When Peter Kingston (Equally honoured? January 3) asked recent recipients of honorary degrees whether they would accept a vocational equivalent - an honorary NVQ - it was, no doubt, humorously intended. But honorary NVQs are a serious proposition and one that warrants wider discussion.

In this country, there continues to be a limited idea of achievement, particularly in education. Rejecting the concept of an honorary NVQ shows a lack of awareness of the need to recognise the contribution individuals make through experiential and reflective learning.

David Starkey, who rejected the idea of accepting an honorary NVQ as "ludicrous", seems to have limited understanding of vocational education. Practical learning is learning by actually doing things - not just thinking, talking, reading and writing about doing things. It is for real - the consequences matter, is delivered by people with expert knowledge and practical experience, and it makes clear links between practice, theory and judgment.

Like all good learning, practical learning fosters confidence, creativity and flexibility, and improves skills such as teamwork, communication, problem solving, organisation and ability to learn.

Learning in a practical style should not be regarded as the poor relation to academic learning. The fact is, for many higher education courses where competition for places is strongest (for example, medicine and veterinary science) practical learning is an essential component. And higher-level practical learning includes a knowledge element. The combination of the practical and the academic is a powerful one - as any employer will confirm.

The University Vocational Awards Council, in partnership with the Edge Foundation (a charitable foundation), is recognising achievement in practical learning through a campaign that has the support of over 50 further and higher institutions, including the University of Cambridge. But more still needs to be done.

Why, for example, is the main practical learning programme for 16- to 19-year-olds, Advanced Apprenticeship, not an accepted route to higher education?

Why are higher education institutions so marginally involved in supporting the delivery of higher level practical qualifications such as NVQ levels 4 and 5? And why is the government's "push" for practical learning in higher education, the foundation degree, at a lower level than the traditional honours degree, with 240 CAT (credit accumulation and transfer) points? (An honours degree typically demands 360 CAT points.)

If we do become serious about recognising practical learning, the benefits are clear. For higher education, it will support efforts to widen participation, recruit under-represented groups of learners and develop partnerships with employers. For individual learners, it is needed if every individual with the requisite ability, is to be able to benefit from a higher education. And for government, it is required if the needs of society and the economy are to be met.

If this country is to continue to grow to meet global economic challenges, we should be concerned to identify and honour the highest achievements in learning wherever they occur.

Personally, as an academic professor who also holds an NVQ level 5, I would be delighted to receive an honorary NVQ. And if higher education wants to demonstrate its commitment to higher vocational learning perhaps it should consider bestowing its own honours; not least on individuals who have made a significant contribution to developing the vocational agenda in this country. Because without it, we can continue to watch our productivity slide and our skills shortages rise.

· Professor Simon Roodhouse is chief operating officer of the University Vocational Awards Council