 Incentivising Specific Combinations of Subjects – Does It Make Any Difference to University Access?Jake Anders, Morag Henderson, Vanessa Moulton and Alice Sullivan National Institute Economic Review, 2018, vol. 243, issue 1, R37-R52 Abstract: A major part of the 2010–15 UK government's education reforms in England was a focus on the curriculum that pupils study from ages 14–16. Most high profile was the introduction of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) performance measure for schools, incentivising study of “subjects the Russell Group identifies as key for university study†( Gibb, 2011 ). However, there does not appear to be good quantitative evidence about the importance of studying such a set of subjects, per se . This paper sets out to analyse this question, considering whether otherwise similar young people who study specific sets of subjects (full set for EBacc-eligibility, two or more sciences, foreign languages, applied subjects) to age 16 have different probabilities of entering university, and specifically a high-status university. It compares results from regression modelling and propensity score matching, taking advantage of rich survey data from a recent cohort of young people in England. We find that conditional differences in university entry attributable to subject choice are, at most, small. Keywords: subject choice: English Baccalaureate; accountability measures; university access (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:niesru:v:243:y:2018:i:1:p:r37-r52 Access Statistics for this article More articles in National Institute Economic Review from National Institute of Economic and Social Research Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.