| Abstract: |
This report is the second of two reports examining the post-16 pathways of young people in England. The primary aim of the first study was to use the unique, monthly activity data of Longitudinal Study of Young People in England 2 (LSYPE2) to capture and describe the typical pathways that young people followed between age 16/17 and 19/20, with a particular focus on the various routes and outcomes that are not the standard 'A levels to university' pathway. This second report picks up where the first report ends, exploring similarities and differences in young people's outcomes at age 19/20 across the pathway clusters. Four broad areas are examined: (1) young people's progression, in terms of their economic activity, attainment level, and attainment type; (2) their material circumstances, including their living arrangements, personal debt, parental financial support, and state benefits; (3) their wellbeing and mental health, which includes the Office for National Statistics four wellbeing measures (ONS4), mental health, health behaviours; and (4) employment, covering young people's employment contract, hours, pay, occupational position, training, and their own subjective evaluations of work. To get a better understanding of the link between the pathways young people were on and their outcomes, estimates were also adjusted for gender, free school meal eligibility (FSM), parental education, and the young person's Key Stage 4 attainment. Statistical differences are estimated in relation to the largest pathway group, those on fulltime non-Higher Education (HE) education into employment pathways. Young people on an immediate A-Level to university pathway, the 'Direct to University' group, were also included for comparative purposes. The findings from both reports suggest that the educational system is working effectively for the large majority of young people. Around one-third of the LSYPE2 cohort transitioned directly into university, while most of those following alternative routes into early adulthood appeared to be on sustained and seemingly progressive pathways. Only a minority followed routes that could be considered precarious or associated with greater vulnerability--a narrative also echoed in their outcomes at age 19/20. It is also clear from the analysis carried out across both reports the importance of socioeconomic background in influencing young people's post-16 pathways. In summary, the research shows that there are many pathways into early adulthood and that not all of these are perfect, some are prolonged or disjointed, some face momentary setbacks, and yet others are delayed. |