Are small sixth forms a good idea?

In a post in January, I mused about the issue of how falling rolls might affect schools particularly if it meant less funding, where school funding is based upon a per pupil funding model. Fewer pupils = less cash. Accountability and falling school rolls. Was it different in the past? | John Howson

One of the possible solutions discussed in that post was a reform of post-16 education. In a cash-strapped school system, is it possible to justify schools with small sixth forms? Are such sixth forms in the best interest of the students?

In order to think more deeply about this issue, I have looked at the ‘A’ Level results from one local authority, as published on the DfE’s website. 11-16 schools are excluded, as are schools that will eventually expect to have a sixth form, but aren’t currently at that stage, and also colleges. What’s is left are the details for the outcomes on ‘A’ Level results for 34 schools, as shown in the table below

pupils enteredbest 3 scoreprogress scoreaverage or above
31239.880.2AA
21135.750.08A
12540.77-0.13
11741.680.02A
11031.45-0.30
10733.240.00A
9634.340.00A
9438.30.17AA
9036.330.19AA
8935.51-0.12A
8731.530.08A
8239.150.80AA
8236.420.07A
7934.57-0.33
6929.47-0.21
6635.10.26AA
6632.37-0.10A
6535.640.03A
6433.39-0.15
6235.70.20AA
5934.69-0.09
5732.520.06A
4634.57-0.33
4233.65-0.11A
4131.14-0.46
3014.67-0.69
2836.310.21A
2525.07-0.02
2234.850.70A
1424.52-0.83A
1318.21-0.75
924.52-0.83
937.780.35A

For comparison purposes, the average score for state schools in England was -0.03 for Progress and 35.76 for the best 3 ‘A’ Levels score. There are other measures that could be used, but these are three I chose to use for this blog post.

Nine out of the 34 schools beat the national average for ‘best score’, although another couple of schools narrowly missed the national average, so it might be better to conclude that 14 schools were either close to or exceeded the national average for ‘best score’, leaving 20 schools that were below the national average.

Progress score is a more contentious measure. Here 15 schools did less well than average. The same schools often feature in both lists. Most of these schools entered less than 100 pupils for three subjects at ‘A’ level. Some pupils might have taken either two subjects and a vocational qualification or just two subjects at ‘A’ Level.

Schools that entered more pupils for 3 ‘A’ Levels were more likely to receive an ‘average’ or ‘above average’ grade.

The data forces me to ask the question – is the current arrangements for ‘A’ Level study across these schools producing the best outcomes for students? Two subsidiary questions are; if this is the outcome close to the top of the demographic cycle, what might happen to sixth form sizes in these schools once rolls start to fall in a few years’ time? The second question is, what is the cost of tuition per pupil under the present arrangements.

To answer the latter question, let’s assume a Year 7 class of 30 for mathematics taught by a newly qualified teacher on the bottom of the Main Scale for five period a week for 40 week, and an ‘A’ Level group taught for 5 periods a week by the Head of Department, on the top of the Upper Pay spine, and with a TLR 2A in addition.

The newly qualified teacher teaches 6 classes per week for 40 weeks, while the Head of Department teaches two ‘A’ Level sets, one of which has 10 weeks examination leave in Year 13. In addition, the Head of Department teaches four classes of 30, one of which has exam leave in Year 11.

 Using this data, and ignoring any other time spent on non-teaching duties, the Main Scale Teacher costs work out at 0.91p per pupil, while the Head of Department costs are £2.33p per pupil.

If the ’A’ Level groups were smaller than 15 in each year, as they well might be in some schools, then the cost per pupil increases unless the Head of Department receives a lesser amount in TLR.

In an 11-16 school, where the Head of Department might teach five classes for 40 weeks and one for 30 to allow for examination leave, the cost per pupil for the Head of Department reduces to below £2 per pupil. If the school has only long-serving teachers then the per pupil for teachers increases to nearer £1.50 per pupil.

For small schools with settled staffrooms, the difference in cost between the cost of teaching Years 7-11 and Years 11-13 may be marginal. The issue then becomes one of teaching and learning. Do small sixth forms produce as good examination results as larger sixth forms? The evidence from the table would suggest they are less likely to do so.

What of the student experience? Is it better to be either ‘a big fish in a small pool’ or ‘a small fish in a larger pool’? Has anyone ever asked students their views?

I think that there is a debate to be had about school organisation and size of school sixth forms when rolls fall, especially if school funding comes under pressure from increased government spending on both defence and welfare, and especially if we are in a recession.

As my colleagues in Haringey found out in the 1970s, such debates about changes to sixth forms can be fraught with political pitfalls for anyone suggesting change. But, is that a good enough reason not to at least discuss changes?

Note: I have only used salary costs in the modelling and not included on-costs from National Insurance and Pensions. I have also ignored premises and other staffing costs, as I assumed the to be low in a subject such as mathematics.  

Gender expectations: alive and well in T Level courses?

The DfE has released data about entrants to ‘T Level’ courses starting in 2025. T Level and T Level foundation year entrant data 2025 to 2026 – GOV.UK

What is striking about the data are the gender disparities between different courses, and how much work among this group of young people and their families may still need to be undertaken if stereotypes are to be confronted.

For instance, 95.6% of those starting the Education and Early Years course were female, whereas 96.9% of those starting the Building Services Engineering for Construction course were males. Males also dominated the three digital courses, whereas the craft and design course participants were 90.4% female. Males made up two thirds of the Agriculture Land Management and Production, but only 19.7% of the Animal care and Management

There was more parity in courses such as Media Broadcast and Production, the Science courses and, interestingly, the overall total ended up 49.3% female and 50.7% male!

The DfE note that 27,446 learners started T Levels in the 2025 to 2026 academic year, up from 25,508 in the 2024 to 2025 academic year. This represents a 7.6% increase in entrant numbers. From the time series data, it looks as if more women are now taking these qualifications.

Table 3: T Level entrants split by T Level pathway and legal sex, 2024 to 2025 academic year

RoutePathwayFemaleMale
Agriculture Environmental and Animal CareAgriculture Land Management and Production35.8%64.2%
Agriculture Environmental and Animal CareAnimal care and Management80.3%19.7%
Business and AdministrationManagement and Administration42.7%57.3%
ConstructionBuilding Services Engineering for Construction3.1%96.9%
ConstructionDesign Surveying and Planning for Construction17.5%82.5%
ConstructionOnsite Construction (discontinued)6.9%93.1%
Creative and DesignCraft and Design90.4%9.6%
Creative and DesignMedia Broadcast and Production43.8%56.2%
DigitalDigital Data Analytics (formerly Digital Business Services)12.9%87.1%
DigitalDigital Software Development (formerly Digital Production Design and Development)12.0%88.0%
DigitalDigital Support and Security (formerly Digital Support Services)8.0%92.0%
Education and Early YearsEducation and Early Years95.6%4.4%
Engineering and ManufacturingDesign and Development for Engineering and Manufacturing9.2%90.8%
Engineering and ManufacturingEngineering Manufacturing Processing and Control12.0%88.0%
Engineering and ManufacturingMaintenance Installation and Repair for Engineering and Manufacturing9.7%90.3%
Health and ScienceHealth91.8%8.2%
Health and ScienceScience53.4%46.6%
Health and ScienceHealthcare Science72.1%27.9%
Legal Finance and AccountingAccounting34.5%65.5%
Legal Finance and AccountingFinance22.6%77.4%
Legal Finance and AccountingLegal Services64.6%35.4%
Total 49.3%50.7%

There are now going to be ‘V Levels’ to add to the mix of qualifications that young people can study for after the age of sixteen. Should we be more worried about the gender split in courses more closely linked to careers than for academic subjects, or doesn’t it matter at all?  

Personally, after thirty years of trying to change attitudes to career choices, I find this data somewhat disheartening, especially as the majority of classroom teachers in secondary schools are now women. It seems as if teachers cannot override stereotyping, and we need to do more careers and work experience to challenge entrenched attitudes.

16 to 19 discretionary bursary fund: allocation methodology consultation

Those readers that live in rural areas might be especially interested in replying to this consultation currently open for responses. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/16-to-19-discretionary-bursary-fund-allocation-methodology

The closing date is on the 23rd May 2019, unless presumably a general election is called before then, in which case purdah rules might apply.

There is a whole section of the consultation about transport costs for this age group that will allow comments about how unfair the present arrangements are. Indeed, the consultation acknowledges the special position of London, and the TfL provisions for travel in the capital for this age group.

There is also a mention of the Grayling Rail Card that will help student using the remaining rural railways to travel to school or college, but does nothing for those travelling by bus or without any transport links at all.

The first section of the consultation is about replacing the present grant based upon student numbers times a fixed amount with a more nuanced grant based upon deprivation factors. The present arrangements were introduced when the coalition scrapped the Education Maintenance Allowance introduced by the Labour government.

Given the battering that the 16-19 sector has taken over funding, the new arrangements should not be used to further withdraw cash from the sector. If ‘need’ is taken into account, It must be related to courses studies as well as income Why should students using very expensive equipment, as say on engineering courses, be provided with a free education, whereas those on catering courses may be required to buy both specialist clothing and even sets of knives.

With the learning leaving age now at eighteen, the rules should be the same for this age group as for other children in education. Local authorities, if funded, would be much better placed to provide the transport arrangements than individual schools and colleges. But, that would require an acceptance that local authorities are a ‘good thing’, something not universally accepted in government.

 

So, if you have an interest in this area, please do download and reply to the consultation. The more responses about the transport issue the better. Perhaps, we can make a difference for families living in rural areas for a change.

 

Post sixteen outcomes decided by KS2 attainment?

Yesterday, the DfE published a whole raft of statistics about the destinations of KS4 and KS5 pupils in 2016/17. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/destinations-of-ks4-and-ks5-pupils-2017 The raising of the learning leaving age to 18 has been one of the relative success stories of the past decade. However, it has literally come at a price as other data now clearly shows. While the rest of the school sector has suffered at the lower end of government cutbacks, post-16 education has really been badly affected.

There are other financial consequences as well. Families that receive free transport for children up to the age of 16 suddenly find, outside of London, that they must pay for the same seat on the school bus if their offspring enters into the sixth form. That is an anomaly that I have long campaigned to see abolished, especially as some councils are now extending the rule to pupils with SEN.

Government now has data on some 99% of the cohort in 2016/17. Generally, the higher your success rate at KS4 the more likely you are to stay in a school environment, if one is available. Less academic success, greater disadvantage and lower level SEN, without the support of a ‘Statement’ or EHCP means a greater chance of switching from a school into a Further Education College at Sixteen. In some parts of the country, most notably the urban areas in some areas of the North West, the situation is more complicated because of the present of Sixth Form Colleges. In those areas, the legacy of the introduction of comprehensive education some forty years ago still drive where students are education post-16.

Overall, some 86% of young people remained within the education sphere rather than training or employment locations after the age of sixteen. Some 5% of young people didn’t sustain their original choice post-16 for at last two terms. This percentage has remained relatively stable for the past few years, falling from 9% in 2010/11.

Apprenticeships and employment remain at about eight per cent of sixteen year olds. The recovery in the economy and pressure of local labour markets in parts of the South don’t seem to have significantly increased the percentage directly entering employment at sixteen. Indeed, with the fall in the cohort, actual numbers will have reduced and that may be a concern to some employers.

Should the difference between school and FE be so marked by perceived ability pre-16? Of those categorised as have low attainment at KS2, 58% ended up in general FE with only 13% in school sixth forms and six per cent in Sixth Form Colleges. By contrast, of those shown as high achievers at KS2, 60% remained in school sixth forms; 18% went on to Sixth Form Colleges and only 15% proceeded into general further education settings. Middle achievers were somewhere in between these two sets of figures.

As someone that entered sixth form with 5 ‘O’ levels, not including English, but who gained high grades at ‘A’ level, I worry about too much segregation at sixteen. Whatever the academic merits of specialisation of institution, is it the right approach socially for the future of society?