Why P.7 leavers shun technical colleges for secondary schools

Each year, the release of PLE results is met with nationwide celebration. However, these celebrations almost always point toward a singular destination: the next level of traditional secondary education.

Despite sustained efforts to promote Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET), most students and parents continue to favour the secondary school pathway over technical colleges.

This preference is rooted in a complex mix of leadership, systemic structures, economic barriers, and deep-seated societal perceptions about what constitutes a successful career.

Firstly, secondary school provides the most direct route to university. We have the Uganda National Qualifications Framework (UNQF), which structures education into nine distinct levels.

While the framework officially recognises vocational certificates and diplomas, the “Direct Entry” route, which involves moving from A-Level (Level 3) straight to a Bachelor’s degree (Level 7) is viewed as the gold standard for academic progression.

Additionally, the UACE pathway takes a shorter time, compared to the TVET pathway from the National Craftsperson Certificate (equal to O-level), National Craftsperson Certificate (equal to A-level) National Technician Diploma, Higher Diploma, and finally a degree. This makes one more likely to remain at the certificate level.

Secondly, our society still values university degrees, and “white collar” jobs so much compared to TVET qualifications. As a result, technical colleges are sidelined as options for those who “failed” to secure good aggregates for secondary school admission.

This mindset is further reinforced by our leadership and role models, because most of our political leaders, including our newly elected MPs, mayors, councilors are themselves products of the traditional secondary school–to–university pathway.

Thus, technical education suffers from low prestige, despite its critical role in employment creation and national development.

Thirdly, there is systemic bias in government sponsorship. The current government sponsorship policy further reinforces the secondary school bias.

Currently, 75% of the 4,000 government-sponsored slots in higher education are awarded based on “national merit,” which relies exclusively on UACE performance. This puts secondary schools in the spotlight. Thus, without providing alternative government sponsorship for those to choose the technical pathway, we will always have more students choose secondary school.

Furthermore, societal attitudes towards gender also reduce the attractiveness of technical colleges for girls. Evidence shows a persistent gender imbalance in STEM programmes, where girls are frequently steered towards arts and humanities fields such as social work or public administration.

For example, at Gulu University, more girls than boys are admitted to study Bachelor of Laws, while more boys than girls study BSc. Biosystems Engineering. These biases start at a young age with parents buying dolls for girls and toy cars for boys. This “feminism” vs. “STEMism” divide ensures that half the student population rarely considers technical colleges as a viable career choice.

Lastly, the high cost of technical education, and limited access also play a significant role in steering students away from technical and vocational institutions. While releasing PLE 2025 results, the Minister of Education and Sports, Mrs Janet Museveni said the government has completed construction of 204 of “seed” secondary schools, and 55 are still under construction.

In contrast, she noted that there are 42 public community polytechnics and about 100 private ones nationwide. This uneven expansion reinforces the perception that secondary education is the default and preferred pathway, while TVET is treated as an afterthought, which undermines efforts to position technical education as a viable and equal alternative.

In conclusion, the TVET Act of 2025 marks a major policy reform by formally structuring and elevating the TVET sector. By categorising TVET providers into levels, from Skills Development Centres to National Technical Universities, the law clearly creates an alternative pathway to university education.

This enables learners to progress from post P.7 hands-on skills training up to the degree level, but with a strong focus on practical, job-ready skills.

But for students and parents to seriously take up technical education, the government must incentivise enrollment. Key interventions include providing sufficient scholarships for public TVET institutions, deliberately promoting successful TVET graduates, encouraging girls and women to join TVET, lowering costs for practical training, and improving access to TVET institutions and programmes.

Without these measures, secondary school will continue to be the preferred option for our P.7 leavers.