the extra funding needed to support providers. However, DfE has estimated that T Levels are 25% more economically valuable to students than comparable qualifications.

Although DfE has developed plans to monitor benefits – including preparing students for work and having the required skills – in the absence of students’ earnings data, and with overall numbers hard to estimate, the anticipated benefits are uncertain.

DfE has evolved the T Levels programme in response to feedback. The Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) reported in June 2023 that DfE had made good progress against its recommendations, including by strengthening its programme oversight.  

The NAO recommends that DfE develops ways to understand the potential impacts on the demand, benefits and cost of T Levels before making wider strategic decisions around the development of the technical qualifications landscape.

DfE must also continue efforts to increase industry placements, which are critical to offering T Levels to more students, and monitor the impact of student take-up on revised commercial arrangements with awarding bodies.

Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said:

“T Levels were developed to provide crucial qualifications and industry experience to students, allowing them to go on to further education or begin roles in skilled jobs.

“They have the potential to offer new opportunities for young people and address critical skills gaps across the economy.

“Although the Department for Education has made progress in delivering the wide range of courses available, efforts must be made to increase student numbers and realise all the potential benefits of T Levels.”

Sector Reaction

Bill Watkin CBE, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, said:

“Today’s report from the National Audit Office reinforces the need to retain a middle pathway of applied general qualifications for students for whom neither A level nor T level presents the best way forward. T levels represent a vital opportunity to acquire the skills and experience that are essential for the workplace, but they are not right for everyone, and we need to be confident that every young person can access a valuable and valued suite of qualifications in the future. 

“The report includes the Department for Education’s estimate that 91,200 students will be studying a T level in 2027. As there are currently 277,380 students studying an AGQ, and 2027 is the last year in which these qualifications will be funded, we are pleased that the first recommendation in the report is for the Department to undertake more work on T levels before making changes to the wider qualifications landscape. 

“Today’s report is clear that the Department for Education cannot yet measure whether T Levels are achieving their aims. Until it can, we believe the Department should change its current policy to allow medium and large AGQs to co-exist with T levels. This would ensure that the pipeline of skilled workers to key sectors of the economy is not disrupted and avoid the creation of a qualifications gap that tens of thousands of students could fall through.”

Cath Sezen, Director of Education Policy, Association of Colleges said:

“T Levels provide a fantastic opportunity for young people to gain the skills and knowledge to enable them to progress to work and apprenticeships or onto higher education. The feedback from students has been very positive and the industry placement where it works can be a game-changer in helping young people understand the world of work.

“However, as identified by the National Audit Office, the numbers of students are not in line with the Department for Education’s initial ambitions and plans. This is not surprising given the very large amount of course content and the heavy assessment requirement.

“These issues, combined with the challenge of finding employers willing to offer high quality industry placements, have restricted numbers and will continue to hinder scaling up.

“This results in T Levels competing mainly with A Levels for students, with the obvious distinction that choosing a T Level narrows work and progression options, whereas choosing three A Levels keeps more options open.

“The work DfE is doing to streamline course content and cut back on assessment for new versions of the first round of T Levels from this September will help open up T Levels to more students, but the numbers are likely to remain lower that originally envisaged.

“We would like to see the Curriculum and Assessment Review propose a broad picture of how T Levels and A Levels fit with other Level 3 qualifications and what the numbers might look like in future years across different options.

“The report also shines a light on the impact of the so-called dynamic pricing model that DfE has agreed with the awarding organisations. At a time when 16 to 18 study programme funding is still below 2010 levels, it is alarming that the exam fees in some subjects, such as education and early years have risen dramatically and are putting enormous pressure on college budgets, from £151 per student in first phase contracts to £375 per student in second phase contracts.

“This suggests there is a fundamental weakness in the contracting model used by DfE for T Levels which results in each awarding organisation having a monopoly on each T Level. Colleges are picking up the tab for poor forecasting of student numbers by having to pay more. The contracting model needs evaluating in terms of the content and assessment too, because we rarely see the same problems with qualifications designed in the awarding organisation market.”