"It’s all about consistency, doing the right work and doing it with the right people..."
Project-based learning is widely known for helping young people develop broad-based, interdisciplinary life skills that complement their academic education. One established example of this approach is the Extended Project Qualification (EPQ). Originally developed as part of the 14-19 Diplomas – and now the only element of that programme still in place – the EPQ holds particular significance for me, as working on the Diplomas was my very first job in the Department for Education. But who benefits from it and how? With support from the Nuffield Foundation, researchers Dr Carol Brown and Professor Helen Walkington at Oxford Brookes University set out to answer these questions. Their findings, unveiled at a recent webinar, paint a complex picture – one I was happy to reflect on as part of the discussion panel.
The research was rigorous: a literature review, quantitative analysis of National Pupil Database data, geospatial mapping of measures around deprivation and outcomes, and qualitative interviews with EPQ providers and student focus groups. Issues investigated included institutional and student characteristics (attainment, sex, ethnicity, the impact of Covid-19), to inclusive practice and barriers to participation. This revealed stark inequalities in EPQ provision and outcomes, with geographic location and school type playing major roles. Overall, only 11% of students took up EPQ at Key Stage 5. Of these, 21% came from independent schools and just 6% from Further Education. Uptake was significantly higher among students from less deprived areas and among white and female students. In terms of outcomes, those with higher prior attainment performed better at KS5 when also taking an EPQ.
Using geospatial mapping, the research identified major deserts in EPQ provision, especially in deprived urban areas. The West Midlands, for example, showed extensively low uptake, with under 5% of eligible students taking the EPQ. However, smaller but more affluent areas, such as Cambridge, achieved 20-50% uptake. Interestingly, for students with the lowest prior attainment, Key Stage 4 EPQ had a slight negative impact on their Key Stage 5 grades. But as the researchers explained, the EPQ offers benefits beyond grade outcomes alone. Despite a complex picture around provision, the research found that the EPQ improved student outcomes beyond mere grades, boosting information literacy, research skills and self-confidence, and shaping young people’s aspirations for future work and study. Crucially, it also supports reduced university grade offers, lowering barriers to admission.
Compared with qualifications like BTECs and A-levels, EPQs also offer a more empowering learning style. Driven by personal interests, students own their research and can produce more creative outputs than simply essay-style assessments. And benefits are not just for students – teachers reported enriched professional development, marked by the shift from traditional ‘chalk and talk’ models of teaching and learning to more interactive mentor-mentee-style approaches. The researchers identified particular barriers to access for disadvantaged students. Limited access to resources, digital tools and journals, as well as reduced cultural capital in terms of home support and external networks, all played a role. Broader barriers for those from less affluent backgrounds included lengthy commutes, caring and work responsibilities which contribute to a ‘leaky pipeline’ of early dropouts.
The research offers recommendations for reducing inequalities and barriers to access, suggesting that inclusive approaches could help EPQs deliver a strong sense of belonging across 16 to 19 provision. In terms of possible solutions, schools and colleges highlighted the importance of smoothing the way for more targeted support mechanisms and so-called ‘inclusivity by design’. Namely, embedding the EPQ more deeply and consistently across the curriculum.
Panel reflections
Professor Mary Richardson (UCL) welcomed the research’s big picture view of EPQ access nationwide, noting that the findings were not entirely surprising. She suggested that deprivation makes delivering the EPQ more challenging, while also creating the very lack of confidence and belonging that it could help to address, especially among girls. She suggested that the EPQ’s value needs to be far better communicated.
Dr Emma Thompson (University of Southampton) echoed that schools serving disadvantaged students rarely offer the EPQ. She called for clearer funding and inclusivity, but warned that these cannot be piecemeal. She argued that the EPQ should be mandatory, not merely an entitlement, and that it needs senior leadership buy-in to succeed. This also means placing project-based learning at the heart of educational strategy.
I believe the EPQ presents a real opportunity to link what and how young people learn directly to the skills that employers consistently say they wish to see in the labour market. This matters for equity, as well. Failing to provide young people from deprived backgrounds with these critical skills means they will appear less attractive to employers, further entrenching existing inequalities. This exceptional research fills a significant gap in evidence around the impact of EPQs and project-based learning. While there are always hurdles to overcome, I see this research contributing to a significant step-change.
"The Extended Project Qualification: An Opportunity for all?" was funded by the Nuffield Foundation. You can watch the full launch webinar here.