Does what you study at age 14-16 matter for educational transitions post-16?

• Published in: Oxford review of education Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 94 - 117
• Main Authors: Moulton, Vanessa, Sullivan, Alice, Henderson, Morag, Anders, Jake
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Routledge 02.01.2018; Taylor & Francis, Ltd; Taylor & Francis Ltd
• Subjects: Academic achievement; Access; applied subjects; Class differences; College Bound Students; Course Selection (Students); Curricula; curriculum; EBacc; Education; Educational Attainment; Educational Objectives; Ethnic differences; Ethnicity; Foreign Countries; Gender Differences; Girls; Institutional Characteristics; Longitudinal Studies; Middle class; Outcomes of Education; Performance Factors; post-16 transitions; Prior Learning; Probability; Racial differences; Secondary School Students; Social Class; Social classes; Social Differences; Socioeconomic Background; Socioeconomic factors; Student Records; Students; Subject choice; Universities; Working class; Youth; United Kingdom (England)
• ISSN: 0305-4985; 1465-3915
• DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2018.1409975

This paper considers whether subject choice at 14-16 influences post-16 transitions, taking into account prior academic attainment and school characteristics, and if so, whether this accounts for socioeconomic, gender, and ethnic differences in access to post-16 education. We consider post-16 progression to full-time education, A-levels, and studying two or more facilitating subjects at A-level. We use 'Next Steps', a study of 16,000 people born in England in 1989-1990, linked to administrative education records (the National Pupil Database). We find that students pursuing an EBacc-eligible curriculum at 14-16 had a greater probability of progression to all post-16 educational outcomes, while the reverse was true for students taking an applied GCSE subject. Curriculum differences did not explain the social class differences in post-16 progression, but an academic curriculum was equally valuable for working-class as for middle-class pupils. Pursuing an EBacc-eligible curriculum particularly strongly increased the chances of girls and white young people staying in the educational pipeline, whereas applied subjects were particularly detrimental for girls. An EBacc-eligible curriculum at age 14-16 increased the chances of studying subjects preferred by Russell Group universities at A-level.