Social Class, Gender and Ethnic Differences in Subjects Taken at Age 14.

Abstract

In this paper, we identify patterns of subject and qualification choices made at age 14. Much of the previous research on 'subject choice' has focussed on the later stages of educational trajectories, particularly Higher Education. However, the choices made at early branching points can limit pupils' subsequent options, potentially contributing to educational inequalities. This paper identifies the patterns of General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) subjects chosen by a cohort of young people born in 1989/1990. We make use of the Next Steps data (formerly the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE)) which is linked to the National Pupil Database. We develop an approach to measuring the academic selectivity of subjects and qualifications. We examine the roles of social class, parental education, income, gender and ethnicity in determining participation in these curriculum groupings. Using measures of prior attainment from age thirteen, we address the question of whether curriculum differentials simply reflect differences in prior attainment or whether they actually operate above and beyond existing inequalities. We find clear socio-economic, gender, ethnic and school-level differences in subjects studied which cannot be accounted for by prior attainment.

The role of schools in explaining individuals’ subject choices at age 14

“…For ease of interpretation, we standardise this score among the sample used in this paper, so that it has a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one. Henderson, Sullivan, Anders, and Moulton (2018) provide further discussion of the development of this measure. Most reassuringly, we note that this method produces similar results to more complex approaches aimed at capturing subject 'difficulty' (Coe, Searle, Barmby, Jones, & Higgins, 2008).…”

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

“…Much research in this area has focused on girls' participation in STEM subjects (Codiroli Mcmaster, 2017). Henderson et al (2017) found that girls have lower odds of taking three or more STEM subjects and higher odds of taking applied GCSEs compared to boys with the same level of prior attainment. With respect to ethnic differences, there is some evidence of complex patterns for educational attainment and participation in certain subjects (Heath & Brinbaum, 2007;Plewis, 2009;Rothon, 2005;Sullivan, Zimdars, & Heath, 2010).…”

Incentivising Specific Combinations of Subjects – Does It Make Any Difference to University Access?

“…KS3 tests are taken roughly contemporaneously with subject choice decisions, so they seem the most appropriate measure to use in this way. Further details, including a ranking of subjects based on this measure, are discussed by Henderson et al (2016).…”

“…To explore whether this is the case, we consider a continuous measure of academic subject selectivity (Henderson et al, 2016) and whether changes along this spectrum make a difference to the probability of progression to higher education. This measure is based on the prior academic performance of the pupils that choose to study each subject.…”

“…However, previous work has highlighted that there are important and complex patterns in the subjects that individuals study during this age range (Henderson et al, 2016). Three particularly important characteristics in explaining subject choices at this age are gender (Bell, 2001;Francis, 2000;Jin et al, 2011;Sullivan et al, 2010), prior attainment (Davies et al, 2008;Jin et al, 2011) and socioeconomic background (Davies et al, 2008;Jin et al, 2011).…”