L UGAR AL QUE DEBE EFECTUARSE LA REMISIÓN : EL CONCEPTO DE “ DOMICILIO ” A LOS EFECTOS DE LA COMUNICACIÓN PROCESAL

Although options about careers, including going on to HE, are often considered before the age of 16, and many policy initiatives to raise aspirations and attainment of potential HE entrants from more socially and economically disadvantaged groups is focused at an earlier age (eg Aimhigher, Excellence Challenge, Partnership for Progression), we start our discussion at around the GCSE stage and Year 11 of school. This is because this is where we have the earliest good statistical evidence on attainment, which has a direct link with likelihood of HE participation.

It has been established that, in general, GCSE attainment at the end of Year 11 significantly influences entry to degrees in HE by aged 19. According to analysis of Youth Cohort Survey, Sweep 3,2 96 per cent of 18-19 year olds studying for a degree attained five

1 _{See various reports, such as The Dearing Report, NICHE, 1997, NAO} report on Widening Participation in Higher Education in England (2002) and research studies, such as Hogarth et al. (1997); Hodgkinson and Spours (2000).

2 _{In Gayle, Berridge and Davies (2003), Econometric Analysis of the} Demand for Higher Education.

plus GCSEs in Year 11; also the more GCSEs held, the greater likelihood of being in degree level study.

Our survey of potential entrants (ie Year 13 students or equivalent, mostly under 21 years of age, see survey discussion in section 1.3.3 and Appendix B, Section. B.5 for more details) supports this. Of all the biographical and educational variables analysed, as likely influences on minority ethnic student intentions, it was the number of GCSEs they had attained so far which had the greatest effect. Both White and minority ethnic students with fewer GCSEs (less than eight) were more likely to have decided not to apply to university in the current year, and this lower attaining group were also more likely to be unsure about doing so, again for both White and minority ethnic students, than the higher attaining students. Other research has shown variations in attainment between ethnic groups at various stages of schooling. Overall, the disparities increase over the course of schooling: at GCSE, Black Caribbean and Pakistani are the worst performing groups (with below 40 per cent of pupils obtaining five or more GCSEs in grades A*-C, 1999- 2002, England and Wales); Bangladeshis do slightly better, but not as well as White pupils (just over 50 per cent); and Indians perform the best (around 60 per cent).1

There are a complex set of reasons for the differences between ethnic groups at GCSE level,2 _{in particular, the higher} performance of Indians, and lower performance of Black Caribbean, and Pakistani pupils. Some of the factors — many relating to socio-economic class — which may hinder educational achievement, apply more to some minority ethnic groups than to others. For example, the effect of relative economic disadvantage is evident in the much lower attainment at GCSE of children eligible for free school meals (FSM), compared with children from same ethnic group who are not. But there are also other socio- economic factors (eg local area deprivation) not captured by the FSM index (and not all children from FSM groups have low attainment, eg the Chinese group are an exception to the general rule). Gender can also be an important variable (girls generally perform better than boys at GCSE, and this is especially evident in the Black Caribbean group). Another factor, likely to be influencing minority ethnic groups in different ways, is school environment and location: most minority ethnic pupils go to school in the major conurbations, and two in five go to school in

1 _{See Figure 4, p. 9, DfES Research Topic paper RTP01-03, by} Bhattachayya et al., (2003). Chinese also perform well but the number is too small to be shown separately from this data source, YCS, 16 year olds.

2 _{See DfES report cited above and also the various reasons are} discussed in our Interim report, p. 35, drawing on earlier research evidence.

London.1 _{Many minority ethnic pupils go to schools where the} majority, or even the overwhelming majority of pupils, are White, and such schools may be less well-equipped to meet the needs of some minority ethnic pupils, than those where they form the majority. School experiences (eg teachers’ low expectations, racial abuse or harassment, lack of role models, peer pressures), parental education, parental occupation levels, parental level of engagement in their children’s education, and parental aspirations for their children have all also been shown to influence attainment of minority ethnic pupils.

There is no consensus about the relative significance of the effect of these different factors on attainment. The recent Cabinet Office report (see earlier, section 1.6), showed a complex interaction of relationships between ethnicity and attainment of young people. Actions taken in recent years to raise minority ethnic attainment in schools have been successful in various areas, though the statistics show that there is still room for improvement. Much of this positive action has focused on schools and LEAs (eg better LEA monitoring of ethnicity, leading to better targeting of additional resources; additional mentoring support to learners, in particular Black Caribbean boys; and staff development to raise awareness in mainstream teaching). OFSTED reports show that improvements have also been made in combating racism in schools, though not all schools have adequate procedures in place.2 _{There are also a number of projects aimed specifically at} raising the awareness and aspirations of the more able students from minority ethnic groups (potential HE entrants), especially Black boys, often involving out-of-school activities (eg Saturday schools and sports run by LEAs, Windsor Fellowship, universities

etc.) and so to close the attainment gap and encourage more of

them to continue in education beyond compulsory school leaving age.