Behind the reviews: the realities of progress reviewers in degree apprenticeships

Laura Hogben

Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning2026https://doi.org/10.1108/heswbl-06-2025-0240article
AJG 1ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Purpose Regular progress reviews are just one of the funding requirements of the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA). The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into the lived experiences of degree apprenticeship progress reviewers (DAPR) and explore and make sense of the different challenges faced by these practitioners. Design/methodology/approach Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was employed to analyse 17 semi-structured interviews of participants from different English universities. Findings This research suggests that DAPR would benefit from strong identity formation, the development of which has been hampered by the plethora of job titles. The lack of job value congruence was a common theme, not just between DAPR and their employers but also between DAPR, apprentices, their managers and other colleagues involved with apprenticeships. Interpretation of the data strongly suggests that DAPR experience an uncomfortable juxtaposition between the compliance and coaching aspects of their role. Originality/value This study enhances apprenticeship literature with authentic first-hand accounts of practitioners' experiences and perspectives conducting progress reviews. The paper considers the challenges of this complex yet crucial role and the value of professional identity formation for these practitioners.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/heswbl-06-2025-0240

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{laura2026,
  title        = {{Behind the reviews: the realities of progress reviewers in degree apprenticeships}},
  author       = {Laura Hogben},
  journal      = {Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/heswbl-06-2025-0240},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Behind the reviews: the realities of progress reviewers in degree apprenticeships

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.