Is VAT affecting private school results?

It might well be a bit of a stretch to believe that the effect of VAT being imposed on private schools in January 2025 is responsible for the decline in the percentage of pupils in such centres awarded Level 7 or above in GCSE level qualifications in some subjects this year, but, interestingly, there has been a decline in the percentages awarded Level 7 or above in some key subjects in such centres.

The subjects include: biology; business studies; chemistry; citizenship; drama; England; English Literature; mathematics; physics and social sciences. Most of the falls are probably not significant, being only a matter of a decimal point or two, and thus within the expected margin of error. Indeed, in most subjects the percentage gaining level 7 of above is still higher than in 2019, before covid struck.

This year, although physics dropped from 60.8% in 2024 to 60.0% in 2025, and mathematics from 33.5% to 32.0% – subject where percentages in the public sector schools generally increased, although they still remain well below the percentages achieved by the private sector centres. In both subjects the private sector percentage was above the 2019 outcome. In mathematics, it might be that 2024 was ‘a good year’, and 2025 is a more normal outcome?

Now, another possible explanation for the drop in percentages, if it isn’t disappearing pupils, might be that the teacher supply crisis is finally impacting private sector schools in some subjects where recruitment is challenging. This might possibly be responsible for the declines in physics and mathematics percentages.

Another possibility is a change in entry policies that allowed marginal candidates to enter, but considering the financial consequences of widening entry at a time when private sector schools might be expected to be looking for cost saving measures, this reason seems unlikely.

Since many private schools are day schools, as a result it would be interesting to know to what extent parents have invested additional funds in private tutoring and Easter revision classes for pupils where there were concerns about outcomes after any ‘mock’ examinations. However, I suspect such investment would be more likely be at ‘A’ level than at GCSE, except perhaps in English and mathematics.

There is a useful table that allows comparison between public and private sector institutions Outcomes by centre type

The outcomes for physics at Level 4 or above are interesting

Grade 4 and above in Physics GCSE %2019202320242025diff 2023 to 2025
All State Funded91.490.290.491.00.80
Independent schools inc CTCs96.896.296.495.9-0.30

The trend in state funded institutions has been upward, despite any possible issues with staffing, whereas the picture is more mixed in the private sector. However, neither percentage take account of who is allowed to take the subject and the prevalence of combined science in many state-funded schools rather than the separate sciences.

Perhaps even more interesting is how different state schools perform with different groups and the extent to which MATs can achieve good results across the Trust.

Sort out physics teacher preparation courses

The next couple of years likely to see the best recruitment levels to physics ITT courses for more than a decade. As a result, there might be a risk that everyone concerned with teacher preparation breathes a huge sigh of relief, and put the problem of the shortage of teachers of physics in the ‘job done’ bin. In my view that would be a big mistake.

Now is the time for someone, perhaps the Institute of Physics, NfER, Nuffield or Gatsby to consider a research project that looks at the pipeline of physics teachers from school to school, and notably from university to teaching. Do different courses produce different numbers of teachers of physics that stay in the profession, and become the leaders of tomorrow or just provide short-term additions to the teaching stock. How important is a middle leadership cadre?

 Mapping these outcomes both geographically and as between public and private schools, and within the public sector as between 11-16; 11-18 and post-16 institutions might create an understanding that could then lead to a debate about how every child could access high quality physics teaching on a regular basis up to Level 3.

With the improvement in mathematics in schools over recent years, there should be the possibility of increasing interest in physics, especially amongst girls. The percentage of girls taking physics is still lamentably low. This is despite 30 years of programmes such as WISE. How far has the lack of management of the scare resource that is teachers of physics held back the encouragement of more girls to study the subject?

Teaching has always looked to be a profession where there is basic pay equality. That’s fine when there aren’t shortages, but there have always been incentives and rewards from golden hellos to additional payments for working in challenging schools. What incentives work to keep teachers of physics in the profession. Is it non-pay matters, such as not having to teach ‘all sciences’ or some mathematics that is as important as pay?

If gender is an issue, what about ethnicity: of both teachers and those that study physics at school? Then there is the issue of what percentage of pupils on free school meals have access to high quality physics teaching? Is it different from those small numbers on free school melas in schools in affluent areas, compared with schools where a large percentage of pupils are on free school meals. In the latter schools, attracting a physics teacher means access for some pupils. In the former, even if there is a physics teacher do the pupils on free school meals have access to physics?

And what about pupils with SEND? What is their access to physics teaching like?

Physics could be a template for other subjects to ask the questions about, ‘what can we do to ensure we have the best system for preparing teachers, recruiting them into schools, and ensuring that they stay in the profession.’ The alternative is that we could carry on as before, and rely upon market forces to provide the Nobel Prize winner of the future.

Better outcomes but rankings don’t change much

Congratulations to everyone receiving examination results today. And a big Thank you to all the other family members, including siblings, the teachers and other school staff, and, indeed, anyone that helped the candidates achieve their grades.

In the first year of this blog, 2013, now available as a book, TEACHERS, SCHOOLS AND VIEWS ON EDUCATION: How 2013 unfolded as viewed from my blog eBook : HOWSON, JOHN: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store I wrote a post comparing the percentage of A* grades between physics and media studies. At that time physics had a much higher percentage of A* outcomes than did media studies. That didn’t make physics easier than media studies as an ‘A’ Level, but might reflect the policies around who could take the subject, and of those that took the subject who were entered into the examination.

Fast forward to 2025 and we find the following

CategorySubjectYearNumber SatA* %A*-A %A*-B %A*-C %A*-D %
A Level UKPhysics20254495711.232.152.971.786.0
A Level UKMedia / Film / TV Studies2025233202.414.850.582.396.0

A level and Level 3 results – Summer 2025 – JCQ Joint Council for Qualifications

There is still a big difference between the percentage of candidates in the two subjects gaining A*-A results. Such differences makes it is risky to talk about average outcomes when there is a difference of more than 17 points in the percentages gaining A*-A grades between the two subjects. It is worth blanking out the subject names and asking a random group of people to tell you which set is physics and which media studies, a subject sometimes rubbished by politicians as easy.

Regular readers of this blog will know that I have been doing some work on funding across the country, and an apparent bias towards London, as measured by changes pupil teacher ratios during the past 50 years as a proxy for funding. The paper can be found on Researchgate at: (PDF) PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS BETWEEN 1974 AND 2024 AND TWO PERIODS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RE-ORGANISATION PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS

It is worth looking at how the regions fared in the ‘A’ level results. The table places the regions in the order that the percentage of A*-A grades achieved and the change between 2023 and 2025

regionDifference % A grade
North West2.50%
Yorkshire and Humber2.30%
London2.10%
England1.60%
East Midlands1.50%
East1.40%
West Midlands1.30%
South East0.90%
North East0.80%
South West0.70%

DfE release 14th August 2025

It would be interesting to drill down within the regions to see whether types of schooling -see next post for national outcomes – makes a difference. Why is the improvement so small in the South West and North East regions? Is the small increase in the South East partly a result of the higher number of candidates from either private schools or selective schools where outcomes were already high. This will be one static to track over the next few years to see any possible change due to the VAT imposition on private schools.

I am sorry that there is less to say about T Levels and other Level 3 qualifications that are equally as important as A Levels to both those that took them and society as a whole.

Less than 400 teachers of physics entered service in 2023/24

As a result of the latest data from the DfE, it is now possible to start to see the consequences arising from the collapse in ITT recruitment to secondary courses in 2023/24.

It is interesting to compare the turnaround from the improvement in recruitment brought about by the covid epidemic with the poor recruitment figures for just three years later.

Year Achieved QTSAchieved QTSDid not achieve QTS% Did not achieve QTS
2017/182549013045
2018/192640213485
2019/202754211914
2020/213070616065
2021/222971522417
2022/232243718408
2023/242121015507

Initial teacher training performance profiles, Academic year 2023/24 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The reduction in numbers achieving QTS (Qualified Teacher Status) from 30,706 in 2002/21 to 21,210 in 2023/24, a reduction of some 8,500, or more than a quarter in just three years, goes some way to demonstrate the depth of the problems with recruitment schools faced in September 2024 and even more so in January 2025.

Hopefully, these numbers represent the lowest point for secondary trainee numbers over the next few years, after adjusting for the changes in targets that result from falling rolls in schools.

The data on the percentage achieving QTS might suggest that when it is difficult to recruit trainees, more marginal candidates are offered a place by training providers, and, as a result, the percentage not achieving QTS increases.

Because the DfE only records those with QTS teaching in a State-Funded ‘school’ it does not count those employed in a Sixth Form College or other further education college and, does not count any teachers from the cohort with QTS working in the private school sector. This latter omission might account for why only 49% of those trained to teach Classics were teaching in a State-Funded school.

SubjectPostgraduate
2023/24
Number of trainees
TotalAchieved QTSTeaching in a State-Funded School (of those achieved QTS)Teaching in a State-Funded School (of those achieved QTS)
Classics69673349%
Physical Education1,4851,43896567%
Primary9,3788,7126,27172%
Business Studies22720114673%
Art & Design40138228675%
Computing41337428275%
Total22,76021,21015,92175%
Modern Foreign Languages1,02497073976%
Other32731023776%
Drama24622717577%
Physics54048537377%
Secondary13,38212,4989,65077%
Geography82277160178%
Chemistry76469154479%
Mathematics1,9001,7621,38579%
Biology88581865280%
Music23722317980%
Design & Technology57654043781%
English2,2102,0621,66181%
History97791974481%
Religious Education27925821282%

It is interesting to note that the percentage of those trained to teach physics teaching in a State-Funded school was the same as the overall average, at 77%. However, that meant that there were only 373 new physic teacher entrants into State-Funded secondary schools from this cohort. It would be interesting to know the routes these 373 took before taking up their initial posts? How many of these 373 were from the PG Salaried High Potential ITT route? (Better known as Teach First).

The relatively small percentage of physical education trainees recorded as working in State-Funded schools may well be a result of the numbers recruited into training compared with the target.

Where trainees are required to pay a tuition fee for a course, what responsibility does the government and the course provider have to the trainee to ensure that there are not way too many trainees for the number of vacancies likely to arise? If this means that the student debt is less likely to be recovered, is this a waste of public money?

In a future post I will explore some other aspects of this dataset.

It’s a funny old world

On the day when nurses look as if they will join resident doctors in demanding more pay, figures about applications from graduates to train as a secondary school teacher hit decade high levels, even after removing the degree apprenticeship numbers from the totals. This month, according to DfE data, 58,880 candidates have submitted one or more applications to train as a teacher. This compares with 46,696 list July and 45,000 in 2108, before the pandemic. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2025 to 2026 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

This July, there were 36,283 candidates applying to train as a secondary school teacher, compared with 17,997 wanting to train as a primary school teacher.

By comparison in July 2018, 26,060 women had applied, whereas in July 2025 that had increased to 31,439. However, applications from men had increased from 12,680 in 2018 to 18,904 this July

Traditional higher education and SCITT courses still account for the bulk of the routes into teaching selected by candidates. However, candidate numbers on traditional salaried routes were down this July, from 8,927 to 7,636, but that may be partly the 7,332 candidates that have applied for the Postgraduate teaching apprenticeship route, up from 6,433 last July.

The new Teacher Degree Apprenticeship route that has attracted 1,079 candidates so far this year. This is a new route and, presumably isn’t open to graduates.

Although applicant numbers from the ‘rest of the world’ group are down this July, from 9,586 in July 2024, to 8,563 this July – this number still represents nearly 20% of all candidates.

Some subjects, including art, physical education, physics, mathematics and computing have recorded their highest level of ‘offers’ this year since the 2013/14 recruitment round. How many are multiple offers or from candidate’s not able to fulfil visa requirements won’t be known until the courses start in just over a month’s time.  Interestingly, offers for English courses are below the number of offers made in July 2024.

Despite the significant increase in candidate numbers, some subjects will not hit their targets set by the DfE this year. Subjects most likely to miss their targets are business studies, drama, religious education, music and design and technology. In English, it looks touch and go at this moment in time as to whether or not the target will be hit.

In some subjects, such as physical education, where the target is 725, there is a risk of a significant overshoot in offers. Such a situation might leave large numbers of trainees with additional debt and little chance of a teaching post in England next summer. The DfE will need to be alert to this issue, especially if the growth in ‘AI’ changes the labour market for those with degrees in physics and mathematics, so as to make teaching look like an interesting career at current salary levels.

It would be a funny old world if incentives to train as a teacher had to be switched from mathematics and the sciences to English and the arts.

The crisis in physics teaching

NfER has published some interesting research about the distribution of physics teachers A widespread lack of specialist physics teachers persists due to recruitment and retention challenges – NFER The most alarming statistic in the report is that 26% of state-funded secondary schools that responded to the School workforce Census had no qualified physics specialist in their science department.

However, there is a caveat to making too much of the data. This is because it is taken from the School Workforce Census. As this is a self-reporting census, the data must be regarded with a degree of caution, as there could be some under-reporting.

As the School Workforce Survey is conducted by the DfE each autumn term, it should have a degree of reliability. However, the NfER report only contains data from 2,296 of the 3,456 state-funded secondary schools in England.

Even so, assuming all the remaining schools have at least one qualified teacher of physics that would mean at least 12% of schools were without a qualified teacher of physics, and more than a third of schools (36%) has either no teacher or only one teacher.

Now some of these schools are 11-16 schools, and a few the remaining middle schools classified as secondary schools. These schools don’t need a teacher for ‘A’ level courses. But who is teaching the GSCE physics courses, and how many pupils from these schools go on to study physics at ‘A’ level?

For the 11-8 schools with no qualified teacher of physics, what arrangements are being made for pupils that want to study the subject at ‘A’ level. If it is matter of having to change school, then what are the costs to the pupils and their families. This is another example of where transport costs may affect choice of courses post-GCSE.

Do schools support each other? This was easy when all schools were maintained schools. In the 1960s, the local girls’ school where I lived could not support Chemistry ‘A’ level, and those girls wanting to study the subject joined the ‘A’ level class at the school I attended. This must be more challenging to arrange these days with competing Multi Academy Trusts.

Interestingly, if you add up all the qualified teachers in the table in the NfER survey it amounts to more than 3,500 qualified teachers of physics: enough for one for every school. However, our distribution system for teachers is based upon open market principles, with teachers free to apply for any post, and teach where they like. Is this the best system for the education of all children, if it means that some are deprived the opportunity to study subjects such as physics because there is no qualified teacher?

Hopefully, the present position marks the bottom of the staffing cycle, and improved interest in teaching, as reported in this blog and on my LinkedIn pages, means more trainees with emerge into the labour market over the next few years.  The issue then will be how to create teaching posts for them. Wil schools be required to either redeploy an existing member of staff or make them redundant? Those schools with falling rolls and a stable staff might find the former difficult. What is needed is a national plan for physics, and perhaps other subjects where there are teacher shortages. But, sadly, I doubt we will see such a radical idea from this government.

Will the 6,500 new teachers be heading for schools in disadvantaged areas?

Increasing teacher numbers in disadvantaged areas and core subjects. I was very happy when I read this heading in today’s Public Account’s Committee report on ‘Increasing Teacher Numbers’. Increasing teacher numbers: Secondary and further education (HC 825)

However, when I turned to paragraphs 25-29, this section just seemed like an afterthought. How depressing was it to read that

‘Schools and further education colleges are responsible for deciding the staff they need and recruiting their own workforces. Local authorities employ teachers in maintained schools.’ Para 25

There is nothing factually incorrect in the statement, but although local authorities are the de jure employers of teachers in maintained schools, ever since the devolution of budgets in the 1990s, local authorities have had little to do with the hiring policies for teachers in these schools, and nothing to do with the academy sector.

The Committee did acknowledge that

‘Those schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged pupils tend to have higher turnover rates and less experienced teachers. This impacts the government’s mission of breaking down the barriers to opportunity and means disadvantaged children are at risk of being locked out from particular careers.’

Teachers in schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged pupils are also less experienced

‘In 2023–24, 34% of teachers in the most disadvantaged schools had up to five years’ experience (20% in the least disadvantaged schools).’

They cited the examples of computer science and physics

‘In the most disadvantaged areas, 31% of schools do not offer Computer Science A-level, compared to 11% of schools in the least disadvantaged areas, due to a lack of trained teachers. For Physics A-level, this is 9% compared to 1%.’

This will come as no surprise to regular readers of this blog. Here is the link to a post from the 21st July 2023, almost two years ago.

Free School Meals and teacher vacancies | John Howson

Thos who know my background will know that I started teaching in a school in a disadvantaged part of Tottenham in 1971, and this issue has been one that has concerned me throughout my career in education. I was, therefore, disappointed to read that

‘We asked the Department when we could expect there to be less variation between schools in the most and least disadvantaged areas, but it did not commit to a timeframe. Instead, it noted that its retention initiatives providing financial incentives were targeting schools and colleges with the highest proportion of disadvantaged students.’

This seems to me to be as close to a non-answer as one can expect. Indeed, looking in detail at the oral evidence session, this is an area where answers from the senior civil servants in my opinion suggested little hope, and not as much concern for the values implied in the questions that I would have liked to have heard. In reality, past experience tells me that it is falling rolls and fewer job opportunities that will propel teachers towards schools where they would otherwise not take a teaching post. Iti s the economy, not the DfE that will improve the life chances of children in those schools with a high proportion of disadvantaged children. This is at the same time as the lives of their parents may be worsened by unemployment and welfare cuts. It’s a funny old world.

Time to stand up to HM Treasury

The news that postgraduate apprenticeships for teachers are to  be reduced to nine months in length Red tape slashed to get more teachers into classrooms – GOV.UK and aligned with the school-year, effectively returns school-based training possibilities to where they were two decades ago when the previous employment-based GTTP Scheme was flourishing.

The fact that the government is offering schools up to £28,000 to cover the cost of training apprentices in mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, computing, and modern foreign languages – the subjects which have the highest teacher shortages – if they take on an apprentice is something of a mixed blessing.

Could we see some applicants ditching higher education courses for a salary and presumably pension and NI contributions as a better bet than a scholarship, especially as once one has a foot in the door, the school is likely to want keep them after the end of the apprenticeship, if they prove successful.

This announcement form the DfE means apprentices pay nothing for their training and will earn a salary while they are training before moving on to full time teacher pay salary. If the salary is better than the scholarship, even without the additional benefits, might some be tempted to move if they become aware of this new route, especially if the school is nearer their home.

The advantage of an employment-based routes has always been their flexibility to offer career changers training near where they live, rather than at a university or SCITT that may be some distance away from their homes.

Of course, there needs to be applicants wanting to start teaching in these subjects, and I believe the current uncertain economic situation will help create the environment for the necessary increase in applications.

Where does this leave those training on other routes without a salary and with student debt around their neck? As they also have no certainty of a job at the end of their training, it appears a poor bet in a time when schools are complaining of under-funding and making staff redundant. Why take the risk of an intensive year of study with no guarantee of a job at the end?

This is why I think the Secretary of State must stand up to HM Treasury, and once again offer the free training for all that was withdrawn by the coalition government in 2010 in a really short-sighted move. Not to do so, could destabilise the whole teacher preparation market, if not in 2025 then certainly in 2026.

I have repeatedly said that the presence of two trainees in adjacent classrooms, one on a salary and the other paying for the privilege of their training, was plainly wrong. This new move on apprenticeships makes it both absurd as well as wrong.

Perhaps the government could offer free training for all as part of the pay bargaining this year with the professional associations. After all, HM Treasury knows that falling rolls will see the schooling budget on a downward trajectory over the next few years, especially as the decline in rolls is greatest in London, the highest cost area in terms of government funding of schooling.

The new on apprenticeships is not a gift horse one should ignore, but one to use as a basis for putting all graduate teacher preparation courses on the same financial footing for those seeking to become a teacher. Not to do so will have consequences.

FE sector and Physics: sparse provision?

The DfE has recently published some data on the workforce in the further Education sector following a survey of institutions. Further education workforce in England – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) the data was based on the 2020/21 college year.

The majority of those institutions surveyed were either general FE colleges or sixth from colleges. The latter were transferred many years ago from the school sector, but are mainly still offering a school sixth form curriculum that is more biased towards ‘academic’ subjects than the curriculum found in general FE colleges.

Regular monitoring of teacher preparation numbers over the course of the past decade – see frequent posts on this blog – has identified physics as a subject where trainee numbers for the school sector have regularly failed to meet the target set by government through the DfE’s Teacher Supply Model and subsequent allocations to ITT providers. This has produced a teacher shortage in the subject.

In the FE sector, physics accounted for 0.3% of the teaching [sic] workforce, compared with 0.3% lecturing in chemistry and 0.6% in biology. Because of the presence of vocational subjects, staffing percentages for academic subjects would be lower in the FE sector than in the school sector. As this level, physics is ranked alongside philosophy and just above politics and classical studies in the table of staffing percentages. Even just looking at staffing of academic subjects, physics only accounts for 1.5% of staff teaching academic subjects in the FE sector.

Overall, staff with physics lecturing as their main subject, based on the data from this survey, would seem to mean that there were only around 250 lecturers across the whole of England in the FE sector in 2020/21. A significant minority are likely to be found in the 44 Sixth Form Colleges, with the remainder spread between the 187 general FE colleges. If spread out evenly, this would mean every college would have one lead specialist in physics. I assume the remainder of any teaching of physics is carried out either by part-timers or by those with qualifications that contain elements of the subject.   

There does seem to be a question about the teaching of physics in the FE sector.

Cumulative percentage outcomes by centre type – grade A and above

Level 5 qualifications

Centre type  – Physics% achieving grade in 2019% achieving grade in 2023Difference 2019 and 2023
Other19.4%25.2%5.80%
Further education establishment18.4%17.2%-1.20%
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)42.4%47.2%4.80%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school21.7%25.6%3.90%
Secondary selective school25.8%29.2%3.40%
Free schools27.8%31.2%3.40%
Sixth form college24.3%27.0%2.70%
Academies21.1%22.6%1.50%
Secondary modern school/high school37.4%37.0%-0.40%
Ofqual data by Centre

FE establishments, along with secondary modern schools, both saw smaller percentages of grade A and above in 2023 than in 2019. Could this be down to staffing issues or is it a change in the mix of students enrolled or were their students learning more affected by covid?

The workforce data for the FE sector has provided a source of information that leads to many more possible questions about learning and outcomes in the FE sector.

Which one is Physics

Ofqual have helpfully provided some data on the 2023 Level 5 results that came out today. Congratulations to all candidates on their achievements, even if they are tempered by the type of referencing system employed to suit the demands of the system.

In the past, I have looked at the A and A* percentages in Physics and Media/Film/TV Studies as an interesting contrast. This year it is also possible to look at the percentages of such grades in both 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year) and 2023. Outcomes by centre type (ofqual.gov.uk)

Cumulative percentage outcomes by centre type – grade A and above

Level 5 qualifications

Centre type  – Physics% achieving grade in 2019% achieving grade in 2023Difference 2019 and 2023
Other19.4%25.2%5.80%
Further education establishment18.4%17.2%-1.20%
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)42.4%47.2%4.80%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school21.7%25.6%3.90%
Secondary selective school25.8%29.2%3.40%
Free schools27.8%31.2%3.40%
Sixth form college24.3%27.0%2.70%
Academies21.1%22.6%1.50%
Secondary modern school/high school37.4%37.0%-0.40%
https://analytics.ofqual.gov.uk/apps/Alevel/CentreType/

Normally, I would ask you to work out which table was the Physics and which Media/Fil/TV Studies, but this year have added the subject titles because not all centres are represented in the Media/Film/TV Studies subject group table by the types of centres.

Centre type – Media/Film/TV Studies% achieving grade in 2019% achieving grade in 2023Difference 2019 and 2023
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)27.7%26.8%-0.9%
Further education establishment10.0%9.4%-0.6%
Academies11.6%12.6%1.0%
Sixth form college11.7%13.3%1.6%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school9.7%12.2%2.5%
Secondary selective school21.7%30.4%8.7%
Source ofqual data

Generally, despite the shortage of teachers of physics, the percentage of grades A and above is higher than in Media/Film/TV Studies (MFTVS) and often higher in 2023 than in 2019 except in the FE sector and secondary modern schools. This highlights the risk of using data in an uncontextualized manner.

My suspicion is that in physics it is only those likely to do well that are entered, whereas the entry policy for MFTVS may be wider, and hence there are more lower grades.

It will be necessary to investigate candidate numbers to see whether the increase in A and above grades in MFTVS in the selective schools is down to either a more selective entry policy or some other factor?

I find some of the groupings a bit odd as well. Should ‘city training colleges’ actually be ‘city technology colleges’ and why are ‘high schools’ included with secondary modern as a group when they could be any type of school? The inclusion of ‘middle schools’ in Level 5 qualifications for physics is even more odd.

So, an interesting set of statistics that not a great deal can be read into, except that there are generally more higher grades in physics than in MFTVS. Is the shortage of teachers of physics having an effect, especially in the FE sector? I cannot be sure, but as further education colleges have a lower percentage in 2023 than in 2019, there might be a case to answer, especially as the recent DfE workforce in further education study suggests that there might be fewer than 250 leading physics lecturers across the whole of the FE sector.

But perhaps outcomes might just be down to who is enrolled?

(an earlier version of this post contained a mistake in the table and the post has been corrected and updated)