Executive Summary
The transition at the age of 16 marks the first point in most individuals’ educational
lives where opportunities and choice become markedly diverse. Students can
choose whether to attend school sixth forms, sixth form colleges or further education
(FE) colleges. This choice is, in part, geographically shaped by quite idiosyncratic
variation in institutional provision. For example, students in London are able to
choose between large numbers of providers with exceptionally high access to school
sixth forms. The North West has high levels of provision in sixth form colleges, unlike
the North East and East Midlands. Students in the North East and South West have
the lowest levels of choice of provider.
This research provides an up-to-date understanding of post-16 educational choices
and transitions, highlighting the implications of differences in choice sets for students
from different areas and backgrounds. Specifically, our research analysis explores
how the choice sets available to students vary according to their geographic, social
and educational background. It investigates the impact of these institutional and
qualification choices made on students’ educational trajectories at age 16 and into
higher education.
Using three linked databases – the National Pupil Database, Individual Learner
Records, and Higher Education Statistics Authority data – we explore all educational
choices made by students who sat GCSEs in summer 2010. Our modelling strategy
allows us to distinguish between inequalities in post-16 choice and attainment that
arise between groups facing identical institutional availabilities and those that arise
because different groups have access to different types of local post-16 provision.
We do this, in part, by comparing choices made by students who live in the same
neighbourhood (Middle Super Output Area) and who achieved similar GCSEs at age
16.
Social inequalities in post-16 routes
Students eligible for free school meals (FSM) live in more urban areas, which gives
them greater choice of post-16 institution and marginally greater access to 6th form
colleges. We find that FSM pupils living in the same neighbourhood and with similar
GCSE attainment as non-FSM pupils have marked differences in the post-16
choices they make that cannot be explained by inequalities in institutional availability.
In this cohort, 9% of non-FSM students drop-out of the education system at age 16
compared to 16% of FSM students. This is, of course, largely related to GCSE
attainment. But we estimate over a third of this participation gap results from
differences in choices made by students with identical opportunities open to them.
We estimate these choices are also responsible for about a third of the gap in entry
to a sixth form environment (i.e. school sixth form, sixth form college or independent
school).
There are FSM gaps in the proportions studying at least level 2 qualifications (58%
versus 78%), level 3 qualifications (40% versus 66%) and 3 A levels (47% versus
21%). We estimate that 24%, 26% and 35% of these gaps, respectively, arises from
choices made by students living in the same neighbourhoods with approximately the
same GCSE attainment.
There are also marked FSM differences in higher education routes. Just 24% of FSM
pupils attend HE versus 42% of non-FSM pupils, with over a quarter of this
participation gap arising from students within the same neighbourhood with the same
GCSE attainment. We estimate that as much as half the FSM gap in Russell Group
attendance (at 2% for FSM versus 10% for non-FSM) could be removed if we were
able to equalise university access between pupils living in the same neighbourhoods
and with similar GCSE attainment.
Gender inequalities in post-16 routes
Male and female pupils generally face similar choice sets but take slightly different
post-16 routes as a result of both differences in age 16 achievement and choices
made by students with the same achievement levels. Boys are more likely to drop
out of education altogether at age 16 (9% versus 11%), but about half of this
participation gap arises from choices by gender of students with the same GCSE
attainment.
Girls are more likely to take at least level 2 qualifications (81% versus 70%), level 3
qualifications (68% versus 58%) and 3 A levels (48% versus 39%). But while
differences in rates studying for at least level 2 qualifications are largely explained by
choice, the differences in rates studying A levels are almost all explained by gender
differences in GCSE attainment.
Girls are more likely than boys to attend HE (44% versus 36%) both because they
have higher GCSE attainment and because they have higher attendance for a given
level of GCSE attainment. The latter contributes about a third of this gender gap. The
pattern for elite Russell Group attendance is quite different because, although girls
are slightly more likely to attend over (10% versus 9%), they are less likely (with 17%
lower odds) than boys to attend for a given level of GCSE attainment.
Ethnic inequalities in post-16 routes.
Students of minority ethnic backgrounds – measured here using six broad ethnic
groupings – have lower propensities to drop out of education at age 16, compared to
the White British population (for whom 10% leave). This rate is the smallest for the
Indian group at just 3%, both because they are higher attaining at GCSE and
because they make different choices compared to White British students living in the
same neighbourhoods with similar attainment. It is lower at just 7% for black
students and 8% for Pakistani and Bangladeshi students, despite having lower
GCSE attainment.
The white other and other ethnic groups are more similar to the White British group,
most likely because these categorisations mask wide variation in educational
choices. Nevertheless, all ethnic minority groups are much more likely than the
White British group to attend a school sixth form or sixth form college, even
accounting for prior attainment and neighbourhood. They are also more likely to take
level 2 qualifications, level 3 qualifications and 3 A levels.
All ethnic minority groups have much higher university participation: the rates for the
black, Indian and Pakistani/Bangladeshi group are 57%, 72% and 53%, respectively,
compared to 36% for the White British population. However, only the Indian ethnic
group is markedly more likely to attend a Russell Group university, compared to
White British pupils with similar GCSE attainment living in the same neighbourhoods.
Post-16 outcomes where there are few school sixth form places available
There are 20 places in England where there is almost no opportunity for students to
attend school sixth forms because they do not exist due to historic local authority
level organisational decisions. We match the neighbourhoods in these areas to
similar neighbourhoods elsewhere in England that have school sixth forms.
This allows us to estimate the impact of living in an area where all students must proceed
to a sixth form college or further education college. We find that living in an area with
no sixth form college has no overall effect on levels of post-16 participation, but it
does affect the types of courses that students study. There are significantly lower
percentages of pupils studying at least 2 level qualifications (73.5% versus 75.5%),
at least level 3 qualifications (59.9% versus 63.0% and at least level 3 academic
qualifications (40.0 versus 43.2%).
The largest impacts are for those in the middle prior attainment group who are much
less likely to study for 3 A levels. This may be because sixth form colleges serve a
smaller community of students than do school sixth forms, leaving greater numbers
of middle attainers to attend general FE colleges.
Higher prior attainment students have a five percentage point lower take-up of at
least 2 facilitating A-levels and lower rates studying for at least one science or maths
A level. One possible explanation is that sixth form colleges are able to provide a
wider range of A-levels, increasing the chances that they study less traditional
subjects. We also find this higher attaining group is slightly less likely to attend
higher education (2 percentage points) or a Russell Group university (1 percentage
points).