Admissions: Are your admissions processes DLA-ready?

Use this self-assessment checklist to evaluate how well your admissions processes support degree-level apprenticeships (DLAs). Grounded in local and international best practice, it helps TEOs and employers design systems that are fair, flexible, and fit for purpose.

Self-Assessment Checklist: Admissions for Degree-Level Apprenticeships

This self-assessment checklist is designed to support tertiary education organisations (TEOs), employers, and system leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand who are developing or evaluating admissions processes for degree-level apprenticeships (DLAs). DLAs combine paid employment with academic study, offering a powerful pathway into professional roles—particularly in sectors like construction and infrastructure.

Effective admissions processes are essential to ensure DLAs are equitable, efficient, and aligned with both employer needs and academic standards. This checklist distils insights from New Zealand pilots and international case studies into a series of reflective questions, helping you assess your organisation’s readiness and identify areas for improvement.

Each question includes a brief explanation to guide implementation. The checklist covers ten focus areas: policy alignment, employer engagement, learner equity, TEO systems, recruitment, induction, monitoring, global comparisons, tools, and contingency planning.

Use this tool to build robust and inclusive admissions pathways that work for learners, employers, and education providers alike.

A: Employer–TEO Collaboration

The core innovation of degree apprenticeships is that they are employer-led and provider-supported. Unlike traditional degrees, where learners enrol independently, DLAs are predicated on a three-way relationship between learner, employer, and education provider. This theme examines whether employers and TEOs work as equal partners in designing entry criteria, selecting candidates, and setting expectations for the learning journey.

Why does this matter? Because apprentices are simultaneously employees and students. If either party employer or provider is sidelined in the admissions process, the result can be mismatched expectations, unclear responsibilities, or uneven learner preparedness. Dual admissions systems, where employers lead hiring and TEOs confirm academic readiness, help ensure that both practical and academic requirements are met.

A good example comes from Queen Mary University of London, where degree apprenticeship offers are only confirmed after both employer and university have approved the applicant. In New Zealand, this model was mirrored in the BEngTech pilot in infrastructure asset management, where local councils identified staff for upskilling, and the TEO verified readiness for degree-level study. Effective collaboration means co-developing outreach materials, using shared interview panels, and jointly delivering orientation ensuring alignment from the very first point of contact.

A-1: Have admissions criteria been co-designed with input from both employers and the TEO?

Admissions criteria should be designed collaboratively to reflect both academic and workplace needs. These requirements need to cover school leavers and experienced candidates without formal qualifications in an inclusive and seamless way.

A shared understanding of the academic requirements (university entrance, any additional specific academic requirements and any alternative requirements), and the employer’s expectations of the candidate (which might include technical and behavioural skills) is critical.

Allowing experienced candidates without formal qualifications to access degree-level training is an essential part of the process. Making sure that employers and the TEO have thought purposefully about how the academic and employee selection criteria fit together is an important foundation for the apprenticeship experience. Apprenticeship standards can be an important reference point for these discussions, particularly when thinking about the non-technical skills that a candidate will need to demonstrate.

A-2: Is there a dual admissions process where employers select and TEOs confirm academic readiness?

Dual admissions ensure that both employers and education providers approve a candidate’s readiness and suitability. Employers may want to take the lead in recruitment and application processes (see below) and will, in any event, have the final decision about who they employ. Making sure that there is a structured process to understand how employer expectations interact with academic requirements is essential.

TEOs and employers will need to think about what support they need and how best to arrange that support (see Is your organisation ready for DLAs?). For example, some TEOs here and overseas offer resources to employers and can sometimes step into the HR function, while some employers, particularly larger ones, will want to manage the process themselves to the greatest extent possible.

A-3: Is a joint offer letter or coordinated notification process in place for successful candidates?

Also important is the way outcomes of this process are communicated to the learner. A joint offer letter or coordinated notification process helps reduce confusion and ensures clarity from day one. Rather than receiving separate or conflicting communications, the successful applicant should be provided with a unified confirmation, ideally including a formal training agreement, that sets out the role, the academic pathway, and the mutual responsibilities of all parties.

This becomes especially important when dealing with rolling intakes or complex funding arrangements, where timely coordination affects enrolment, employment start dates, and student support activation.

A-4: Have tri-partite training agreements been developed and signed before programme start?

Tri-partite training agreements are a critical tool for DLAs, formally capturing the shared responsibilities of the learner, the employer, and the TEO. In New Zealand, there is already long-standing experience with such agreements in sub-degree apprenticeships, where they are used to establish the scope of training, assessment responsibilities, and the obligations of each party. For DLAs, the same principle applies but with added complexity. The agreement must reflect not only workplace training commitments but also degree-level academic requirements, including study workload, support expectations, and how workplace experience contributes to formal learning outcomes. Signing the agreement before the programme begins sets a clear foundation for the apprenticeship journey, avoids confusion later, and provides a reference point if disputes or misunderstandings arise.

Given the dual nature of DLAs, these agreements must be robust and tailored to the context. For example, they should specify the proportion of on-job vs. off-job learning, confirm arrangements for study leave or block courses, and identify the employer’s nominated workplace mentor alongside the TEO’s academic contact. In many cases, they may also incorporate expectations around pastoral care, performance monitoring, and communication protocols.

Where learners are entering DLAs via internal upskilling or career transitions, the agreement provides structure and formality to what might otherwise be an informal arrangement where the learner employee is left to balance study and work themselves. New Zealand’s experience with industry training means there is already institutional and regulatory familiarity with the training agreement model, but TEOs and employers should think carefully about how best to adapt that approach for the degree context, ensuring it supports high-quality delivery while remaining flexible enough to accommodate different industries and employer capacities.

Recruitment & Application Process

DLAs are unique in that applicants must simultaneously secure a job and a place in a degree programme. This theme looks at how well the recruitment and application process supports this dual requirement, ensuring that candidates are selected through fair, transparent, and coordinated procedures.

The process must be easy to navigate for learners, clear for employers, and robust enough to maintain academic standards. A fragmented process where the learner applies separately to an employer and a TEO, with no coordination can lead to confusion, delays, or mismatched expectations. Instead, good practice involves a joint or unified application, co-branded promotional material, and shared screening tools such as interviews, aptitude tests, or diagnostic assessments.

Some models can include:

• a group training organisation (GTO) handling initial recruitment, assessment, and matching with host employers before passing candidates on to the university. This centralised model ensures consistency and streamlines the experience for learners and employers, and can be well-suited for people new to the industry.

• the TEO coordinates admissions workshops or days for multiple employers using simulated activities where employers can select from multiple candidates who are a good ‘fit’ for there organisation. This model can be well-suited to school leavers or those entering the industry. Examples from Australia show that these approaches can generate very high levels of industry from prospective learners and be exceptionally competitive.

• TEOs can establish a matching service where they connect people seeking apprenticeship opportunities with employers seeking apprentices. New Zealand has several examples of these kinds of approaches from work-based learning, and many TEOs that require professional and clinical practice or work-integrated learning will have existing networks to draw on to facilitate these opportunities. This model can work well if the TEO has good networks with employers and employers are looking for support with selection and recruitment of apprentices.

• Employers can nominate their own staff to develop their careers and qualifications through DLAs. This works well for existing employees who are already embedded in the organisation and ready to upskill into higher-level technical or professional roles. It also reduces recruitment effort, ensures cultural fit, and supports workforce development goals within the business, but may require good systems for recognition of current competency.

A-5: Are roles clearly defined for both employers and TEOs in candidate recruitment and selection?

For DLAs to function effectively, it’s essential that employers and TEOs have a clear and agreed understanding of their respective roles in the recruitment and selection process. Unlike traditional tertiary education entry, where the education provider typically makes autonomous decisions about admission, DLAs require employers to be actively involved in selecting who they wish to hire and support through the qualification. If this division of responsibility is not well articulated, it can lead to duplicated effort, gaps in communication with candidates, or misalignment in expectations between employment suitability and academic readiness. In some cases, this may also result in delays or confusion that discourage prospective apprentices or frustrate employers.

Strong practice includes written protocols or memoranda of understanding between TEOs and employers outlining how roles and responsibilities will be shared. For instance, employers may lead the recruitment process up to the point of making a job offer where the ‘training contract’ serves as a prerequisite for enrolment at a TEO, while TEOs then assess academic readiness, facilitate RPL if needed, and confirm enrolment. In coordinated models, both parties may participate in shared interviews or assessment centres. In others, aspects of each process could be contracted out to other groups such as industry associations, chambers of commerce or work-based learning providers. The clarity this brings not only improves internal workflows but also supports candidates by making the process transparent and predictable. It also ensures that key functions such as reference checks, aptitude testing, or pastoral needs assessments are assigned to the organisation best placed to deliver them.

A-6: Are job vacancies and academic requirements advertised together in a way that’s clear to learners?

In DLAs, it’s vital that learners understand they are applying for a dual opportunity: a job and a place in a degree programme. This is often unfamiliar territory, particularly for school leavers, career changers, or those from equity groups who may not have had exposure to apprenticeship models that combine degree-level study with employment. Advertising academic and job-related entry requirements separately can lead to misunderstandings as candidates may assume they only need to meet one set of criteria, or may be unaware of the full scope of the commitment involved. Joint or co-branded advertising helps ensure learners see the apprenticeship as a single, integrated pathway, rather than two separate hurdles.

A unified or coordinated application process is a key enabler of learner-friendly DLA admissions. The traditional approach, where learners apply separately to an employer for a job and to a TEO for a place in a programme, risks duplication, confusion, and administrative inefficiency. It can also slow down the time it takes for an apprentice to begin work or study, particularly if one application stream progresses faster than the other. For DLAs, where time-sensitive recruitment may coincide with semester or funding deadlines, a single entry point or tightly coordinated dual entry system is essential.

Good practice involves the use of combined vacancy listings or promotional materials that clearly outline the dual nature of the opportunity, including timelines, expectations, and support available. For example, a civil engineering DLA opportunity might include information on the required NCEA Level 3 maths credits or equivalent, as well as details about the job role, hours, and pay. This approach has been used successfully in the UK’s national apprenticeship portal, where vacancies list both employer and university requirements. In New Zealand there might be a case for a coordinated platform managed by a TEO or intermediary organisation to showcase available DLA roles, reducing search costs for learners and ensuring messages are accurate, consistent, and aligned with both parties’ needs.

A-7: Do employers and TEOs coordinate interviews or use shared screening tools?

Shared screening tools and coordinated interviews can be an important feature of high-functioning DLA admissions processes. Because candidates must satisfy both employment suitability and academic preparedness, it makes sense for employers and TEOs to combine efforts where possible. Fragmented interview processes can create unnecessary pressure on learners requiring them to attend separate interviews or submit duplicate information and may lead to inconsistent or contradictory assessments. For example, an employer might prioritise interpersonal skills while the TEO is assessing for academic readiness, without sharing these insights or aligning criteria.

Collaborative approaches could include joint interview panels, shared aptitude or diagnostic tests, and the use of structured selection rubrics that reflect both workplace competencies and academic potential. Some international models (like the Manchester Metropolitan University Assessment Centre or in the context of more traditional apprenticeships the Passgenaue Besetzung in Germany) have formalised these practices, with employers and providers co-developing interview scripts or assessment centre activities. South Australia’s pilot degree apprenticeships in engineering use a group training organisation to manage a single-entry process for multiple employers and the university.

A-8: Are diagnostic assessments or RPL interviews used for applicants without formal credentials?

Recognition of prior learning (RPL), recognition of current competency (RCC) and diagnostic assessments are critical tools for broadening access to DLAs particularly for experienced workers, career changers, or others who lack formal academic qualifications. DLAs offer a pathway into degree-level study that values real-world experience and practical capability. Without alternative entry mechanisms, however, applicants with strong skills but unconventional educational backgrounds may be excluded or discouraged. This undermines equity goals and reduces the talent pipeline for industries already facing skills shortages.

Assessing whether a candidate has existing competencies, prior learning or specific development needs are commonly used by TEOs in New Zealand to assess whether a candidate has the foundational skills to succeed in the programme, even if they do not hold standard entrance qualifications like NCEA University Entrance. These assessments can identify gaps that may be addressed through bridging programmes or concurrent learning support. For example, an adult apprentice with a Level 4 trades qualification and ten years’ industry experience may need to complete a short math refresher to meet the demands of an engineering degree. Well-structured RPL/RCC systems also require collaboration with employers, who can verify competencies and provide evidence of workplace learning. Embedding these tools into the admissions process makes DLAs more inclusive, responsive, and aligned with the principle of recognising learning wherever and however it occurs.

Closing the loop with employers about the results of these assessments is critical because it ensures that all parties have a shared understanding of the apprentice’s readiness and any areas that may require additional support. Employers may assume that their selected candidate is “study-ready” based on workplace performance, but diagnostic assessments may reveal gaps in academic writing, mathematics, or digital literacy that need to be addressed for success at degree level. Providing employers with this feedback allows them to make informed decisions such as adjusting work duties during study periods, offering additional mentoring, or contributing to the cost of bridging programmes.

It also reinforces the collaborative nature of the apprenticeship model. When TEOs share diagnostic or RPL/RCC outcomes with employers, it supports better alignment between on-the-job training and off-the-job learning. For example, if an assessment shows that an apprentice struggles with report writing, the employer might assign tasks at work that provide practice with documentation or written communication. Conversely, strengths identified through these assessments can be built upon in the workplace. This feedback loop helps tailor the learning journey to the apprentice’s actual needs, increasing retention and completion rates and strengthening the partnership between education and employment from the outset.

Internationally, more formal and nationally recognised versions of these assessments include the Validation des Acquis de l’Expérience which allows the award of a qualification in full or in part on the basis of a portfolio of work experience only, or can be used to produce a personalised action plan to address any gaps.