Researchers investigate the factors driving lower attainment
Nearly half (44 per cent) of the gap between the GCSE results of disadvantaged pupils and their peers already exists at age 11, according to new joint research from the Education Policy Institute (EPI) and the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF).
Their new report Growing apart: the evolution of the disadvantage gap, examines the socioeconomic attainment gap in England, tracking how educational inequalities develop across different phases of a child’s life. Specifically, the research tracks the evolution of this disadvantage gap across four compulsory phases of a child’s life: the Early Years Foundation Stage (age 5), Key Stage 2 (age 11), Key Stage 4 (age 16) and 16-19 education. Researchers aimed to address two key questions: which specific factors are associated with lower attainment for disadvantaged children and young people; and whether the gap is driven more by who pupils are, or where they learn and live. The disadvantage gap is measured in terms of months of learning, comparing the academic attainment of socioeconomically disadvantaged students against their non-disadvantaged peers.
By the time they take their GCSEs, disadvantaged students are on average 17.9 months behind their peers. The researchers found that the largest contributor to the gap at the end of Key Stage 4 is the lower prior attainment (at age 11) among disadvantaged pupils, adding 6.8 months to the gap. Prior attainment at age seven (Key Stage 1) also contributes (1.6 months) over and above KS2 attainment, reinforcing that early intervention has a ‘protective’ factor against gap-widening later on. Disrupted schooling – notably pupil absence – plays a progressively larger role as children progress from primary to secondary school. Absence contributes around one-fifth (21 per cent) of the gap at Key Stage 2, rising to one-third (34 per cent) by Key Stage 4. Even moderate absence over years 9 to 11 – defined as an absence rate at or above the national average but below 10 per cent – is associated with lower GCSE attainment by 5.5 months, compared with similar pupils whose absence is below the national average
The report also finds that differences in disadvantaged pupils’ attainment in core subjects (mathematics and English) are strongly associated with the size of the gap across phases. Even by age 11, a large part of the 10.1-month Key Stage 2 gap can be explained by disadvantaged pupils having already fallen behind at age five in literacy (adding 1.9 months), maths (1.3 months) and communication and language (1.0 month). Meanwhile the researchers suggest that around 10 per cent of the disadvantage gap at ages 16–19 is linked to the characteristics of students’ peers, with disadvantaged students more likely to study in settings with lower average prior attainment and higher concentrations of disadvantage and SEND.
Emily Hunt, Associate Director for Social Mobility and Vulnerable Learners at the EPI, said: ‘Our research shows that early intervention is crucial in addressing the disadvantage gap. But it is not enough on its own. Disadvantaged pupils continue to fall behind at every stage of compulsory education, and are significantly more likely to experience disrupted schooling across both primary and secondary years, which further exacerbates the gap. We do find cause for cautious optimism: strong attainment at primary school appears to act as a protective factor against later decline. But the key factors driving the gap: prior attainment, SEND and absence do not emerge in isolation. They are affected by wider social conditions: welfare, health, housing and family support. Government investment that looks beyond school gates towards these underlying determinants will be essential if we are serious about closing the gap.’
Professor Becky Francis CBE, Chief Executive of the EEF, also commented: ‘What stands out from the findings is how hard it is for young people to catch up once they’ve fallen behind. This has profound implications for our education system as a whole. It reinforces just how important investing in high-quality early years education is for disadvantaged children. And it also shows the limits of what schools can achieve on their own. Collaboration with services beyond the school gate is vital.’