Closing attainment gaps would improve access to post-16 STEM qualifications for disadvantaged and black Caribbean pupils, according to new report

A report by the Education Policy Institute (EPI) and the Centre for Youth and Education (CfEY), supported by Mission 44, highlights the need for targeted efforts to increase post-16 participation in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects for currently underrepresented groups.

The report estimates the progression rates of different pupil groups and explores the extent to which the school a pupil attends affects the likelihood of progressing to post-16 STEM qualifications. It then identifies key enablers and barriers to supporting wider post-16 STEM participation.

New analysis finds that the odds of progressing to level 3 STEM after leaving secondary school are 44 per cent lower for disadvantaged students compared to their more affluent peers. Students that are ethnically black Caribbean, white and black Caribbean, gypsy/Roma, and travellers of Irish heritage are amongst the least likely to progress to level 3 STEM qualifications.

 Disadvantaged students and students from certain ethnic backgrounds are particularly hindered by lower average GCSE attainment.

The difference in progressing to level 3 STEM between students on free school meals and their more affluent peers almost disappears if they have similar attainment, whilst black Caribbean students are estimated to be 40 per cent more likely to progress to level 3 STEM qualifications than white British students with similar attainment.

EPI estimates that the odds of progressing to level 3 STEM qualifications after leaving secondary school are 42 per cent lower for girls, compared to boys. Though prior attainment masks the size of the gender gap – girls are 60 per cent less likely to progress to level 3 STEM qualifications than boys with similar attainment – with preferences playing a larger factor.

 The analysis shows that school attended plays a modest role in determining students’ likelihood of progressing to level 3 STEM, though this is more pronounced for some groups such as: girls compared to boys; for disadvantaged compared to non-disadvantaged students; and for all major ethnicity groups compared to white students.

 Prior attainment was also linked to perceptions of subject interest, as students were more likely to express a preference for subjects that they saw themselves as being successful in. Students also made a link between their option choices and perceived teacher quality, or in some cases simply the availability of specialist teachers.

 EPI said it also found that in many school settings, STEM routes are found to be limited to traditional A-level academic routes with prior attainment entry barriers. There is often a lack of clear pathways to post-16 STEM qualifications for ‘middle attainers’.

The EPI has made a number of recommendations:

• It said the curriculum and assessment review should consider how access to non A-level post-16 STEM qualifications can be improved, including how to fill gaps in local provision. Routes to level 3 STEM qualifications are generally quite limited to traditional A-level academic routes with prior attainment entry barriers

• The government should develop a renewed strategy for closing the disadvantage gap which acts as a barrier to accessing level 3 STEM subjects. This should include the adequacy of disadvantage funding across all phases and the introduction of a student premium for those studying in post-16. Low prior attainment is a particular barrier preventing more disadvantaged students progressing to level 3 STEM. We know that by the end of secondary school disadvantaged students are, on average, 19 months of learning behind their peers

• The government should ensure the sufficient supply of specialist teachers in secondary schools by increasing retention through differentiated pay. Students’ preferences for further study in a field are influenced by their current teachers. In 2023/24 the government only met 17 per cent of its recruitment target for physics teachers, 36 per cent for computing and 63 per cent for maths teachers.

Careers’ leaders should continue to work with careers advisers and hubs to provide employer experiences that offer ‘real world’ examples of what it is like to work in STEM jobs in practice, particularly focusing on representation from currently underrepresented groups.

Students often do not have a good understanding of the wide range of STEM career opportunities and improving awareness of the courses and routes that are available will likely increase participation.

Louis Hodge, associate director at EPI, and one of the report authors says: “Our analysis shows that certain groups of pupils continue to be underrepresented amongst those taking higher level STEM qualifications.

“This includes girls, pupils eligible for free school meals and pupils with certain ethnic backgrounds. We find that secondary schools play a role in setting up pupils to pursue further study and careers in STEM, but they don’t often target these underrepresented groups.

 “The government and schools need to work together urgently to tackle some of the barriers underrepresented groups face. These include attainment (which accounts for almost all the differences between disadvantaged pupils and their more affluent peers) and the current shortage of specialist teachers.”