Following our Inclusive Pedagogy Symposium 2026,Dr. Lu Li, Loughborough University, reflects on what the growth of degree apprenticeships means for inclusive practice in higher education.

It was a pleasure to present at the Inclusive Pedagogy Symposium 2026, where I shared my work on how the growth of degree apprenticeships invites universities to rethink what inclusion means in higher education.   Many of the inclusion frameworks universities use today were developed with the traditional full-time student in mind. But degree apprenticeships are now growing fast, and extending the same inclusion frameworks to cover them will not be enough. The risk is that we end up enrolling apprentices without really including them in the university community.  

A growing route into higher education

Degree apprenticeships, which combine full-time paid work with higher level study, are becoming a more visible part of higher education. In England, degree apprenticeships are offered at bachelor’s level (Level 6) and master’s level (Level 7) across more than 100 universities. The number of people starting a degree apprenticeship grew from around 22,500 in 2018/19 to more than 60,000 in 2024/25, nearly tripling in six years. Degree apprentices now account for around 12% of all entrants at master’s level and nearly 6% at bachelor’s level in England.   The rapid expansion of degree apprenticeships matters. They open higher education to learners the conventional route does not reach and strengthen partnerships between universities and employers. But widening access is only the first step. The harder question is whether our current inclusion practices are ready for students whose learning sits across university and employment.  

Degree apprentices are structurally different

Degree apprentices often experience higher education differently from traditional students. They are employees as well as students, with a protected portion of their working hours set aside for ‘off-the-job’ training – learning that takes place outside their normal work duties. Where traditional students often experience belonging through campus life and the wider student community, apprentices build their sense of belonging across two worlds at once: university and workplace.  

These structural differences shape how everyday inclusion works in practice. For apprentices, organisation is not only about whether a course runs smoothly; it also depends on how university requirements fit with workplace responsibilities and protected study time. Support is not only about academic guidance; it also involves helping students connect theory, assessment and their workplace experience. Voice is not only about being asked for feedback; it is about whether feedback mechanisms reflect the realities of learning while working. Existing inclusive practices remain important, but they do not fully fit students whose learning sits across university and employment.  

What the student experience data shows

In the 2025 National Student Survey, degree apprentices rated their experience less positively than full-time students on six of seven themes. The largest gap was on ‘organisation and management’, at around 13 percentage points, suggesting particular challenges around course organisation and communication for apprentices. ‘Student voice’ also showed a clear shortfall, pointing to a gap in how their feedback is gathered and acted on. The differences remained after the results were adjusted for differences such as subject, age, sex, ethnicity and disability. Earlier research raises similar concerns. Nawaz and Edifor (2024) found that only 19% of apprentices felt highly integrated within their provider’s learner body, while nearly half felt their course was not held in the same esteem as traditional courses. Taken together, the findings suggest that current approaches to inclusion may not work as well for apprentices as they do for traditional students.

One model won’t fit all  

For universities, the practical message is that extending existing inclusion frameworks to cover apprentices is not enough. Drawing on research I am currently conducting, the findings suggest that inclusion needs to work on two levels. The first is what every student needs: good teaching, fair assessment, accessible resources, and responsive support. The second is what specific groups of students need, based on how they study and participate.  

For degree apprentices, this means recognising workplace knowledge, improving coordination between the apprentice, employer and university, setting schedules and deadlines around employment, and supporting apprentices’ study needs alongside work. For example, instead of asking apprentices to analyse a generic case study, an assessment could ask them to analyse a real problem or decision from their own organisation using the module’s concepts and methods. Programme organisation should also reflect the realities of full-time work. Universities could set a minimum notice period for changes to class times or deadlines, identify predictable workload peaks with employers and apprentices before the year begins, and offer a few assessment windows rather than relying mainly on individual extensions after a clash. Finally, inclusion needs to reach across university and workplace. Degree apprentices’ concerns often involve how learning is supported at work, not only the course. Therefore, training for workplace mentors should be part of the inclusive pedagogy, helping them understand protected study time, what the course expects, and how to support an apprentice through it.  

Designing inclusive practices for degree apprentices can benefit wider groups of students. Many distance learners, part-time students and other ‘non-traditional’ groups also study alongside work, caring responsibilities and other commitments outside the university. Together they make up over a fifth of UK higher education students. The scheduling flexibility introduced for apprentices balancing work and study, for example, can support a distance learner in full-time employment as well. This reflects the value of Universal Design for Learning, where designing with one group in mind can improve access for many others.  

So my question to colleagues across the sector is this: where does your institution’s approach to inclusion still fit traditional students better than apprentices, and what would it take to close that gap?

Reference:

Nawaz, R. and Edifor, E.E. (2024) Degree Apprenticeship: Voices from the Frontline: Impact, Policy and Good Practice Guide 2024. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Available here

Dr Lu Li’s is a university teacher in Accounting and Finance at Loughborough University. Her teaching and research focus on how curriculum design, assessment and student support can create more equitable learning experiences in higher education. She is a recipient of Loughborough University’s Early Career Teacher Award and serves on the School’s Athena Swan Self-Assessment Team, where she supports equality and inclusion work.