This blog has been hard to write – so many perspectives to consider, issues to distil and questions to articulate, but they’re important so bear with me while I try to explain.

Do you know the difference between a Higher, a National Progression Award (NPA) and a Foundation Apprenticeship (FA)?

No need to panic if not as, for this blog, it’s their similarities that are important.

Potentially, all three learning programmes could be deemed to have the same level of difficulty as they are credit rated at level 6 on the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). They could also all earn those successfully completing them the same number of SCQF credit points – 24 (one SCQF credit point equals 10 notional hours of learning).

How SCQF level 6 qualifications are structured and recognised

All Scottish Highers are awarded 24 SCQF credit points, but some NPAs carry fewer while FAs carry more. All three are potential programme types on offer in fifth and sixth year in Scottish schools and, as of April 2026, there are 735 level 6 programmes on the SCQF Register.

In addition to differing credit values, some programmes must also meet specific design principles to be classified as a particular type of qualification – a Higher, for example, typically requires an externally marked exam.

Others have no such set criteria and credit rating against SCQF level descriptors has enabled them to be assigned a level on the SCQF and, through doing so, built credibility, confidence and recognition of attainment in a way which previously wasn’t possible.

SCQF qualifications: Freedom, flexibility and choice

The variety of programmes on the register is vast and caters for interests as diverse as E‑sports, classic ballet and Scottish Studies, through to Preparation for HE (all are 24‑credit SCQF level 6 courses – see more examples below).

Many of these are often referred to as ‘alternative level 6 qualifications’ (alternative to a traditional Scottish Higher qualification, even though they may carry fewer SCQF credit points). They are offered to senior phase pupils in our secondaries and the range of choices are far from those on my own 1990s school options forms.

Increased personalisation and options can be very motivating for young people, indeed for any learner, but freedom, flexibility and choice present other challenges, particularly when it comes to university entry.

The value of alternative qualifications

These courses have intrinsic value and often practical relevance in the workplace: one pupil told me recently that they secured a job in Costa Coffee because they had completed their SCQF level 5 Barista Award in school.

The majority of learning programmes aren’t designed with university entry in mind. However, when we start delivering them in schools, we all want to get it right for those pupils undertaking them, especially those who are applying to university and, therefore, need to know whether alternative qualifications at SCQF level 6 will be considered currency for entry or not.

Will SCQF level 6 alternative qualifications allow university entry?

If a learning programme has been credit rated at SCQF level 6 and carries 24 credit points (as a Higher does), should it be considered ‘equivalent’ to a Higher as an accepted qualification for university entry? And if not, why not?

Is the level of difficulty someone can cope with (which is what an SCQF level tells us) what universities need to know to determine that individual’s ability to succeed on a degree course? Or is sitting an exam in the traditional sense a fundamental measure or gauge of degree potential? Or is the type of assessment not as important as the requirement that it is marked externally (not by your own teacher)?

Once core curriculum aligned qualifications have been attained (e.g. Physics and Maths are usually required Highers for Engineering degrees), what else determines degree readiness as few (if any) universities only ask for 2 Highers for entry to a degree? Do the other 1, 2 or 3 Highers normally required indicate an individual’s ability to work at a certain level of difficulty and, if so, could this also be demonstrated through attainment of an alternative 24-credit, SCQF level 6 qualification?

Putting equivalency of SCQF level 6 in the spotlight

Unfortunately, I can’t answer these questions but I can raise them, and my role at Scotland’s Community of Access and Participation Practitioners (SCAPP) affords me the opportunity to set up online discussions and to invite key stakeholders along to probe important questions like these. We did this at an initial webinar on this topic in January, but it was clear that more stakeholders representing different organisations and perspectives were needed in the virtual room to try and answer these questions and explain the complexities further.

There were admissions officers, careers advisers, teachers and widening participation practitioners present, but we would love to have Qualifications Scotland and Education Scotland representatives among others in attendance at a follow-up session.

The challenges of SCQF level 6 alternative qualifications

Some of the issues and challenges raised at the initial webinar include:

• Learners, parents, teachers and advisers can find it hard to keep track of universities’ entry criteria as these vary not just by university but course by course, and some courses and universities will recognise an alternative SCQF level 6 qualification for entry while others will not.

• Universities are autonomous institutions free to set their own entry criteria, so there is no requirement for them to adopt a blanket policy on accepting FAs, NPAs or other SCQF level 6, 24 credit point qualifications for entry onto their degrees.

• Many universities will consider alternative SCQF level 6 qualifications in the holistic context of an individual’s application, but sometimes applicants incorrectly describe these on their UCAS forms, so it can be difficult to assess their merit.

All of these factors contribute to the challenges presented by alternative SCQF level 6 qualifications.

What does this mean for widening access?

Does uncertainty about the recognition of a qualification create an additional barrier for university applicants from widening‑access backgrounds, potentially compounding the difficulties they already face?

I don’t know the answer to this either, but it’s where my professional interest in this topic lies.

Reflection and next steps

Scrolling through the SCQF Register, I think I would have loved the level 6 Achieving Excellence in Sport 24-credit qualification (if it had existed in 1998 and been on offer to me). But, as it’s not a Higher, would it have affected my chances of getting into university, even though the Higher Music I did in S6 was no more relevant in terms of curriculum alignment to the Arts degree I was applying for? The SCQF level 6 Preparation for HE course would have been infinitely more useful but, again, would it have counted towards ‘getting me in’, despite there being no doubt it would have helped me ‘get on’ well in my studies once there?

If we can all agree, which I think we can, that we want university applicants to make well informed options choices, knowing the currency of alternative SCQF level 6 qualifications when it comes to admissions criteria, then a discussion on how to move closer to achieving this should be had by all those involved in the writing, delivery and credit rating of, as well as those advising and participating in, these programmes.

Join the follow-up conversation online on Thursday, 28 May, from 3pm to 4.15pm. Find out more and sign up here.

To keep in the loop, sign up to the SCAPP mailing list.

Patricia Anderson is a former secondary teacher and current Development Manager for SCAPP (Scotland’s Community of Access and Participation Practitioners).