Disadvantage status and pupil premium
Students were considered disadvantaged in year 11 and were eligible for pupil premium funding if they had been eligible for free school meals at any point in the last six years, had been looked after by the local authority, or had been adopted from care. Students eligible for free school meals are a subset of the wider disadvantaged group. See methodology for details.
The gap between disadvantaged and other students remains similar to previous years
Students who were eligible for pupil premium in year 11 (around a quarter of the cohort in all state funded schools and colleges) were 11.9 percentage points less likely to have an overall sustained destination when leaving 16 to 18 study compared to all other students. This gap is similar to the previous year where it stood at 12 percentage points.
Disadvantaged students were more likely to stay in further education and less likely to progress to higher education
While 38.8% of non-disadvantaged students leaving 16 to 18 education progressed directly to higher education, the rate for the disadvantaged group was 26.2%. On the other hand, 17.7% of disadvantaged students continued in further education, compared to 11.6% of all other students.
Outcomes for disadvantaged students vary widely across England
The gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged students sustaining a destination was greatest in North East England where it stood at 16.7 percentage points (64.4% compared to 81.1%, respectively). The smallest gap was recorded in London, with a difference of 4.2 percentage points (76.2% compared to 80.4%, respectively).
Disadvantaged students in London were more than twice as likely to progress to higher education than their peers in South West, South East, North East, and East of England.
Female students were more likely to have an overall sustained destination than male students
Overall, 82.1% of female students had a sustained destination compared to 76.9% of male students. This is a difference of 5.2 percentage points.
Female students were more likely to continue in education than males (55.7% compared to 48.1%) and were less likely to take up apprenticeships (5.2% compared to 7.6%) after 16 to 18 study than male students.
The gender gap is most pronounced in progression to higher education. While 40.7% of female students went to higher education, the corresponding figure for male students was 30.8%. This is a difference of 9.9 percentage points. This gap has widened compared to the previous year where it stood at 9.3 percentage points.
A higher proportion of male students had no recorded activity in the year following the end of 16 to 18 study when compared to female students (6.2% compared to 4.0%, respectively).
Destinations varied by gender and disadvantage status
Disadvantaged female students were 6.2 percentage points more likely to sustain an education destination than disadvantaged male students (50.5% compared to 44.3%, respectively). Interestingly, there were similar proportions of disadvantaged female students and non-disadvantaged male students who sustained an education destination (50.5% and 49.3%, respectively). Disadvantaged male students (44.3%) were 5 percentage points less likely to sustain an education destination than non-disadvantaged male students (49.3%).
Non-disadvantaged male students were more likely to sustain an apprenticeship destination (8.4%) than non-disadvantaged female students (5.4%) and disadvantaged male and female students (5.1% and 4.7%, respectively).
Non-disadvantaged male students were most likely to sustain an employment destination (22.3%) whereas disadvantaged male students were least likely to sustain an employment destination (17.8%).
Destination outcomes varied by ethnicity, particularly at the level of minor ethnic group
While there was relatively little variation between the major ethnic groups, the overall rate of sustained destinations varied significantly when looking at the more detailed minor ethnicity groupings.
Students who identified as Gypsy/Roma or as Traveller of Irish Heritage were the least likely to sustain a destination (47.7% and 41.8%). This is 31.7 and 37.6 percentage points lower than the national average (79.4%). The two groups (Gypsy/Roma and Traveller of Irish Heritage) are relatively small and their outcomes are volatile between years.
Within the Asian ethnic group, students of Chinese and Indian ethnicity were most likely to have a sustained destination (87.3% and 86.1%), followed by students of Bangladeshi background (82.9%). Pakistani students were least likely to sustain a destination.
Students who were either white and Black Caribbean (72.4%) or Black Caribbean (74.7%) were less likely to continue in a sustained destination compared to the national average for their major ethnic group (Mixed Dual Background; 77.1% and Black or Black British ethnic group; 81.9%). Students of Black African (85.0%) ethnicity were more likely to sustain a destination compared to the national average for Black or Black British major ethnic group.
Special educational needs
Students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools were less likely to have a sustained destination overall
Students with recorded special educational needs (SEN) were 5.8 percentage points less likely to have an overall sustained destination than those students without SEN (80.8% compared to 86.6%, respectively). This is partly because they were less likely to go into employment or apprenticeships.
Students with SEN were more likely to sustain a further education or other education destination than non-SEN students (6.0% and 8.1% respectively for SEN vs 2.5% and 4.4% for non-SEN). They were, however, less likely to continue in higher education compared to non-SEN students (48.3% compared to 57.6%, respectively).
Learning difficulties or disabilities
College students with learning difficulties or disabilities (LLDD) were more likely to have a sustained education destination than other students without LLDD
Students with recorded learning difficulties or disabilities (LLDD) were more likely to stay in education after 16 to 18 study compared to all other college students (44.6% compared to 42.6%, respectively). This is a difference of 2.0 percentage points. Students with LLDD were more likely to continue in further education and less likely to continue in higher education compared to the rest of the cohort. Finally, students with LLDD were less likely to take up apprenticeships or go into employment.