EPI: Significant Disparities In GCSE Resit Success Require Targeted Reforms To Post-16 System

Disadvantaged students are, on average, one-fifth of a grade behind in English and one-eighth of a grade behind in maths when resitting GCSEs, according to new research from the Education Policy Institute (EPI). 

Introduced in 2014, the resit requirement aims to boost literacy and numeracy so that young people are better prepared for work and further study. Today’s report, funded by Pearson, “English and Maths Resits: Drivers of Success” examines what helps – and hinders – the roughly one-third of students in England who must retake English and maths each year. The report finds that:  

• There is a cluster of top-performing institutions in the North West of England. The English and maths resit results of students in the North West are 0.1 grades higher than the average for students with similar Key Stage 4 results students across England. Conversely, the South West is the worst-performing region overall, recording below-average results in both subjects. 

• There are significant attainment gaps by disadvantaged status, gender and ethnicity. Disadvantaged students fall behind by a fifth of a grade in English and one eighth of a grade in maths compared with their non-disadvantaged peers. 

• Motivation, engagement, and attendance are critical for resit outcomes. Unauthorised absences in Year 11 strongly predict poorer resit attainment, indicating that the factors driving absences before age 16 persist post-16 and continue to affect academic performance.  

• Resitting too soon can harm attainment, if not well targeted. While November resits can be beneficial for individual students, providers that enter more students for November achieve lower progress on average. This likely reflects a drop in motivation for those who don’t pass the November exams. 

Building on previous work highlighting the urgent need for additional funding for students aged 16–19, “English and Maths Resits: Drivers of Success” proposes the following key recommendations: 

• Introduce a 16–19 Student Premium to close the disadvantage gap through targeted funding. 
   

• Prioritise strong student-staff relationships at the start of term, particularly for resit students who may have previously struggled with English or maths. 
   

• If alternatives to the current GCSEs are to be developed, they should feature grading systems that clearly reflect incremental student progress.  
   

• Refine institution performance metrics by accounting for students’ overall Key Stage 4 (GCSE) attainment when measuring 16–19 English and maths progress, providing a fairer assessment of how effectively institutions deliver resits. 

David Robinson, the Education Policy Institute’s Director for Post 16 and Skills said: 

“We welcome the curriculum and assessment review’s commitment to ensure that English and Maths resits will be a central feature of its final report and recommendations. The importance of improving the effectiveness of this policy is clear from the finding of today’s report. The benefits of securing core numeracy and literacy skills are obvious, but so too is the impact on motivation for students who feel trapped on the resit treadmill.  

“Re-examining the policy in light of the new evidence we have uncovered should enable policymakers to take more informed, targeted decisions about the future of resits. Our analysis shows there is considerable scope to improve outcomes within the existing framework.” 

Roberta Thomson, Education Policy and Product Director for Pearson Qualifications, said: 

“It is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach to resits does not work for students. The findings of this important research provide significant food for thought as we work with partners to push for immediate changes that would improve the resit experience for our current learners. 

“But, while short-term changes within the current GCSE framework could make a significant difference, incremental adjustments can only go so far. In the longer term, we must go further by introducing a post-16 GCSE English and Maths route designed with post-16 students in mind, providing an alternative but still rigorous qualification, alongside a more flexible approach to assessment.”    

Sector Reaction   

Anne Murdoch, Senior Adviser in College Leadership at the Association of School and College Leaders, said:

“We have a number of concerns about the resit process for English and maths and this is a very valuable piece of research. One of the issues identified in this report is that many resit students have had negative experiences with English or maths in the past, and that this makes preparing and motivating them for resits more challenging. It would surely be sensible then to focus on preventing these negative experiences in the first place, rather than how they can be overcome down the line.

“We therefore think it is time for a fundamental rethink in how we assess English and maths. We think that new proficiency tests should be developed for literacy and numeracy that demonstrate to future employers or educators that students meet a set of pre-determined standards, while giving every young person the dignity of a qualification. Crucially, these tests could be taken when the student is ready, rather than being dictated by the existing resit cycles.

“We fully support calls for a 16-19 student premium, matching the system already in place for younger pupils, in order help address educational inequalities that persist within the post-16 sector.”

David Hughes CBE, Chief Executive, Association of Colleges said: 

‘’This report adds to a wide range of research which points to the need for a fundamental rethink about how the education system supports more young people to become confident and proficient in English and maths. The system we have is letting down too many children at every stage, such that by age 16 a very large number feel like they have failed, when the failure is on the whole education system, not the individual child or young person.

“After ten years of restrictive post-16 English and maths funding requirements, our education system is still struggling, despite the dedicated efforts of colleges and schools. We need a clear and focused discussion on how to improve the entire education system to better support English and maths progress from key stage 4 through the 16 to 19 phase and beyond.”

“The report rightly highlights the importance of motivation, engagement and attendance in key stage 4 and into colleges. We believe that can only be achieved from a new approach. We urge policy makers to work with the whole sector and awarding bodies to design a motivating curriculum and qualification which allow students to show what they can do and demonstrate success.’’