In response to today’s report on Further Education and Skills, we welcome the Education Select Committee’s recommendation that the Department for Education introduce a 16–19 student premium for post-16 students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
As highlighted in evidence submitted to the committee by the EPI and ASCL, funding to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds currently drops off a cliff at age 16 – two years before the end of their compulsory education. There is no equivalent to Pupil Premium funding to support attainment in 16-19 education, and this underfunding must be addressed urgently to prevent young people from disadvantaged backgrounds from falling further behind their peers during this phase.
This closely mirrors the evidence submitted to the committee by Get Further. Achieving a standard pass in GCSE English and maths is crucial for accessing further study, training, and employment opportunities. Yet, half of students from disadvantaged backgrounds leave school without these qualifications, making them disproportionately likely to need resit as part of their 16–19 education. These young people require robust support to catch up, which will only be possible with additional targeted funding.
We are pleased that the Education Select Committee has lent its support to addressing this funding disparity and advocating for the resources that disadvantaged students need to succeed.
However, we were disappointed to see low expectations for this country’s young people entrenched through the committee’s recommendations for the introduction of a three-route model of post-16 English and maths study for those who leave school without a grade 4 in GCSE English and maths. Within this model, only students in ‘Route A’, who are considered to have ‘a realistic prospect of achieving grade 4’, would continue to receive support to gain these qualifications.
We know from international counterparts such as the Netherlands, where fewer than 10% of 16-to-19-year-olds are without equivalent level 2 qualifications in English and maths, that it is possible for the vast majority of our young people to reach a grade 4 in GCSE English and maths.
While we agree that the number of young people achieving a recognised standard of English and maths beyond the age of 16 should be higher, this will not be achieved by funnelling some students off into embedded English and maths study or alternative qualifications. These approaches have been tried previously and they have not worked. Employers and education providers value GCSE qualifications, and we must avoid creating a two-tier qualification system that disproportionately disadvantages young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and those with identified SEND.
Instead, we need targeted reforms that allow students with low prior attainment to make meaningful progress towards achieving the GCSE. We have recommended the introduction of a two-year GCSE pathway for these students as part of our submission to the Curriculum and Assessment review, and we are optimistic that the review panel will recognise the importance of retaining this ambition for young people in their upcoming report.
—
Published 23/09/2025, 14:33
Featured photo by Kenny Eliason on Unsplash