Effective delivery of degree apprenticeships (DA) in the built environment: the role of infrastructure in higher education institutions (HEI) and workplace

Degree apprenticeships (DAs) were introduced in 2015 as part of broader apprenticeship reforms shaped by the Richard Review (Richard, 2012), which criticised the fragmentation of the apprenticeship system and called for employer-led standards, simplified funding mechanisms and enhanced quality assurance. These reforms sought to strengthen the integration between industry and higher education (HE), creating the conditions for the development of degree-level apprenticeship pathways. DAs provide the apprentices with an opportunity to secure a funded bachelor's or master's degree whilst getting industry experience (UCAS, 2022). This is achieved through combining HE with on-the-job and vocational training (Carter and Tubbs, 2017).

The tuition fees for the apprentices are financed by an apprenticeship levy fund, which was introduced in 2017 and covers the entire cost, enabling students to complete a degree without incurring the burdensome debt typically associated with a traditional degree (Department for Education, 2016). According to BIS (2013) and Baker (2019), for the apprenticeship to be effective, all three stakeholders (student, HEI and the employer) need to sign a tripartite agreement to guarantee the commitment of each stakeholder to work together.

Apprentices are of great value to organisations as acknowledged by employers. According to Gaini (2021), 89% of business leaders in England who have apprentices have noticed that apprenticeships enable an organisation to proactively build its future. In fact, following government incentives, DAs have become the preferred option for many professions in the UK over the last few years including the construction industry (Ryley, 2016). It has become particularly popular amongst students because it allows students to gain experience and earn money whilst studying, making it a desirable option in the current economy. Another advantage is that most students will have a guaranteed job at the end of the DA and will have developed skills which will be useful in their future careers (NETAPS Foundation, 2023).

The construction industry is one of the largest sectors of the UK economy and provides a range of DAs such as architecture, building surveying, quantity surveying (QS) and construction management (CM) amongst others. DAs in the built environment (BE) are considered vital because they give students practical experience of what is taught at the university (UCAS, 2022). Degree apprentices have been found to require interest and assistance from the employer and HEI for the apprenticeship to be effective (Taylor-Smith et al., 2023). Therefore, this paper will investigate the current infrastructure available to support degree apprentices in the BE from the perspective of HEIs and workplaces, with the aim of enhancing the effective delivery of DAs. Having launched in 2015, DAs are an emerging concept within both HEI and workplaces. This suggests the need for continued research on the success, barriers and limitations of the infrastructure of DAs to enhance their delivery. In the context of this paper, ‘Infrastructure' refers to the support system that the HEI and workplace provide to degree apprentices.

It is noteworthy that there have been several studies on DA in the BE. Ahmed et al. (2022) explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HEI and DA considering the pandemic as one of the most disruptive global events to have occurred in recent times. This agrees with Corbera et al. (2020) on the need for reinvention of DAs in HEIs due to the challenges the education sector faced from the pandemic. Jallow et al. (2020) focused on how the pandemic affected the apprentice's off-the-job learning and end-point assessment (EPA) due to activities such as site visits not taking place, making the delivery of the DA challenging. In another study, Power-Mason et al. (2025) highlighted the challenges of rising regulatory pressures, financial constraints and the need for innovation confronting HE leaders and managers. On the other hand, Bravenboer (2016) investigated the significance of collaboration between HEIs and employers, as well as incorporating expertise on both sides throughout the process for student to obtain the most knowledge and to ensure that the DA is effectively delivered. Drawing from multiple disciplines, Quew-Jones (2023) investigated the viability of DA in the UK HEIs.

However, there appears to be a gap in the literature on the assessment of infrastructure in HEIs and the workplace to support the delivery of DAs in the BE with more studies focusing on the latter. Although, Quew-Jones and Rowe (2022) would have been suitable to address this gap, the focus was on how to enhance the DA curriculum (with no specificity to the BE) through work-based manager and mentors (WBMM) with less emphasis on HEI. Similarly, Konstantinou and Miller (2020) investigated work-integrated learning and its relevance to skills development in DA. Jones et al. (2022) investigated the role of employers in the DA-to-graduate transition. Additionally without reference to a particular context, Chadwick et al. (2024) highlighted the barriers to effective higher and degree levels apprenticeships. Also, using a systematic literature review, Horackova et al. (2024) investigated the challenges and implications of good practice in delivering the Chartered Manager Degree Apprenticeship.

These studies further suggest the need to begin to comprehensively explore the support available at both the workplace and most importantly, the HEI for the effective delivery of DA. To this end, the focus of this paper will be on the infrastructure provided to apprentices by HEIs and the workplace in the BE with the aim of identifying improvements that could be implemented. The importance of exploring the role of infrastructure provided by HEIs and the workplace is significant for identifying how improved collaboration could help in the overall progress of the apprentice and ensure successful completion. Additionally, the need to explore the current infrastructure to support DAs in the BE arises from the crucial role of apprenticeship in the skills development of construction artisans and in achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 8. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 delivers the literature review, followed by Section 3, which presents the methodology for the study. The findings and discussions are covered in Sections 4 and 5, respectively. Section 6 presents the conclusion and recommendations for future work.

DA is an educational route that enables students to complete a HE degree whilst being employed full-time. This allows the student to gain credit for work-based learning alongside the HEI studies. Several advantages of the route according to Carter and Tubbs (2017) are presented in Figure 1 (Carter and Tubbs, 2017). Daniel et al. (2019) explored the distinctions between DA and conventional educational pathways and noted that it involves a blend of work and studying, with apprentices typically attending university once a week. This is in contrast to full-time students who dedicate their time solely to studying. Also, unlike traditional degree programmes that require the student to complete a degree in three years for full-time or four years with an industry year, DA takes around three to six years to complete (UCAS, 2022).

The Institute for Apprenticeships (2023a) approved that a DA must include the following:

1. A contract of employment

2. Have an apprenticeship contract

3. Be paid at least minimum wage

4. Allowed 20% structured off-the-job training

5. Complete an EPA

6. Work a minimum of 30 h per week.

Originally, DA was introduced as a tool for economic growth. However, due to the evolution of DA in many fields such as engineering, business, law and construction (UCAS, 2022), DA is now perceived as a tool for enhancing social mobility and a valued way of upskilling the workforce. Rowe et al. (2017) argued that DA became increasingly popular as an opportunity to gain qualifications and experience simultaneously. Cavaglia (2022) explored the evolution of apprenticeships since 2015 and found that, although DAs are still an emerging pathway to obtaining a degree. The construction and planning sector has, in recent years, experienced one of the largest increases in DAs, whereas the retail sector which has seen a significant decline.

There are multiple stakeholders within the DA structure. These are the apprentice, the higher education institution (HEI), the employer, the government (Ofsted) and the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). The stakeholders are all equally vital to make the DA successful. Daniel et al. (2019) noted that for DA to be successful, there needs to be adequate and appropriate buy-in from the apprentice and the employer highlighting the importance of the stakeholders working together.

Dawson and Osborne (2019) submitted that the apprentice is the key stakeholder at the centre of the DA, who undoubtedly gains the most from the DA due to the apprenticeship levy and tuition-free education whilst gaining industry experience. As an apprentice, most of the working week is spent at the workplace. However, apprentices are required to spend a minimum of 20% of their time in off-the-job study or training which will be spent at the university for a DA student. This equates to around 30 h at work and 10 h on the apprentices' studies (UK Government, 2023a). Throughout the programme, the apprentice will complete HEI assessments (Williams et al., 2020) but also an end-point apprenticeship assessment as mandatory to signify the completion of the apprenticeship programme. When originally employed, the apprentice will sign an apprenticeship agreement and a commitment statement. This is significant to set out the expectations of the programme and the responsibilities of the apprentice that would result in a successful completion (Office for Students, 2018).

Employers have the responsibility of remaining in charge of the apprenticeship reform to ensure that the development and evolution of DA is right for business Williams et al. (2020). It is also significant for the government and employer to work together effectively. It is through this cooperation that apprenticeship programmes can be constantly improved. Additionally, the employer is a key stakeholder during the DA programme as it supports employees to develop skills and knowledge that are directly relevant to the field. This benefits the employer because the apprentice on completion will be a well-trained and highly skilled (UWL, 2023).

The HEI provides the learning component of the DA. The HEI has expectations set by the government. One of which is to provide qualified and competent teaching staff achieved by ensuring that staff are trained with the necessary contemporary industry knowledge for the apprenticeship standard. Also, the staff are encouraged to undertake continuous professional development (CPD) to ensure the apprentices are receiving the highest standard of teaching (UK Government, 2023b).

The IfATE was introduced in 2017 as a separate section of the Department for Education. The institute works with employers to develop, approve, review and revise apprenticeships and technical qualifications. Through this guidance from thousands of small and large employers, the IfATE delivers apprenticeships which are at the highest standard to help employers provide the required skills for the apprentices. The IfATE covers a range of occupations and sectors one being the BE industry (IfATE, 2023a).

In recent years, the government through the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted), started inspecting DA which had previously been in the remit of the Office for Students (UK Government, 2023a). Although the process of inspection may not necessarily be one that HEIs would choose to engage with, the inspections have the potential to lead to improvements in the delivery of DA. Additionally, the Ofsted report serves as an avenue to commend the HEI such as providing high-quality teaching and assessment practice. Furthermore, such a report can be helpful to spotlight good relationships between HEI and employers in both design and delivery which is essential to make the programme successful.

Within the BE, recruiting new employees is vital due to the ongoing labour shortage in the BE following Brexit (CITB, 2017). One way to achieve this is through the DA. According to Hernandez-March et al. (2009), the shortage of workers was exacerbated by the perceived knowledge and abilities of graduates leaving HE and the expectations and demands of businesses and employers. Shortly after, the conservative party in the 2015 manifest pledged to create 3 million new apprenticeships in England by 2020 to help bring in a strong workforce for the UK (Conservative Party, 2015). Originally only nine DA programmes were introduced which included: Surveying, Aerospace Engineering, Nuclear Scientist and Nuclear Engineering.

According to UCAS (2022), the main DAs in the BE are architecture, engineering, surveying and CM which are offered by different HEIs across the UK. For example, the University of Greenwich (UoG) provides a separate programme for traditional full-time students which lasts three years. In contrast, the DA programme is treated as a separate course which lasts between four to five years. Although the two programmes share modules, the DA programme also provides work-based (WB) modules (University of Greenwich, 2024). Similarly, London South Bank University (LSBU) provides a separate DA programme which provides the apprentice with surveying chartership accredited by the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). The LSBU programme has a longer duration than the traditional degree programmes and requires five and a half years to complete (LSBU, 2022). Likewise, the University of Westminster provides a DA programme that is fully accredited by CIOB and RICS and lasts five years (University of Westminster, 2023).

Dawson and Osborne (2019) noted that developing the infrastructure for DA is a critical component for delivering high-quality DAs which would result in achieving the expectations of government in producing work-ready graduates. Degree apprentices need to receive the best infrastructure throughout their study to succeed in the apprenticeship. Infrastructure means both tangible and intangible provisions to support the DA from enrolment in the apprenticeship programme through completion. In this context, it extends to completion of the EPA. Previous studies have focused on the infrastructure provision from the employer whilst there has been limited study on support from the HEI. Infrastructure from both parties includes work-based mentors and line managers, adequate training to meet the minimum 20% off-the-job element from the employer, whilst the HEI can provide support through effective course management, flexibility in the mode of delivery to increase access (Hughes and Saieva, 2021).

This section provides an overview of some of the infrastructures required of both the employer and the HEIs.

The workplace can support the apprentice by assigning the apprentice a workplace mentor which assures the apprentice settles into the assigned role and provides extra support in addition to that from the line manager. In addition, the mentor is expected to provide support for the academic work of the apprentice such as the work-based module (UK Government, 2023b). Implementing well-being services is also crucial in case the apprentice is struggling with mental health issues. This can be accessed through Work Mental Health Support Services for Apprentices provided by the Department for Work and Pensions or a private provider such as Health Assured which is a corporate health and well-being package available, with comprehensive support and easy access (Health Assured, 2023). Providing this service will help the apprentice both in the workplace and during their studies. Besides work and study support, employers are encouraged to provide the apprentice with regular performance reviews with set aims and goals to monitor progress and improve communication with the apprentice. Similarly, it is encouraged for the workplace to attend the review meetings of the apprentice facilitated by the HEIs to help their academic journey (UK Government, 2024).

Oloke et al. (2023) signposted some of the infrastructure provided by the employer that were not accessible during the pandemic. These include site visits; off-the-job training; face-to-face interaction with tutors and peers; and pastoral care amongst others. Corroborating this, Cavaglia (2022) reported that there was a dramatic decline in DA numbers following the pandemic. Recent government data indicated that apprenticeships have not yet recovered to pre-pandemic levels, highlighting the level of disruption the pandemic caused and the need for a resilient infrastructure for DAs to succeed.

Dawson and Osborne (2019) argued that for DAs to be effective, there must be a high level of collaboration amongst stakeholders, because a strong infrastructure will deliver high-quality DAs, creating work-ready graduates. Additionally, a key issue that DA in BE encounter is the delivery of the industry requirements within the curriculum. This could be resolved through an increased level of co-delivery between the employer and HEI, by introducing more work-based learning. Conceptualising a model for provider-employer collaborations in the curriculum design and delivery of QS DA programmes, Obi (2025) identified four collaborative stages, four practice areas, 14 focus actions and 12 enablers.

It is noteworthy that HEIs are providing various infrastructures to enhance the DA experience. A good example is the well-being services such as Support Though AccessAbility Retention and Transition (STAART) which is a disability and diversity focused initiative at the University of Greenwich that aims to support students with any disability or health condition (University of Greenwich, 2024). Other universities may also have in-house services like STAART or provide counselling services, medical support and tools and resources if an apprentice or any other student requires help (UCAS, 2018). Particularly for DA students, HEIs need to provide regular progress review meetings and sessions tailored to support preparation for the EPA. At the University of Suffolk (2022), it is a requirement to hold progress review meetings at least once every 10 weeks to meet the 12-weekly window in the funding rules and more frequently if needed. The HEI also supports the apprentice by providing high-quality lectures and work-based modules which have assignments that assess the apprentice and deepen their knowledge.

The literature review lays the foundation (for the empirical phase of this study) to gather perceptions of apprentices on the strength of the current infrastructure and the barriers being encountered in their apprenticeship journey. It would be interesting to explore current experiences around work-based module, EPA and reviewing meetings, teaching schedule and support and well-being and workload amongst others which are infrastructure provided by the HEI.

This study is underpinned by a realist philosophical position, recognising that apprentices' experiences of infrastructure and support are shaped by objective organisational structures within HEIs and workplaces, whilst simultaneously being interpreted through participants' subjective perceptions. This stance enables the study to capture both the existence of institutional support systems and the ways in which these are experienced by degree apprentices.

Methodologically, the study adopted a mixed-methods approach (Creswell, 2014), combining quantitative and qualitative techniques to provide both breadth and depth of understanding. The design followed a pragmatic orientation, whereby quantitative data offered measurable patterns of perceptions, whilst qualitative data provided explanatory insights. Structured survey items were informed by existing discussions within apprenticeship and HE literature (deductive orientation), whereas open-ended responses were analysed inductively to allow themes to emerge directly from participants' accounts (Saunders et al., 2012). This integration enabled a more comprehensive interpretation of infrastructure and support within the BE context.

A survey strategy was employed as it allows for the systematic collection of standardised data from a defined population to explore specific issues (Anand, 2022). A structured questionnaire was developed to examine degree apprentices' perceptions of infrastructure, conceptualised in this study as encompassing both institutional support (e.g. academic provision, well-being services) and workplace support (e.g. mentoring and practical exposure). The instrument consisted of both closed-ended and open-ended items (Hyman, 2016). Please refer to the  Appendix for a copy of the questionnaire.

The closed-ended section comprised Likert-scale items measured on a five-point scale ranging from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree”. These items assessed key dimensions of support, including academic delivery, work-based learning integration, well-being provision, mentoring and opportunities for practical engagement. The open-ended items invited participants to elaborate on their experiences, identify additional forms of support and suggest areas for improvement. To enhance the instrument's clarity and face validity, the questionnaire was pilot tested prior to distribution, resulting in minor refinements to wording and structure.

The study was conducted within a UK university offering DAs in CM and QS. The questionnaire link and QR code (Mentimeter platform) were distributed to the entire cohort of BE apprentices (N = 102), representing a census of the target population rather than a sampled subset. The institution was selected using convenience sampling, based on accessibility and proximity (Jager et al., 2017). Although this limits generalisability, it enables in-depth insight into a clearly defined educational context. Participation was voluntary, and a total of 57 valid responses were obtained, representing a response rate of 58.88%, which is acceptable for cohort-level descriptive research.

Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, with frequencies and percentages calculated for each Likert-scale item. Results were presented graphically to highlight trends in agreement and disagreement across institutional and workplace dimensions of support. The analysis was intentionally exploratory, aiming to map prevailing perceptions rather than establish causal relationships.

Qualitative data were derived from the open-ended responses, with 23 participants providing comments on HEI support and 29 on workplace support. These responses were analysed using thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006). The analytical process involved data familiarisation, initial coding, grouping of codes into broader themes and iterative refinement to ensure coherence and internal consistency. Themes were generated inductively, allowing participants' perspectives to shape the analytical structure. Representative quotations were incorporated to illustrate key themes and retain the authenticity of participants' voices.

The integration of quantitative patterns with qualitative insights facilitated methodological triangulation, enhancing the robustness and interpretive validity of the findings by corroborating trends with explanatory narratives.

Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection from the Faculty of Engineering and Science Research Ethics Committee (FREC) at the University of Greenwich (Reference: FES-FREC-ENG-23.03.09). Participants were provided with an information sheet and consent form, informed of their right to withdraw and assured of anonymity and confidentiality throughout the research process.

93% of respondents were QS apprentices whereas only 7% were CM apprentices out of the 57 respondents. This highlights that the majority of the results were concerning the perception of QS apprentices. The results showed that 62% of the students' DA lasted four years whereas only 38% of students' DA lasted five years. Moreover, out of the 57 respondents, 4% (two students) were currently in year 1, 9% (five students) in year 2, 44% (25 students) in year 3, 40% (23 students) in year 4 and 4% (two students) in year 5 showing that 84% of the respondents were in their third or fourth year of the DA. Having a high percentage of students towards the end of their DA gives a better perception of the delivery and infrastructure compared to students at the start of their programme.

The second section of the questionnaire was designed to establish the perceptions of the apprentices as regards the support from HEI. In addition to examining the current infrastructure, the participants were also required to provide recommendations on how the HEI could improve the delivery of DA.

1. Work-based module

Out of the 57 respondents, 55 attempted this question. A total of 47% of respondents indicated that they “strongly disagree”, “disagree” and “neutral” that the HEI provided enough support regarding the work-based module, whilst the other 53% answered positively that they “agreed” and “strongly agreed”.

1. End point assessment and review meetings

As shown in Figure 2, a total of 58% of respondents “agreed” and “strongly agreed” that the apprentices received enough support regarding the EPA and only 29% perceived the support as insufficient. Concerning timely review meetings, out of the 55 who responded to the question, a total of 66% “agreed” and “strongly agreed” that meetings were provided promptly, 15% were neutral, 16% disagreed and 4% strongly disagreed.

1. Teaching schedule and other support

In terms of a sufficient teaching schedule Figure 3 shows that a total of 58% of apprentices “agreed” and “strongly agreed” and only 20% “disagreed” and “strongly disagreed” that a sufficient teaching schedule was provided. The results highlighted that 56% of the apprentices “agreed” they have been provided sufficient help and 9% “strongly agreed” with the statement. Therefore only 34% of the respondents selected “strongly disagree”, “disagree” and “neutral” regarding the help provided by the HEI throughout their studies.

1. Well-being and workload

Figure 4 showed that only a total 11% of respondents “strongly disagreed” and “disagreed” with the HEI providing a sufficient well-being system, 33% were “neutral” on the statement and a total of 66% “agreed” and “strongly agreed”. Moreover, Figure 5 shows that a total of 60% of the respondents “agreed” and “strongly agreed” that the HEI provided a manageable amount of work and a total of 40% “strongly disagreed”, “disagreed” and were “neutral” regarding the topic.

1. Additional support and areas the HEI can improve

The questionnaire also allowed the respondent to mention other support systems by the HEI that were not included in the questionnaire. Out of the 57 participants, 23 responded to this section of the questionnaire. The dominant theme the 23 respondents mentioned was support from personal tutor and peers.

One respondent (R19) stated that:

Another student (R21) noted that:

As observed in the perception of the apprentice to delivery of the work-based module, nearly half of the respondents were not satisfied with its delivery.

One apprentice (R1) noted that:

Similarly, another apprentice (R12) stated:

It was suggested that the apprentices should not have exams in the work-based module because it is a self-taught module in which often apprentices struggle with the associated stress of exams. Despite being a self-study module, a large portion of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the HEI's support, indicating that the HEI should give more support for the module.

Although review meetings were typically positive and timely, one of the apprentices (R4) stated:

Regarding the teaching schedule, some of the apprentices noted that the current structure affects the apprentices' work negatively, suggesting that the HEI should consider the work–life and well-being of apprentices around future timetables.

One of the apprentices (R10) stated that:

First, the participants’ company type and size were obtained followed by the perception of the infrastructure provided by the workplace in terms of the DA and areas for improvement. Out of the 57 respondents, 53 answered the question on the company size. Notably 50% of the respondents worked for main contractors whereas the rest worked for a mixture of sub-contractors. As shown in Figure 6, a total of 49% of the respondents worked for larger companies that had over 251 employees. The other 51% of students worked for companies ranging from 0–250 employees, highlighting that majority of the apprentices worked for larger companies with good infrastructure as only 32% are employed by companies under 101 employees.

1. Workplace module and practical opportunities

Figure 7 shows that more than half of the apprentices were satisfied with support for work-based module, with a total of 77% expressing “agreement” and “strong agreement” with it. This means that only a total of 23% expressed “strong disagreement,” “disagreement,” and “neutrality” about this. Remarkably, no apprentices “strongly disagreed” regarding insufficient practical opportunities. Only 2% of the apprentices “disagreed”, 8% were neutral and a significant total of 91% “agreed” and “strongly agreed” that they had ample practical opportunities, such as site visits.

1. Well-being and mentor support

As presented in Figure 8, no student expressed a “strong disagreement” regarding their satisfaction with the well-being support provided. Only 6% “disagreed”, 13% were “neutral” and the remaining total of 81% “agreed” and “strongly agreed” with the statement. As illustrated in Figure 9, a total of 81% of the respondents also “agreed” and “strongly agreed” that they have been satisfied with the help provided by their workplace mentor, 13% were “neutral”, 6% “disagreed”. Similarly to well-being, none of the respondents “strongly disagreed”.

1. Additional support and areas for improvement in the workplace

Furthermore, the questionnaire allowed respondents to suggest other support systems provided by the workplace not included in the questionnaire. Out of the 57 respondents, only 29 responded to this section of the questionnaire. The three dominant themes identified by the apprentices were (1) support from colleagues, (2) review meetings and (3) additional training such as CPDs.

One of the apprentices (R12) stated that:

Another apprentice (R27) also revealed:

Additionally, the questionnaire captured how the workplace could improve the infrastructure for apprentices. The core themes the respondents highlighted were (1) support towards studies, (2) more time for assignments and (3) assessment support.

One apprentice (R13) stated that:

This was supported by another apprentice (R15) who indicated that the workplace should:

In summary, the findings provided useful information about the perceptions of apprentices of the support provided by both the HEI and the workplace. Whilst majority of the apprentices were satisfied with the infrastructure provided by the HEI, it was suggested that the work-based module can be improved. In addition to this is enhanced effective communication between the students and the HEI. Few of the students also raised concerns related to timetabling and assessment deadlines which need to be addressed to ensure a work–life balance for the apprentice. The apprentices appreciated support from the workplace through mentors and colleagues especially as it relates to well-being services and practical opportunities such as site visits. However, additional training such as CPDs were requested. Also, additional time during the working week to devote to studies and assignment completion was raised by some of the apprentices.

Following an extensive review of the findings, the following five themes as discussed hereafter were identified for discussion.

The general perception towards the support provided by the HEI was encouraging from the respondents. An infrastructure deemed adequate was the support provided for the EPA. The EPA is the final stage of an apprenticeship. It assesses whether the apprentice has gained the skills which were outlined in the apprenticeship standard (UK Government, 2024). Due to the importance of the EPA, it is vital the HEI continues to provide effective delivery of DAs from the start of the programme, this can be achieved through:

1. Ensuring the apprentice is familiar with the assessment format and grading criteria;

2. Creating mock exams based on the behaviours, knowledge and skills found in the EPA grading criteria;

3. Using the mock results to help the apprentice progress;

4. Wording and assessing all assignments with reference to the EPA grading criteria (UK Government, 2023b).

Corroborating this, the IfATE (2023b) suggested that using review meetings to help prepare for the EPA and ensuring the apprentice's welfare and well-being are enhanced are a priority throughout the process.

Another significant support provided to apprentices is progress review meetings, which are essential in ensuring that apprentices are on track with their learning and working successfully towards the completion of their DA. It is crucial for the review meeting to be a tripartite discussion between the stakeholders to cover all aspects of the apprentice's journey whilst on the programme (The University of Westminster, 2023). Chewter (2023) argued that review meetings help engage employers in off-the-job learning, connecting training with on-the-job tasks and providing ongoing support to apprentices and are to be seen as a check-in, not a chase-up. Furthermore, the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) stated that review meetings must be carried out every 8–12 weeks (UK Government, 2023a). To adhere to the EASFA policy the HEI needs to ensure that review meetings are arranged within the period to provide the apprentice with sufficient support. Implementing these support systems will improve the delivery of the DA and benefit all stakeholders.

Continuing to address the support provided by the HEI, the most prevalent suggestion from apprentices was improving the work-based (WB) module infrastructure to help deliver the DA more effectively. The importance of a work-based module cannot be overemphasised in the effective delivery of DA in HEI. The Quality Assurance Agency (2018) highlighted that work-based learning module is integral to the course of study and it is to be designed in partnership between the HEI, employer and student. Furthermore, it allows the apprentice to apply the knowledge covered in the scheduled teaching and learning activities. Konstantinou and Miller (2020) noted the significance of work integrated learning (WIL) modules in enhancing the ability of the apprentice to reflect on their practice whilst working and studying which has the potential to have a long-term benefit to their professional identity.

Similarly, Quew-Jones and Rowe (2022) suggested the need for mentors to be involved in negotiated learning which the work-based module affords. This perhaps aligns with Dawson and Osborne (2019), who argued for an industry designed curriculum coupled with a contractual obligation for stakeholders and the embedding of work-based learning strategies.

The module is to provide a vehicle for the apprentice to take responsibility for planning, achieving and recording their personal and professional development. Compared to traditional lectures, the workplace module is intrinsically different, and it is perceived as more demanding because it transfers the responsibility of the module firmly into the hands of the learner which some apprentices struggle with. To this end, it is crucial that the HEI provides sufficient guidance and ensures that all students have an equitable opportunity to succeed in the module. This can be achieved through the HEI providing a clear scope of the workplace learning tasks and implementing clear guidelines for the module.

Most of the apprentices indicated satisfaction with the well-being support provided by the HEI, suggesting that efforts in this area have been effective. However, there is still a need for improvement in areas such as workload management and well-being support, as indicated by the proportion of questionnaire respondents who voiced dissatisfaction or neutrality on the subject.

In the construction industry, poor mental health is rife. According to Glyn (2023), a total of 59% of construction workers who had completed a recent survey had taken sick leave due to their mental health. Similarly, Bennett (2018) supported this and indicated that mental health conditions cost the UK economy roughly £3.1 billion each year therefore it is crucial to provide sufficient support. These studies highlighted the importance of mental health and well-being. It is therefore incredibly important to support apprentices in the BE by both providing a manageable workload and making support systems easily accessible.

The IfATE (2023a), highlighted the importance of the workplace and the HEI in ensuring that apprentices' well-being needs are met. With some of the apprentices stating that they are not aware of the support systems provided, the HEI must make sure the support systems are visible by facilitating well-being events and workshops that are collaborative to encourage discussion so that the apprentices feel supported. Bennett (2018) argued that effective mental health support can help apprentices cope with pressure and succeed in their DA.

Regarding the workload, most apprentices asserted that assignment deadlines could be more spread out and to provide additional study days. This is because working and studying can be overwhelming. According to Kirwin (2023), DA offers the unique challenge of balancing work and education which can be demanding to students. However, DAs provide a valuable opportunity to develop time management and multitasking skills which are highly valued in the workforce. To succeed with the workload, the apprentice must maintain effective communication with both the HEI and the employer to avoid mental stress. Agreeing with this Minton and Lowe (2019) suggested for coherence between the employer and education provider to ensure that the apprenticeship is effective in meeting the needs of the employer and the apprentice. Cook et al. (2024) further noted that facilitating more robust networks and working patterns in apprentices working environment could be helpful for apprentices to develop resilience to external pressures. This would increase the chance of successfully completing the programme and reduce the potential for burnout thereby addressing the falling achievement and retention rates.

The analysis of additional support systems available to apprentices revealed key themes such as support from personal tutors, peers and workplace mentors. As previously discussed in the literature review, workplace mentors are a powerful support that helps apprentices settle into work and support them throughout their studies and work (UK Government, 2023a). This was confirmed in the questionnaire as multiple respondents indicated that personal tutors and workplace mentors have been very beneficial, highlighting that it is vital to have this support system for the DA to be delivered effectively. The Queen Mary University of London (2024) provides a variety of support systems to assist apprentices throughout their studies, such as specialist careers consultants, capturing feedback from previous degree apprentices on DA and how to succeed in the DA. In addition to this are support events to help guide the apprentices together. The suggestions from the respondents provided insights into areas where both the HEI and the workplace could enhance their support for apprentices, including communication and flexibility in study arrangements. According to Craig (2021), 42% of students from a student survey reported that they would appreciate more personalised one-to-one communications from their HEI. Therefore, it was suggested to use relevant communication channels and personalise the communication so that students receive authenticity and transparency throughout their DA to help them feel supported. It is crucial for the HEI and workplace to make these improvements as the Office for Students (OfS) in January 2024 confirmed it will invest £12 million to increase the number of Level 6-DA courses in English HEI (Office for Students, 2018). Therefore, is it vital for HEIs to have a sufficient infrastructure which delivers quality DAs.

Overall, the apprentices were satisfied with the infrastructure provided by their workplace for the DA. Despite the high level of satisfaction, some areas require improvement. The key areas to improve on included providing more time for assignments and delivering additional support and training for studies and tests. The most common proposal from the apprentices was to allow for additional time throughout the working week to devote to studies and assignment completion, especially when there are several deadlines in a short timeframe. This suggests that workplace mentors need to provide as much help as possible by sharing their knowledge and experience (UK Government, 2023a) and that during high-stress periods such as exam season, the workplace could attempt to allocate extra studying time for the apprentice.

The findings revealed a high degree of satisfaction regarding practical opportunities and support from workplace mentors. Despite high levels of satisfaction concerning practical opportunities, it is critical to ensure that the infrastructure supporting these opportunities is reliable. Particularly in the BE, practical experiences are vital for the apprentice to develop their skills. Following on from Oloke et al. (2023), DA programmes need to continue evolving infrastructure to provide smooth delivery regardless of the circumstances to avoid the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moreover, the IfATE (2023a) argued that a good relationship encourages the apprentice to speak up when they are struggling and need support. The workplace can create positive relationships through regular catch-ups and providing a healthy work environment so that the apprentice can manage workload. Therefore, it is imperative for the apprentice and their line manager to have a good relationship. According to Barnes (2023), it is critical to establish a support system for apprentices that includes assistance such as regular check-ins and mentoring as it enhances the apprentice's studies and helps integrate them into the company. Despite the positive perception of the workplace infrastructure, it is crucial for the workplace to be constantly evolving so the DA is delivered effectively for all stakeholders.

This study set out to evaluate the delivery of DAs in the BE by examining apprentices' perceptions of infrastructure within HEIs and workplaces. The findings demonstrate that whilst the overall model of delivery is regarded positively, the effectiveness of DA programmes is uneven across institutional and workplace contexts. Workplace provision was consistently perceived as supportive, especially in relation to mentoring, practical exposure and well-being, whereas institutional support, most notably the work-based module and aspects of communication and timetabling, requires further strengthening. The work-based module emerged as the most significant area of concern. Although intended to integrate academic and professional learning, apprentices reported insufficient guidance and clarity from HEIs. This suggests that the challenge lies not in the existence of infrastructure, but in its coordination, visibility and responsiveness to apprentices' dual academic and employment commitments. Without structured academic scaffolding and clearer communication, the intended integration between university and workplace learning becomes strained. The findings also underscore the importance of practical learning opportunities within the BE sector. Apprentices placed strong value on site visits, mentoring relationships and workplace feedback. These elements were central to their perception of programme effectiveness. However, the disruption caused by external shocks such as the COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in the current DA infrastructure, particularly its limited flexibility. This highlights the need for adaptive systems capable of sustaining practical engagement during periods of disruption.

Another critical insight concerns the EPA. Apprentices emphasised the importance of continuous preparation rather than isolated support towards the end of the programme. Integrating EPA guidance throughout the curriculum may therefore strengthen preparedness and reduce anxiety associated with assessment. Collectively, the findings indicate that the success of DAs in the BE is contingent upon coherent collaboration between HEIs and employers. Where communication is transparent, mentorship is structured and academic expectations are aligned with workplace realities, apprentices report positive experiences. Conversely, where coordination is weaker, dissatisfaction emerges.

This study contributes to the literature by demonstrating that infrastructure within DAs should be conceptualised not merely as provision, but as the alignment between institutional systems and apprentices' lived experiences. The findings reinforce the need for more integrative and relational perspectives in examining apprenticeship delivery, particularly in professionally oriented disciplines such as the BE.

The study also highlights the importance of adopting mixed-methods approaches in apprenticeship research, as the integration of quantitative trends with qualitative insights enables a more nuanced understanding of learner experiences. However, the relatively small and context-specific sample underscores the need for further empirical research across multiple institutions to enhance generalisability.

Future research should prioritise comparative studies across HEIs, disciplines and regions to identify structural variations in DA delivery. Expanding the sample to include a more balanced representation of CM and QS apprentices would allow for programme-specific analysis. In addition, incorporating longitudinal designs and the perspectives of alumni would provide deeper insights into how infrastructure influences long-term professional outcomes. Such research would strengthen the evidence base required to inform policy and institutional practice.

The findings offer several actionable implications for both HEIs and employers involved in delivering DAs within the BE.

For HEIs, there is a clear need to:

1. Strengthen the design and delivery of work-based modules through clearer guidance, structured academic support and improved alignment with workplace activities

2. Embed EPA preparation throughout the curriculum rather than concentrating support at the final stage

3. Enhance communication channels and timetabling flexibility to better accommodate apprentices' dual roles

For employers, the study highlights the importance of:

1. Providing structured and consistent mentoring support

2. Ensuring access to meaningful practical experiences, including site visits and project engagement

3. Offering protected study time and flexible workload arrangements during academically intensive periods

At a broader level, the findings indicate that as investment in DAs continues to expand, ensuring coordinated, responsive and adaptive infrastructure will be critical to sustaining programme quality, apprentice satisfaction and retention.

This study is limited to a single UK institution offering BE DAs, which may restrict the generalisability of the findings to other institutional or regional contexts. Although the sample represents a census of the defined cohort, it was dominated by QS apprentices, limiting comparative insights across disciplines. Furthermore, the study relies on self-reported perceptions captured at a single point in time and therefore does not reflect longitudinal changes in experience or objectively measured outcomes.

Future research should extend the scope to multiple HEIs across the UK to capture regional and institutional variation in DA delivery. Comparative studies incorporating a broader disciplinary mix and longitudinal perspectives would provide more robust insights into programme effectiveness. Including the perspectives of former apprentices would further enhance understanding of the long-term impact of infrastructure on professional development.

Overall, this study affirms that whilst the DA model in the BE is functioning effectively in many respects, its sustainability and credibility depend on continuous refinement of institutional and workplace infrastructure. As investment in DAs increases, ensuring structural coherence and responsiveness will be essential to maintaining programme quality and supporting apprentices' academic and professional advancement.

Title of project: effective delivery of degree apprenticeship (DA) in built environment: The role of infrastructure in higher education institutions (HEI) and workplace

Name of Researcher:

This questionnaire is to explore the current infrastructure that degree apprentices are receiving from the workplace and higher education institute. Within this questionnaire infrastructure refers to support system.

To be completed by the participant.

1. I have read the information sheet about this study

2. I have had an opportunity to ask questions and discuss this study

3. I have received satisfactory answers to all my questions

4. I have received enough information about this study

5. I understand that I am/the participant is free to withdraw from this study:

6. At any time (until such date as this will no longer be possible, which I have been told)

7. Without giving a reason for withdrawing

I understand that my research data may be used for a further project in anonymous form, but I am able to opt out of this if I so wish.

Contact details if you require any assistance

This project is supervised by (including University e-mail address):

Name:

Email:

Telephone:

Researcher's contact details (including University e-mail address):

Name:

Email:

Do you consent to this survey following the information from the previous page?

Yes

No

• 1. Which of the following categories apply to you?

  • A. Degree apprentice

  • B. Employer

  • C. University staff

  • D. Other

• 1B. If previously answered others, please specify.

• 2. Which of the following categories apply to you?

  • A. Quantity surveying student

  • B. Construction management student

• 3. Year of study?

  • A. Year 1

  • B. Year 2

  • C. Year 3

  • D. Year 4

  • E. Others

• 3B. If previously answered others, please specify.

• 4. If you have completed your degree apprenticeship how many years since completion?

  • A. 1–3 years

  • B. 4–7 years

  • C. 7+ years

• 5. Which Higher Education Institute do you attend?

• 6. How long is your degree apprenticeship programme?

  • A. Four years

  • B. Five years

For the following statements please kindly indicate your level of agreement with the following questions

• 7. Your Higher Education Institute has provided you with enough support in regard to the workplace-based module

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 8. Your Higher Education Institute has provided you with enough support in regard to preparation for the EPAs

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 9. Your Higher Education Institute provided you with timely progress review meetings

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 10. Your Higher Education Institute provided you with a sufficient teaching schedule that accommodates your workplace learning

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 11. Your Higher Education Institute provided you with sufficient help throughout your studies

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 12. Your Higher Education Institute provided you with a sufficient well-being support system

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 13. Your Higher Education Institute has given you a manageable amount of work

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 14. Your Higher Education Institute has done enough to support degree apprenticeship students

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 15. What other support is available or currently being provided by your Higher Education Institute not covered in this questionnaire?

• (Explain in detail)

• 16. How could the Higher Education Institute improve the infrastructure for the degree apprenticeship?

(Explain in detail)

• 17. What type of construction company do you work for?

• 18. What is the company size (number of employees)?

  • A. 0–50

  • B. 51–100

  • C. 101–150

  • D. 151–250

  • E. 251+

For the following statements please kindly indicate your level of agreement with the following questions

• 19. Your workplace has provided you with a support system during your degree apprenticeship

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 20. You have been satisfied with the work-based module (relevant to work/university content)

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 21. Your workplace has provided you with enough support in regard to the work place module

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 22. Your workplace has provided you with enough practical opportunities such as site visits

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 23. Your workplace provided you with adequate well-being support

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 24. Your workplace mentor has been available when needed and helped guide you throughout your studies and work

  • A. Strongly disagree

  • B. Disagree

  • C. Neutral

  • D. Agree

  • E. Strongly agree

• 25. What other support is available or currently being provided by your workplace not covered in this questionnaire?

(Explain in detail)

• 26. How could the workplace improve the infrastructure for the degree apprenticeship?

(Explain in detail)

Thank you for taking part!