This briefing explores the ethnic disparities existing in educational outcomes from early years to higher education, taking in schools, further education and post-education destinations.
The statistics and charts used are drawn from the Government’s Ethnicity Facts and Figures website unless indicated otherwise (with a web link to data sources). This is by reference to six broad ethnic groups (White, Mixed, Asian, Chinese, Black and Other) referencing specific ethnic sub-groups (e.g. Gypsy or Irish Traveller, White and Black Caribbean, Indian, Black African and Arab) where that information is available, and where it is telling us something different. There are 18 sub-groups used by the government which can be found here. All the figures are for England only, unless stated otherwise.
Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities
In the wake of Black Lives Matter protests in July this year the Prime Minister established a Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities to investigate “all aspects of inequality”. The Commission’s terms of reference states that it will “review inequality in the UK, focusing on areas including poverty, education, employment, health and the criminal justice system”. In September the Commission published a more detailed outline of the areas that it will consider. In terms of education and employment it will be looking at:
- Early years’ family structures: including family services and attitudes towards education.
- Disparities in educational attainment and exclusions.
- Exploring success factors for improving educational outcomes.
- How the curriculum could highlight the contributions of the different communities and regions of the UK.
- Employment opportunities for young people (with a focus on 16-24-year olds).
- Barriers to entry and routes to progression in employment.
The Commission is expected to report by the end of 2020. There are ten commissioners. Dr Tony Sewell CBE, an education consultant, chairs the Commission. Dr Sewell was previously appointed by Boris Johnson (then Mayor of London) to chair an inquiry examining primary and secondary education in London.
Early education
The impact of starting school behind is significant and can be damaging to a child’s progress throughout their school years, and prospects beyond. The literature and notably the Children’s Commissioner’s recent report (Best beginnings in the early years), which the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities has referenced as part of its consideration, focuses on issues of poverty and households where a parent or carer is experiencing severe mental ill health, substance misuse or domestic abuse, to explain differences in early years’ outcomes. Race disparities are not referred to. The take up of free childcare entitlement by ethnicity is not centrally recorded; though the take-up of places and the quality of childcare providers is lower in the most deprived areas of England, according to the National Audit Office.
71 per cent of 4-to-5 year olds met the expected standard in development by the end of the 2018 to 2019 school year. Pupils from the Chinese (76%) and those from the Indian ethnic group (78%) were most likely to meet the standard. Gypsy/Roma (34%) and Irish traveller (39%) were least likely to. Bangladeshi (67%) Pakistani (64%) and Black pupils (68%) fell below the average. See the chart below.
In every ethnic group, pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) were less likely to meet the expected standard, with just only over (55%) half doing so – a gap of 18 percentage points. The biggest attainment gap was for White Irish Pupils (-29 percentage points) followed by White British pupils (-23) which is explained by much poorer attainment by FSM pupils among these groups.
In every ethnic group, girls (78%) were more likely to meet the standard than boys (64%). The biggest gap was in the Black African ethnic group, where 77% of girls and 60% of boys met the standard.
Primary School
Almost two-thirds (65%) of 10-to-11 year olds met the expected standard in reading, writing and maths in the school year 2018 to 2019. Pupils from the Chinese ethnic group (80%) were most likely to meet standard. White Gypsy and Roma (19%) and Irish Traveller (26%) pupils were least likely to do so. White British pupils performed at (65%), Black African performed above (67%) and Black Caribbean pupils (56%) performed below the national average.
In every ethnic group, pupils eligible for FSM (47%) were less likely to meet the expected standard than non-FSM pupils (68%); a gap which is wider than at early years. The gap is bigger among White Pupils (-24 percentage points), driven by significant lower attainment by FSM pupils (21 pp below the national average) compared to FSM pupils from other backgrounds. White Gypsy and Roma FSM pupils were least likely (at 17%) to meet the standard. In contrast, Chinese FSM pupils performed (75%) above the national average for non-FSM pupils (68%). See the chart below.
Again in every ethnic group girls (70%) were more likely than boys (60%) to meet the expected standard. The smallest gap was found in the Irish Traveller ethnic group, where 75% of girls and 70% of boys met the standard. The biggest gap was found among the Black Caribbean group, where 64% of girls and 49% of boys met the standard; figures for White British pupils were 70% and 60%.
Standards at Secondary School including GCSEs
Analysis conducted by the Centre for Social Justice show that attainment gaps between pupils from ethnic minority groups and White pupils have reduced substantially over the last thirty years.
Almost thirty years ago, at GCSE level Indian pupils outperformed White pupils in contrast to their Pakistani and Bangladeshi counterparts who were performing well below average. Since then the proportion of all ethnic minorities achieving good GCSE outcomes has increased, with all groups closing the gap with White British pupils. By the early 2000s the number of Pakistani pupils achieving 5-GCSEs A-C grades had increased by half, with the proportion of Bangladeshi pupils doing so, increasing threefold. The gap between White and Black pupils (around 14 percentage points) remained, although the performance of Black pupils as for others increased by 13 points between 1991 and 2001.
These trends continue to the present, with Indian pupils outperforming other groups on this measure between 2002 and 2012; with Indian FSM pupils by 2012 nearly performing on par with White British children not eligible for FSMs. By 2010 performance by Bangladeshi and Black African pupils had surpassed that of their White British counterparts. Pakistani pupils also closed the gap two years later, however the proportion of Black Caribbean pupils achieving the 5-GCSE benchmark was 4 percentage points below that of their Black African and White British peers; still they have made considerable progress over that decade – by 51 percentage points.
The good 5 GCSE measure was replaced in 2016 by the ‘Attainment 8’ score (out of 90), which measures pupils’ performance in 8 GCSE-level qualifications (on scale of 1 to 9, where 1 represents the lowest score and 9 the highest, with English and Math double weighted). Given the change, making a like-for-like comparison with previous years is not possible. Nevertheless, the Attainment 8 trends show that Chinese, Indian, Bangladeshi and Black African pupils continue to outperform White British pupils, with Pakistani pupils closing the gap. It is noteworthy that for the 2018-19 school year, Black Caribbean pupils fall further behind (39.4) with pupils from Gypsy/Roma (19.1) and Irish Traveller (26.6) backgrounds having the lowest average scores. See chart below.
In every ethnic group, pupils eligible for FSM (34.9) had a lower average Attainment 8 score than those not eligible (48.6). Among FSM-eligible pupils, those from the Chinese ethnic group (57.9) had the highest score and White pupils had the lowest (32.0). The biggest gap between FSM-eligible pupils and those not eligible was in the White Irish ethnic group, where the average Attainment 8 score was 37.0 and 54.3 respectively (a gap of 17.3 points), followed by White British pupils with a gap of 16.4 points. It is notable that Chinese, Indian Bangladeshi and Black African FSM eligible pupils outperform Black Caribbean pupils who are not eligible for FSM, and are closing the gap with White British pupils also not eligible for FSMs.
Again, in every ethnic group, girls (49.5) outperform boys (44.0) with a notable gap for Other Black and the Black Caribbean groups, where girls scored around 8 more points than boys on average, a gap that has narrowed since primary school.
Pupil progress between 11 and 16 years old (‘Progress 8’)
Pupils from the Chinese ethnic group (1.03) made the most progress between the ages of 11 and 16 (‘Progress 8’ score, with a positive score means that on average more progress since Key Stage 3 tests in Year 6 is being made than the average) in 2017/18. Asian (0.45) and Black (0.12) pupils made higher than average and pupils from White British (-0.14) and Mixed (-0.02) groups made lower than average progression. Pupils with the lowest progress scores were in the Irish Travellers (-1.16) and White Gypsy/Roma (-0.78) groups. There are some differences within ethnic groups, notably between Black African (0.31) and Black Caribbean (-0.30) pupils. See chart below:
In every ethnic group, pupils eligible for FSM had lower Progress 8 scores than those not eligible; see next section. Girls (0.22) made more progress than boys (-0.25) in every ethnic group. Scores were negative for both boys and girls among Black Caribbean, Mixed White/Black Caribbean, Gypsy and Roma and Irish Traveller groups.
Performance by disadvantage pupils
Children living in poverty are more likely to have lower levels of educational outcomes, reducing employment opportunities and earnings in adulthood with evidence that the relationship is circular with educational attainment the most influential factor for poverty in future life stages.
In every ethnic group pupils, eligible for FSM made less progress between the ages of 11 and 16 (as measured by Progress 8) than those not eligible, with average scores of -0.53 and 0.06 respectively.
Analysis conducted by the Office of National Statistics found that educational outcomes for Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils do not follow this trend; Bangladeshi and Pakistani children who are eligible for FSM have higher Progress 8 scores than the overall national average for all pupils, with Progress 8 scores of 0.30 and 0.03 respectively. The gap between average Progress 8 scores for FSM-eligible pupils and those not eligible was 0.24 for Bangladeshi pupils and 0.27 for Pakistani pupils, narrower than for most ethnic groups. This is even though children from Pakistani and Bangladeshi households are more likely to live in low income and in-material deprivation out of all ethnic groups: 2.8 and 2.4 times more likely, respectively (to live in low-income households) compared with children living in White British households.
In contrast White British children, who are less likely to live in poverty, progressed less than average if they were FSM eligible (-0.78). In addition, White British pupils have the second largest gap in average Progress 8 scores between FSM-eligible pupils and those not eligible, at 0.73 points. Indeed White Boys FSM pupils (-0.98) make less progression than Black Caribbean FSM boys (-0.81); similar pattern is found with girls.
Destinations of school pupils after GCSEs (and equivalent qualifications)
In nearly every ethnic group over 90% of pupils went into education, apprenticeships or employment, the exception being White Gypsy and Roma (67%) and Irish Traveller (72%) groups.
Pupils from the Chinese and Indian ethnic groups primarily stay in education (97% and 96% respectively). Pupils from a Mixed White/Black Caribbean (84%), and White British (85%) background were less likely to stay in education; significantly so, for White Gypsy/Roma (56%) and Irish Traveller pupils (58%).
Six per cent of White British pupils went into apprenticeships, the highest percentage out of all ethnic groups after Irish Traveller pupils (which has very small numbers). The average is 4%.
White Gypsy and Roma (23%) and Irish Traveller (22%) pupils were the most likely to have no sustained employment or education. Pupils from the Chinese ethnic group were the least likely to go into employment, at less than 0.5%, Gypsy/Roma pupils were more likely to enter employment, at 8%.
School Exclusions
The 2019 Timpson review acknowledged that children from African-Caribbean, Irish Traveller and Gypsy/Roma backgrounds are three-to-four times more likely to be excluded from school than other groups but concluded the trends are complicated. Finding that factors specific to a child’s ethnicity – related to cultural misunderstanding and low expectations – are driven by broader factors. That if factors such as poverty are considered the differences between ethnic groups are substantially reduced and that children with some types of special educational needs, those supported by social care and those who are disadvantaged in other ways account for three-quarters of all excluded children. However critics of his report, while accepting that the causes of exclusion are complex and wider than ethnicity, point out that higher exclusion rates between African-Caribbean or Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children remain after taking account of such factors.
In the 2017 to 2018 school year, temporary and permanent exclusion rates were the highest among Irish Traveller (17.42% and 02.29% respectively) and Gypsy and Roma pupils (16.52% and 0.36%). The lowest rates were among pupils from the Chinese (0.50% and 0.01%) and Indian ethnic groups (0.75% and 0.027%). The exclusion rates for White British pupils (5.70% and 0.10%) were comparable to those from Mixed (5.89% and 0.16%) and Black (5.56% and 0.13%) backgrounds; but are notably higher among Black Caribbean (10.48% and 0.28%) and Mixed White/Black Caribbean (10.13% and 0.27%) pupils.
Exclusion rates were lower in 2017-2018 than in 2006-2007 for virtually all ethnic groups (save Chinese permanent rates which remain the same but are very low). They have fallen the most among pupils from a Black and Mixed backgrounds, but still in every year the rate for these pupils was higher than the national average.
A-levels, apprenticeships and further education
Further education
In the eight years to July 2019 the total number of people (young people and adults aged 16 plus) in further education (FE) fell by almost a third (30.6%) driven almost entirely by decreasing numbers of White students. Although their number also decreased over the same period (by 18.4%), there are now greater proportions of FE students from the Asian, Black, Mixed, and other ethnic groups (from 19.3% to 22.6%).
The fall in participation concerns adults 19 and over, and has been assigned to long terms trends, more recent policy decisions to withdraw some grants and replace them with learner loans and increased participation in higher education.
In the academic year ending July 2019, all ethnic groups had higher participation in FE than their make-up of the overall population; the exception being White people who made up 77.3% of those participating in FE but 84% of the overall population.
Apprenticeships
The overwhelming majority (86%) of all learners starting an apprenticeship were white in 2018/19, compared to 84% of the general population. Asian learners only made up 5% of apprentices and 8.4% of the overall population. The proportion of Black and Mixed apprentices is slightly below their overall population. The proportion of starters from BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) backgrounds was 12.3%, its highest level, increasing from 9.7% in 2011-12. Five years ago the government set a target to increase the proportion of BAME people starting an apprenticeship by 20% by 2020: between 2015-16 and 2018-19 the rate of increased stood at 17%, with one year to go.
A-levels
In the 2018 to 2019 school year the average point score for all 16-to-18 year old students taking A-levels was 33.42 (equivalent to grade C+). Students from the Chinese ethnic group had the highest overall average point (37.98 – equivalent to grade B). White Irish Traveller students had the lowest (23.47), followed by Black students overall (28.74). The average point score for White British students (32.65) was slightly below the national average (33.42). It is notable that the gap between Black African and Black Caribbean pupils is narrower than in other stages of education. See chart below:
Destinations of students after 16-to-18 study
As at the early stage at 16, students from the Chinese (87%) and Indian ethnic (88%) groups were the most likely to go onto education, apprenticeships or employment. The percentages of Asian, Black (83%) and White (82%) students were all above the national average (81%), but below for Black Caribbean (78%) and Mixed White/Black Caribbean (77%) students. The ethnic groups most likely to have no sustained destinations were White Gypsy Roma (34%) and Irish Traveller students (33%).
White British students were most likely to go into employment (29%) or an apprenticeship (11%), less than half stay in education (42%) compared to at least three-quarters of Chinese, and two-thirds of Asian and Black students that do; though only just over half (52%) of Black Caribbean students stay in education. Still the White Gypsy/Roma ethnic group had the lowest percentage of students staying in education (13%), followed by the Irish Traveller students (22%).
Over the eight academic years to July 2018 students from the Bangladeshi, Black African, Black ‘Other’ and Asian ‘Other’ ethnic groups went from having below average destination outcomes to having above average outcomes. The percentage of pupils from the Bangladeshi ethnic group going into education, apprenticeships or employment went up from 85% to 90%, the biggest increase out of all ethnic groups. Pupils from the Chinese and Indian ethnic groups were consistently among those most likely to go into education, apprenticeships or employment. The trend has been fairly steady for White British and Black Caribbean young people.
Higher education
Whilst entry rates into higher education are higher among minority ethnic groups, retention rates are generally lower, and degree outcomes poorer, than White students.
Consequently last year the Government announced a series of measures to improve outcomes for ethnic minority students in higher education which are due to be implemented during the course of the current 2020-21 academic year. Universities will be held to account on how they will improve outcomes for underrepresented students, including those from ethnic minority backgrounds through the Office for Students. The accountability is not only aimed at university admissions, but also retention rates, attainment and progression into further study or employment. Universities will have to publish admissions and attainment data broken down by ethnicity, gender and socio-economic background, with the Government encouraging the publication of league tables.
Entry rates into higher education
In 2019, White state school pupils aged 18 had the lowest (30.3%) and Chinese pupils (68.0%) had the highest entry rate into higher education. This was the case in every year from 2007 to 2019. The gap, currently at 20 percentage points, between Asian and White students has also been there for a couple of decades. The gap between White students and Black students is a more recent development widening since 2006, as entry rates increased among Black students from 21.6% to 44.5% but only from 21.8% to 30.3% for White pupils, the smallest increase across the different groups. Again, there is a notable gap between Black African and Black Caribbean students with two-thirds of Black African young people progressing into university, but less than half (44.7%) of Black Caribbean young people do so, though that is still above average.
Attendance at top higher education institutions
Overall in 2017/18, just over a third of White and Mixed background entrants went to high tariff providers (i.e. highly performing HE institutions) – the highest percentage of all ethnic groups. This includes both undergraduates and post-graduates at all ages. 16.3% of Black entrants went to high tariff providers, the lowest percentage out of all ethnic groups. Black entrants are 1.5 times more likely to go to a low tariff provider as White entrants – 44.1% of Black entrants did so, compared with 28.6% of White entrants.
Over 42% of entrants from Asian backgrounds (including Chinese students for this dataset) went to medium tariff providers – this was the highest percentage of all ethnic groups, followed by 39% of entrants from the “other” ethnic group.
Continuation rates and degree outcomes
Black students are over 1.5 times more likely to drop-out of university than a White student with the drop-out rate (according to the Office of Students) Black students at 15% compared with 11.2% for those from Mixed background, 9.7% for Asian and 8.7% for White Students. This broad pattern has remained stable since 2010.
Black graduates are also least likely to gain a first or upper second class degree: 60% did so in 2016/17 compared with 72% of Asian, 75% of Mixed and 82% of White graduates. Some of this difference can be ‘explained’ by differences in entry qualifications (according to the Office for Students) as the gap increases for lower A-level grades and BTEC grades. However, when these and other factors are taken into account there still remains a gap in outcomes by ethnic group. This was estimated at 17 percentage points for Black students and 10 percentage points for Asian students and 6 points for those from a Mixed background. So a Black or Asian students who begins university with the same entry qualifications as their White peers remains less likely to graduate with a top classification of degree, suggesting the differences are reflective of something within the university experience rather than the relative abilities of students.
In the period between 2012/13 and 2017/18, the percentage of graduates achieving a first class or 2:1 degree increased for all ethnic groups. The largest increases were seen in the Asian (by 10.8 percentage points) and Black (10.7) ethnic groups. The smallest increase was among the White ethnic group (7.7). Over the same period, the difference between the percentages of graduates from White and Black backgrounds achieving either a first class or 2:1 degree decreased by 3 percentage points (from 26.4 to 23.4).
Destinations and earnings of graduates after higher education
In 2016/17, 88.1% of White graduates were in sustained employment or further study (or both) one year after graduation, the highest percentage out of all ethnic groups, followed closely by graduates from the Indian ethnic group (87.3%). Chinese (80.5%) and Pakistani (83.2%) graduates were least likely to be in sustained employment or further study; though there are higher non-reporting rates, particularly among Chinese graduates. After three and then five years that pattern remains broadly the same. Over the ten years it is noticeable that the proportion of Black African graduates in sustained employment or further study falls from 85.4% to 75.1%, though again there is a higher percentage of non-reporting.
Indian graduates had the highest average earnings one year after graduation (£21,900), followed by those from the Chinese (£21,700) and Other Asian (£20,800) ethnic groups. Graduates with the lowest average earnings were from the Other Black (£17,400), Bangladeshi (£17,900) and Black Caribbean (£18,000) groups; while average earnings for White British graduates was £20,000, slightly above the average (median) salary (£19,900).
The average salary for those who graduated 5 years ago was £26,000. After five years, graduates from the Indian and Other Asian ethnic groups had the highest average earnings, both at £28,500. Graduates from the Other Black and Pakistani ethnic groups had the lowest average earnings (both £22,400). The figures for Black African graduates were £23,900, Black Caribbean was £23,700 and White graduates were £26,100.
As well as earning below average after graduating, Black graduates are less likely to be in highly skilled employment (or further study six months) after graduation. Sixty-nine per cent of Black graduates in 2016/17 were in such activities compared with 71% of Mixed, 72% of Asian and 74% of White graduates; according to the Office of Students degree classification accounts for much of the difference in employment outcomes.
Comment
Achievement and progression gaps between ethnic minority children and young people and their counterparts among the White British community have reduced substantially over the last thirty with many ethnic groups overtaking their White peers on measures across the school years and further education. However, work still needs to be done to ensure all young people, whatever their background, can benefit fully from their time in the education system.
There are still concerning disparities, notably in entry into the top universities and degree outcomes. Education outcomes for disadvantaged White young people, for those from the Black Caribbean community (predominately boys, but not exclusively) lag behind others, whilst those from Gypsy/Roma and Irish Traveller backgrounds are well behind that achieved by those two groups.
In conclusion, three observations on broad trends from the data. These trends, while not new, are a reminder of the work which still needs to be done to improve our society in England and its education system.
1. Disparities between different ethnic minority groups, and within them, are more significant at least up to higher education, than between ethnic minorities and the white population.
Looking across the different stages of education demonstrates that grouping ethnic groups under the heading of BAME (Black and Asian Minority Ethnic) and comparing their progress against the White population is meaningless. It serves to hide some significant differences and trends. There are often larger disparities between ethnic minority groups (e.g. between Asian and Black groups) and within them (e.g. between Black African and Black Caribbean) than there are between the ‘BAME’ and the White population. Even making comparisons between broad categories (White, Black, Asian, Chinese and Other) cannot tell the whole story. Comparisons need to be made in a more granular way.
Black African pupils generally fare better than Black Caribbean pupils for instance, 64% of Black African pupils attained standard passes in both English and maths GCSE (in 2018-19), close to the national average; however only less than half (48%) of Black Caribbean pupils achieved this. Black African pupils also make more progress between the ages of 11 and 16 with an average Progress 8 score of +.33, whilst for Black Caribbean the average score was -0.31. The relatively advantaged Black Caribbean pupils are now performing worse than their disadvantaged Black African counterparts across a range of measures. At the same time, Black pupils eligible for FSM attain better on some key measures, including the English and maths GCSE measure, than White FSM-eligible peers.
Likewise, within the Asian group, Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils perform worse than pupils from an Indian background. This is not seen if we look at the Asian group as a whole. Nor do we see the welcome progress made by Pakistani and Bangladeshi children in recent years who are closing the gap and, on some measures, have overtaken their White peers.
2. The gap in educational progression widens as children get older. At its widest, the gap spans from nine months as they leave early years and enter primary school to almost five years at the GCSE stage. Some children from some groups buck that trend.
This is shown by the diagram below, which illustrates analysis undertaken by the Education Policy Institute showing the progress made by each ethnic subgroup against the baseline for the White British pupils (i.e. they are plotted at the zero axis). Showing Chinese and Indian children already ahead by the time they enter primary school compared to their White British peers (and indeed ahead of other groups) with that gap growing to almost year and seven months, respectively, when they complete their primary phase, and then to 14 months and two years ahead after taking their GCSEs.
The size of the ethnicity gap (relative to white British children) at various ages in 2019, measured in months
Source: Taken from data presented in Education in England: Annual Report 2020, Education Policy Institute, August 2020 (achievement in Secondary School is good passes for English and maths GCSE)
The outcomes gap for Gypsy / Roma and for Irish Traveller children starts off wide between six and eight months behind as they enter primary school and grows to almost three years and two years at GCSE in comparison to their White British peers.
The gap also widens for Black Caribbean from two months at early years to five months at the end of primary school and eleven months at GCSE. In contrast, Black African children start at a similar point but make more progress and (almost) close the gap with White British children at GCSE.
The direction of the gap is reversed for Bangladeshi children who are over two months behind White British pupils in the early years, but by the end of primary school have gained ground and overtaken their White peers by over two and half months; they are five months ahead at GCSE.
White British pupils who provide the benchmark for this analysis, on average make poorer educational progress than most ethnic groups, except Black Caribbean children and those from Gypsy/Roma and Irish Traveller backgrounds.
3. Socio-economic disadvantage impacts White British children and young people more than others
Low educational attainment and progression is closely associated with economic disadvantaged, indeed for all ethnic groups children eligible for FSM have lower educational achievement. As this briefing has shown the so-called attainment gap between socio-disadvantaged pupils and those from better off households, is much larger for White British pupils driven by underperformance by disadvantaged White British pupils rather than exceptionally high performance by their more advantaged peers.
Children from Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds are more likely to live in poverty, but those on FSM make higher than average progression between the ages of 11 and 16. In terms of GCSE attainment it is notable that Chinese, Indian, Bangladeshi and Black African FSM eligible pupils outperform Black Caribbean pupils not eligible for FSM and are closing the gap with White British pupils also not eligible for FSMs.
External Links
Cabinet Office’s Race Disparity Unit
Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities
Government’s Ethnicity Facts and Figures website
Child poverty and education outcomes by ethnicity, Office of National Statistics – February 2020
Facing the facts: Ethnicity and Disadvantage in Britain, Centre for Social Justice – November 2020
How do student outcomes vary by ethnicity? – Office for Students
Related Briefings
School exclusion: Timpson review and DfE response – May 2019
Other LGIU material
All LGIU Covid-19 resources are gathered in one place and you can also sign up to our Global-Local pandemic Frequent Updates. Also, see all our Post-Covid Councils workstream.
2021 school examinations and fairness (December 2020)
The Greenwich direction – let it be a turning point in central-local relations (December 2020)
DfE and DHSC research on the state of wellbeing and mental health of young people in England (November 2020)
Starting school in September 2020: catching up and recovery (September 2020)
Children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing under Covid-19 (August 2020)
Back to normal? The full reopening of school post Covid-19 and mitigating the impact on pupil learning (July 2020)
Testing times: update on school examinations in England in 2020 and 2021 (July 2020)
Not normal: closing schools to most pupils and Covid-19: impact on learning (April 2020)
For further information, please visit www.lgiu.org or email john.fowler@lgiu.org
