In 2020, the first of the government’s T levels, the technical alternative to A levels, will begin to be taught in UK colleges.

T levels are seen as part of the answer to our unbalanced education system, which is churning out far too many people with academic qualifications and not enough with the technical skills that employers are crying out for. In other words, skills that are essential in solving our ongoing productivity challenges.

The fact that the education system is in need of significant reform is not in doubt. Our recent People Power research found that nine out of 10 employers are already struggling to recruit the skilled people they need, with 45 per cent stating that the education system needs to be better aligned to employer needs. As Brexit looms on the horizon, the UK’s ability to fill jobs with home-grown talent is more important than ever.

A great idea in principle

The problem - as we have seen with apprenticeships - is that a great idea in principle doesn’t always work in practice. We are now 18 months in from the introduction of the apprenticeship levy and the majority of it remains unspent, the number of people starting an apprenticeship has decreased, and you don’t have to look hard to find an employer willing to say that the system doesn’t meet their needs. Not a very auspicious start.

So what has been the issue? In a nutshell, the government didn’t work effectively enough to define what success should look like from the beginning. Instead an arbitrary number of young people starting apprenticeships was deemed to indicate success. Using a three million target (which is highly unlikely to be met), rather than defining what is high-quality in the eyes of employers and apprentices, has seen poor engagement across the board. This, in turn, has led to lots of criticism as businesses struggle to see the value.

But have we learned from previous mistakes when it comes to the implementation of T levels? It doesn’t seem so. To date, no clear measures of success have been published by the Department for Education. We’re only told that T levels will be a gold standard or should rival Germany’s technical education system, but not what it means in practice.

What is success?

So what should success look like? Is it getting a higher proportion of students into vocational university courses, apprenticeships or work? Is it the ability to demonstrate longer term career progression for students? Is it about better meeting labour market needs and training more young people in careers where there are skills shortages? Is it embedding workplace skills into the curricula so young people can hit the ground running when they start work? Or perhaps it’s all, or none, of the above - we simply don’t know. Instead, we’re left with vague, ambiguous soundbites on which to hang the fate of the nation’s education system.

One thing is for certain: without extremely clear measures of success and the availability of hard data, it’s going to be difficult to persuade parents and teachers that T levels are a good option for young people. Equally, we must provide employers with proof of their stamp of quality - and that they’re worth the lengthy work placements.

It is an oversight by the government not to run a pilot for the T levels, with a longer phased introduction across sectors. Hurrying them in won’t do anyone any favours. This is a huge change and it is crucial that we get it right rather than risk damaging the T Levels brand before it has even begun. The headlong rush into very tight deadlines seems a costly, high-risk strategy. Evidence of this is shown by the DfE’s permanent secretary, the top civil servant in the department, warning that it will be a challenge to have the first three T levels ready by 2020.

Product testing

We need a baseline which allows the education system to understand where we need to move from and to. I believe the government should consider carrying out an A/B test between the pilot T levels and a similar well-regarded established qualification, such as BTEC and the City & Guilds Technicals. This would allow us to see which qualifications perform better in the real world against agreed success measures. Any business worth its salt tests products before releasing them to market, so why are we not testing a product that will potentially impact the lives of hundreds of thousands of young people?

It might seem surprising that someone who heads an organisation that, if successful, stands to benefit from T levels would be calling for such rigour. I truly believe that T levels could put professional and technical education back on the map if they are successful. But this will only be achieved if they are implemented properly to a gold standard widely understood by all.

I will be writing to the education secretary in the next few weeks to ask him to define what the success measures are. If we don’t understand this in these important early stages, we risk damaging T levels before they’re even ready to be taught. Which will mean consigning professional and technical education to be a second choice for decades to come. In the current economic climate, we cannot afford to do this.

Chris Jones is chief executive of City & Guilds Group