English universities’ caution about the LLE is hardly surprising

The recent news that 130 providers have been approved to offer modules under England’s lifelong learning entitlement (LLE) has been a long time in the making. It’s encouraging to see progress after several years of uncertainty and a lukewarm pilot scheme, but there are still a few issues to iron out to see the scheme reach its potential.

Some coverage of the announcement suggested surprise at low university participation: eight out of the 20 English Russell Group universities, and less than half of Universities UK’s membership. However, we see this as a strong start given the difficult financial context of the sector and outstanding questions around what type of learner the LLE will best serve – and how the LLE framework sits alongside existing flexible provision for adult learners.

The central question for the LLE is learner demand. A pilot scheme in 2021-22 saw four out of five courses failing to launch owing to insufficient demand from students, with only 125 enrolments across 17 courses – in stark contrast to the expected 2,000 enrolments across 100 courses. You could generously suggest that given the cost-of-living crisis hard on the heels of the Covid crisis, it could have been a case of bad timing. But, a second, more recent trial (costing £5 million) fared only marginally better, reaching just a fifth of its recruitment goal. With a 2026 poll by the Higher Education Policy Institute showing that only 12 per cent of the public were aware of LLE, there remains little evidence that awareness or demand is increasing.

The recent public debate over the fairness of student loan repayment conditions may not help either. Opening the student loan book to high-quality flexible, modular learning is at the heart of the LLE framework, but in a tricky economic climate how many people will be prepared to take on this personal debt? For those already in employment, why not instead use the Growth and Skills Levy (GSL) – soon to replace the Apprenticeship Levy – to upskill and retrain, thereby avoiding personal debt and guaranteeing the skills that your employer wants?

There’s also a question about how much universities are able to invest when the state of the sector’s finances is a universally recognised challenge and providers of all shapes and sizes are making efficiencies and examining every budget line. It’s no surprise that although they may support the concept, institutions aren’t racing to set up new courses or transform provision at scale.

Of course, most UK degree courses are already modular and credit-based. But these sit within the academic coherence of a full degree programme rigorously designed to build progression and depth of learning across a cohort. Offering those modules completely unbundled from their course would result in a stop-start learning process that sold learners short.

However, we shouldn’t undersell how much flexible learning universities are already providing for adult learners. Lifelong learning is something that universities are already embracing, and there is plenty of goodwill and intent to make it a success so more people can benefit from university education in many forms. A vast range of activity across Russell Group universities fulfils the intentions of lifelong learning, if not the eligibility criteria of the LLE funding framework – from degree apprenticeships to targeted continuing professional development (CPD).

The University of Oxford’s lifelong learning institute, for instance, offers everything from data science to diplomacy with a wide range of short courses and online modules; UCL and the University of Nottingham deliver apprenticeships in priority skills areas like health, engineering and computing; and King’s College London provides upskilling opportunities through its professional education offer, including co-designed courses with King’s Health Partners. With financial pressures unlikely to ease soon, it’s likely many universities are focusing on existing successful provision rather than embarking on significant scaling-up of modular learning without evidence of demand.

Moreover, Russell Group universities are well placed, given their existing strong relationships with employers, to make education more responsive to economic needs and to develop bespoke modules at pace – if sufficient funding is there to support it. This could be part of the government’s solution to the growing number of NEETs: people post-16 who are not in education, employment or training.

But if the LLE is to substantively change how England learns, there will need to be a significant cultural shift in how learners, institutions, government and business approach education. So far, it’s unclear who should drive that.

What we need is a clearer understanding of learner demand, better alignment with policy initiatives like the GSL, and funding incentives for providers to curate high-quality modules. Only then are we likely to see the LLE fulfil its potential to be transformative for adult learners.

Jamie Roberts is policy manager at the Russell Group.