Today is A-Level Results Day.
For thousands of young people across the country, this morning will bring celebration, relief, perhaps disappointment and, for many, the first big decision about what comes next.
Some will head to university. Others will start apprenticeships, go to college, enter employment or take a different route altogether. And that is exactly as it should be.
But as we celebrate today’s results, there is a bigger question we should be asking about the choices we offer the next generation – and about the institutions we choose to support.
Do we back our winners enough in the UK?
That question feels particularly relevant this year because the Government is making a significant change in the way it talks about education and skills.
The old political ambition of getting 50% of young people into university has gone. In its place is a broader ambition: for two-thirds of young people to participate in higher-level learning by the age of 25, whether through academic, technical or apprenticeship routes. The Government has also set a target that at least 10% should pursue higher technical education or apprenticeships by 2040. I think there is a great deal to welcome in this.
For too long, technical and vocational education has not enjoyed the status it deserves. A young person who wants to become an engineer, electrician, advanced manufacturer, technician or skilled construction worker should not feel that they have chosen the “lesser” route. Apprenticeships can be transformative. Further Education colleges are essential to our economy. Technical skills are vital to the reindustrialisation, productivity and economic resilience that Britain desperately needs.
In June, before becoming Prime Minister, Burnham argued that the days of a school system configured entirely around the university route should come to an end. He said that university was “great for those who want it”, but asked when the country was going to focus on the life chances of young people who wanted something different. His answer was a system based on parity between academic and technical education. Since entering Downing Street, that agenda has accelerated.
The Government’s recent “new deal for young people” explicitly aims to end what it calls a “degree by default” culture, crack down on poor-quality university courses and shift investment further towards youth apprenticeships. On 27 July, Burnham went further, announcing reforms that will allow 14-year-olds to access technical education, skills training, work experience and connections with employers. His message was deliberately symbolic: Britain should value the “hard hat” as much as the “graduation cap”.
And on 28 July, the Government announced further support for technical education and apprenticeships, including free apprenticeship training for eligible under-25s, up to £8,000 of support for SMEs hiring young apprentices, and a package intended to create 50,000 new youth apprenticeships. This is a significant policy shift. But it raises an equally significant question.
What does it mean for higher education?
Because there is a danger in trying to correct one imbalance by creating another.
We absolutely should raise the status of apprenticeships. We absolutely should strengthen Further Education. We absolutely should ensure that a young person does not feel that university is the only respectable route to a successful life.
But none of that requires us to talk down universities. And we should be very careful that we do not.
The power of Higher Education
Higher Education has, and will continue to, transform the lives of millions of people.
For a young person from a disadvantaged background, the opportunity to study at university can be genuinely life-changing. It can provide knowledge, confidence, professional networks and access to careers that might otherwise have seemed beyond reach.
And it does something else that is particularly important to the Midlands: it connects people to the research, innovation and businesses that will shape the economy of tomorrow. The Midlands is awash with globally renowned higher education institutions who educate the engineers, scientists, doctors, teachers, entrepreneurs and business leaders that Britain needs.
They conduct research that becomes new technology. They work with businesses to solve real-world problems. They create spin-outs and start-ups. They attract investment and international talent. They are economic institutions as much as educational ones. That is why the language we use matters. If a young person hears repeatedly that university is an outdated route, a route that leaves them with debt and uncertain employment, they may quite reasonably conclude that higher education is something Government itself no longer values. That would be a mistake.
Britain has a higher education industry the world envies
There is a fundamental economic point here. Higher education is one of Britain’s internationally successful industries. Universities UK estimates that the sector contributes around £265 billion to the UK economy and supports more than 768,000 jobs. Universities also provide billions of pounds of support and services to businesses and not-for-profit organisations.
International students are another part of this story. The Higher Education Policy Institute’s latest analysis estimates that the international students who started higher education in the UK in 2024/25 will generate a net economic benefit of £40.4 billion over their studies. That is an extraordinary export success. And the benefit isn’t only financial.
Those students become part of Britain’s international network. They build relationships with British institutions and businesses. They take their experience of Britain back into economies, governments and organisations around the world. Britain’s soft power globally is significanty enhanced through the power of Higher Education.
Our research base is similarly exceptional. Government analysis shows that the UK produces a disproportionately high share of the world’s highly cited research. This is a competitive advantage. In a world increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, life sciences, clean energy, defence technology and digital innovation, the countries that can generate knowledge and turn it into commercial opportunity will prosper. Universities sit right at the heart of that ecosystem.
So when we ask whether Britain is backing its winners, higher education surely belongs on the list.
But we cannot ignore the funding crisis
This does not mean universities should be beyond criticism. Far from it. I worked in the sector for ten years (admittedly some time ago) and saw first hand some of the real issues that Higher Education continues to be plagued by.
There are some extremely legitimate questions about the value delivered by some courses, the relationship between education and employment, institutional efficiency and whether the current funding model is sustainable. The Government is right to challenge poor provision and should be tougher on how it funds (or doesn’t more precisely) consistently poorly performing course and/or institutions.
But there is a huge difference between improving a sector and allowing a world-class sector to weaken. That distinction matters because the financial position of universities is already extremely difficult.
The Office for Students has continued to warn about financial sustainability, while Parliament’s Education Committee has described the sector as facing a financial crisis, with risks around institutional insolvency, course closures and redundancies. At precisely the moment when we should be thinking about how universities can drive productivity, innovation and regional growth, many institutions are instead having to think about how to balance the books.
That cannot be the long-term strategy for a country that wants to compete internationally.
And then there is the graduate debt question
There is another reason why the Government’s new rhetoric is gaining traction. Students and graduates are understandably worried about the cost of higher education. Recent analysis by the Intergenerational Foundation has highlighted the increasing repayment burden faced by graduates under the current student loan system, while arguing that the funding model has shifted a growing share of the cost of higher education onto individuals. These concerns are real and I don’t believe that the issue is still given anywhere near the proper attention it deserves in the policy landscape – and not just from a personal interest in the state of the sector with three children of my own several years away from tertiary education!
We should want a student finance system that is fair, understandable and sustainable. But again, we should separate the question of how we fund higher education from the question of whether higher education is valuable. They are not the same thing. If the funding model is broken, fix the funding model.
The Midlands knows the answer
This matters particularly to the Midlands. Our region cannot afford a false choice between universities and technical education. We need both – and we have both.
We need world-class universities working alongside outstanding Further Education colleges. We need apprenticeships and degrees. We need researchers and technicians. We need professors and engineers. We need academic discovery and practical application. And, crucially, we need the institutions to work together. Universities need to be part of that future – not treated as yesterday’s model.
I agree with the PM that we should establish parity between academic and technical education. But parity should mean equal respect, not equalisation through decline.
We should not tell young people that everyone needs a degree. But neither should we tell them that fewer people should aspire to university simply because the Government wants to increase apprenticeship numbers.
The right question is not: “How many young people should go to university?” but more along the lines of “What is the right route for this young person, and how do we make every route genuinely excellent?”
That is a much more ambitious question and it means investing properly in all of them. If we want more apprenticeships, fund them. If we want stronger Further Education, invest in colleges. If we want technical education to have parity of esteem, give it the facilities, teachers and employer relationships it needs. If there are consistently falling institutions, Government shouldn’t be afraid to tackle them head on.
And if we want Britain to retain one of the world’s strongest higher education sectors, invest in our universities too. And that brings me back to the question I started with.
Do we back our winners enough in the UK?
At a time when Government is rightly backing technical education and apprenticeships, let’s not inadvertently stop backing another of Britain’s great winners.
Our universities are globally respected. They are economically significant. They transform lives. They power research and innovation and support business.
But above all, let’s not allow a world-class British industry to decline because we have forgotten how successful it is.
The hard hat deserves to be valued as much as the graduation cap. But the answer is not to knock down the graduation cap.
The answer is to make sure Britain backs both. We need to back our winners.
References
- UK Government — Prime Minister unveils reforms to transform further and higher education — September 2025 announcement replacing the 50% university target with the two-thirds higher-level learning target.
- UK Government — New deal for young people to end “degree by default” culture and boost youth apprenticeships — June 2026 policy announcement.
- Andy Burnham — Speech at the People’s History Museum, Manchester, 29 June 2026 — Burnham’s argument for parity between academic and technical education.
- UK Government — PM: “From today Britain will value the hard hat as much as the graduation cap” — July 2026 reforms giving 14-year-olds earlier access to technical education.
- UK Government — Government invests in young people with more opportunities close to home — July 2026 apprenticeship and Further Education package.
- Office for Students — Financial sustainability of higher education providers in England: 2026 — latest assessment of university finances.
- Higher Education Policy Institute — The benefits and costs of international higher education students to the UK economy, 2026 — latest analysis of the economic contribution of international students.
- Intergenerational Foundation analysis, reported by The Guardian — student loan repayment burden — recent analysis of graduate repayment costs.
- UCAS — A Level Results Day 2026 — confirmation that 13 August 2026 is A-Level Results Day.
This is a personal blog post. Any opinions, findings, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Centre for the New Midlands or any of our associated organisations/individuals.
ABOUT OUR AUTHOR:
Chris Smith is the Founder and CEO of the Centre for the New Midlands, launching the organisation in January 2020. Prior to establishing the only independent, non-partisan think tank solely focussed on the West Midlands region, Chris worked for 15 years in the UK Higher Education sector, with extensive experience in student recruitment, stakeholder engagement; business development and major gift fundraising.
Chris has previously worked for the Saga Group plc and the Home Office, Immigration and Nationality Directorate. Chris is a former Students’ Union President and has also been a Trustee of a Students’ Union.
Chris has served as a member of the NSPCC Business Board in Coventry and Warwickshire and is an Acorns Children’s Hospice Business Ambassador. He is an avid Tottenham Hotspur supporter and a ‘Man of Kent’ by birth but an ‘adopted’ Coventrian having lived in the city since 2003.
