IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Disengagement 14-16: Context and Evidence

Listed author(s):
  • Hilary Steedman
  • Sheila Stoney
Registered author(s):

    This paper presents an overview of our current state of knowledge regarding poor motivation of 14-16 year oldschool pupils in the UK. A number of experts in the field from a variety of disciplines presented papers on thistopic to a series of seminars held at the London School of Economics between 2002 and 2003. These papers,summarised here, present evidence from a historical, comparative, and social science perspectives and report theresults of evaluation of government intervention programmes to improve motivation. International comparisons(PISA) show UK disengagement below the OECD average but the UK has the strongest link between socioeconomicdisadvantage and disengagement. We identify a very small 'out of touch' group who have practicallylost touch with school and a larger group - around one fifth of the cohort - who could be characterised as'disaffected but in touch'. Finally, we identify a further group - perhaps 15 per cent of the cohort who gainbetween 1 and 4 GCSE passes at Grades A*-C but who have not reached full potential as a result of loss ofinterest in learning. The 'out of touch' group often requires intensive one-on-one mentoring outside the schoolcontext. Evaluation of government intervention programmes has not so far shown an obvious way forward forthe 'disaffected but in touch' group, targeted principally by workplace learning measures. For the '1-4 Grade C'group, there may be something of a magic bullet - namely better vocational options.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Centre for Economic Performance, LSE in its series CEP Discussion Papers with number dp0654.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Oct 2004
    Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0654
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Steedman, Hilary & McIntosh, Steven, 2001. "Measuring Low Skills in Europe: How Useful Is the ISCED Framework?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 564-581, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0654. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.