Positive trends hide serious 16-19 challenges for the new government

EPI's new report reveals concerning trends below a broadly positive headline. But are the new government's proposals equal to them?

EPI's new report reveals concerning trends below a broadly positive headline. But are the new government's proposals equal to them?

17 Jul 2024, 14:01

EPI has this week published its latest annual report, which highlights inequalities in students’ educational attainment in 2023. The findings show that since 2019, economically disadvantaged students have fallen further behind their peers in the early years, key stage 2 and key stage 4 phases of education. In contrast, the 16-19 disadvantage attainment gap appears to have returned to 2019 levels.

Comparing through time has been somewhat messy in recent years. Two years of cancelled exams and a staggered return to usual grade boundaries make direct comparisons a bit of a non-starter, so we instead focus on how gaps compare to 2019, prior to the pandemic.

In the 16-19 phase, economically disadvantaged students appear to be no further behind their peers than they were in 2019, though this is no cause for celebration. We know that there have been changes in the participation rate, retention and choice of post-16 qualifications since 2019 too.

These compositional effects will impact our measurement of the gap, and we will be exploring this through a deeper analysis to be published later this year. 

Moreover, a return to 2019 levels means we have seen no meaningful improvement since before the pandemic. Disadvantaged students are still 3.2 grades behind their peers across their best three results by the end of 16-19 study.

If we dig a bit deeper than our headline trend, we see other less positive patterns emerging.

Looking at A Level students only, economically disadvantaged students are over half a grade behind per qualification. This is a small increase since 2019, and we see similar trends among disadvantaged applied general students and those taking other level 3 qualifications.

It is safe to say that the new government has inherited a post-16 education system that has not worked well for a large cross-section of the young people it is meant to serve. This could be a moment of opportunity, but are the plans set out to date bold enough to make a material difference?

Disadvantaged students fall further behind during the 16-19 phase

There were some good ambitions set out in the Labour manifesto, as scrutinised in our recent general election report. However, they lacked detail.

Rolling out T Levels looks set to continue, but challenges with take-up and securing work placements remain.

Meanwhile, pausing and reviewing the defunding of the alternative level 3 qualifications is a positive step to ensure students from all backgrounds have suitable options available to them; but not going ahead with a planned Conservative policy is hardly the kick-start that the sector desperately needs.

Enabling providers to become ‘Technical Excellence Colleges’ formed another key part of Labour’s post-16 vocational offer, which will be funded through local skills improvement plans. If well executed, this may improve outcomes for the students attending these institutions. However, there is a long history of specialist institutions struggling to recruit students. They sound great in a manifesto or policy announcement, but focusing more on supporting existing colleges may ultimately be a more effective approach.

Reforms to apprenticeship funding are long overdue, as the decline in take-up under the current system demonstrates. Despite this, it is not clear how the increased flexibility Labour are proposing will boost take-up among young and disadvantaged learners, for which apprenticeship numbers have dwindled in recent years.

More positively, Labour’s commitment to form a cross-government child poverty strategy is a very welcome pledge and reflects a long-standing EPI recommendation. We know that much of the attainment gap in the 16-19 phase is a result of disadvantaged students falling behind in earlier phases. Therefore, addressing poverty at younger ages will also have the benefit of helping to reduce this gap.

However, it is also the case that disadvantaged students fall further behind during the 16-19 phase. None of the policies set out so far by the new government would appear to do much to address this. They are largely tinkering at the edges.

Plans to raise participation, retention and attainment among the most vulnerable students are needed if we are to make progress in closing the gap.

The new government should begin by focusing on addressing the teacher recruitment and retention crisis in the FE sector, where the majority of disadvantaged learners study. More support for disadvantaged students in 16-19 education is also required, preferably in the form of a student premium.

For many young people the 16-19 phase is the final opportunity to address the educational inequalities that they have experienced over their lifetimes. If the new government is to make progress on closing long-standing inequalities, it must not forget the 16-19 phase.

Latest education roles from

Biology GCSE Tutor (Variable Hours)

Biology GCSE Tutor (Variable Hours)

Richmond and Hillcroft Adult & Community College

Work Experience Support Assistant

Work Experience Support Assistant

Bournemouth and Poole College

EHCP & SEND Administrator

EHCP & SEND Administrator

Bournemouth and Poole College

Director of Governance

Director of Governance

Stanmore College

Lecturer in Policing and Public Services

Lecturer in Policing and Public Services

West Suffolk College

Part Time Variable Hours Tutor of Construction and the Built Environment

Part Time Variable Hours Tutor of Construction and the Built Environment

York College

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *