IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/nierev/v240y2017ipr42-r57_13.html

Post-Compulsory Education in England: Choices and Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Hupkau, Claudia
  • McNally, Sandra
  • Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer
  • Ventura, Guglielmo

Abstract

Most students do not follow the ‘academic track’ (i.e. A-levels) after leaving school and only about a third of students go to university before the age of 20. Yet progression routes for the majority that do not take this path but opt for vocational post-compulsory education are not as well-known, which partly has to do with the complexity of the vocational education system and the difficulty of deciphering available data. If we are to tackle long-standing problems of low social mobility and a long tail of underachievers, it is essential that post-16 vocational options come under proper scrutiny. This paper is a step in that direction.We use linked administrative data to track decisions made by all students in England who left compulsory education after having undertaken the national examination – the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) – at age 16 in the year 2009/10. We track them up to the age of 21, as they progress through the education system and (for some) into the labour market. We categorise the many different types of post-16 qualifications into several broad categories and we look at the probability of achieving various educational and early labour market outcomes, conditional on the path chosen at age 17. We also take into account the influence of demographics, prior attainment and the secondary school attended. Our findings illustrate the strong inequality apparently generated by routes chosen at age 17, even whilst controlling for prior attainment and schooling up to that point

Suggested Citation

  • Hupkau, Claudia & McNally, Sandra & Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer & Ventura, Guglielmo, 2017. "Post-Compulsory Education in England: Choices and Implications," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 240, pages 42-57, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:nierev:v:240:y:2017:i::p:r42-r57_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0027950100003781/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claudia Hupkau & Sandra McNally & Jenifer Ruiz-Valenzuela & Guglielmo Ventura, 2017. "Post-Compulsory Education in England: Choices and Implications," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 240(1), pages 42-57, May.
    2. Jiaqi Li & Anna Valero & Guglielmo Ventura, 2020. "Trends in job-related training and policies for building future skills into the recovery," CVER Research Papers 033, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    3. Maragkou, Konstantina, 2020. "Socio-economic inequality and academic match among post-compulsory education participants," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra & Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer, 2020. "Entry through the narrow door: The costs of just failing high stakes exams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    5. Sandra McNally & Luis Schmidt & Anna Valero, 2024. "Do management practices matter in further education?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(363), pages 740-769, July.
    6. Hector Espinoza & Stefan Speckesser, 2019. "A Comparison of Earnings Related to Higher Level Vocational/Technical and Academic Education," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 502, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    7. Martin McGuigan & Sandra McNally & Gill Wyness, 2016. "Student Awareness of Costs and Benefits of Educational Decisions: Effects of an Information Campaign," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(4), pages 482-519.
    8. Gill Wyness, 2021. "Should we abolish GCSEs?," CEPEO Briefing Note Series 14, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Aug 2021.
    9. Emily McDool & Damon Morris, 2020. "Gender and Socio-Economic Differences in STEM Uptake and Attainment," CVER Research Papers 029, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    10. Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra & Terrier, Camille & Ventura, Guglielmo, 2020. "Closing the Gap between Vocational and General Education? Evidence from University Technical Colleges in England," IZA Discussion Papers 13837, IZA Network @ LISER.
    11. Chiara Cavaglia & Sandra McNally & Guglielmo Ventura, 2020. "Do Apprenticeships Pay? Evidence for England," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(5), pages 1094-1134, October.
    12. Jenifer Ruiz-Valenzuela & Camille Terrier & Clémentine Van Effenterre, 2017. "Effectiveness of CEOs in the public sector: evidence from further education institutions," CVER Briefing Notes 005, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    13. repec:cep:cepisp:is03 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Robbie Maris, 2025. "Upper Secondary Pathways and Progression to Further Study," CEPEO Working Paper Series 25-08, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Aug 2025.
    15. Sandra McNally, 2018. "Apprenticeships in England: what does research tell us?," CVER Briefing Notes 008, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    16. Hector Espinoza & Stefan Speckesser, 2019. "A comparison of earnings related to higher level vocational/technical and academic education," CVER Research Papers 019, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    17. Sophie Hedges & Vahé Nafilyan & Stefan Speckesser & Augustin de Coulon, 2017. "Young people in low level vocational education: characteristics, trajectories and labour market outcomes," CVER Research Papers 004, Centre for Vocational Education Research.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:nierev:v:240:y:2017:i::p:r42-r57_13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/niesruk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.