Written Evidence Submitted by STEM Learning

(DIV0076)

STEM Learning is a not-for-profit organisation dedicated to improving young people’s lives through the power of STEM. We believe that great STEM education builds knowledge and skills that are vital for everyone, leading to great career opportunities and enabling young people to become informed, thoughtful citizens who can help address the extraordinary challenges and opportunities. For more about STEM Learning and our impact, please see www.stem.org.uk and www.stem.org.uk/evidence/ImpactReport2021.pdf.

Our submission to the Committee’s inquiry into Diversity in STEM addresses several areas where the Committee has called for evidence, including:

• the reasons why certain groups are underrepresented in STEM;
• what has been done – and what could and should be done to address this underrepresentation.

In particular, we wish to draw attention to the foundations of underrepresentation in STEM that are visible in the substantial gaps in STEM attainment. Our evidence utilises data from the National Pupil Database to analyse STEM attainment.[1] The analysis shows complex patterns of differential attainment correlated with gender and ethnic background. However, after taking these into account, it is clear that socioeconomic disadvantage has a substantial negative impact on STEM attainment – this is true for both male and female students and for every major ethnic group. Further details on our analysis – including a full set of charts – can be accessed via www.stem.org.uk/impact-and-evaluation/data.

The roots of underrepresentation: (1) Gender and STEM attainment in schools

Gender gaps in STEM have received considerable attention – largely focused on the lack of female students progressing to A level physics - and subsequently to physics and engineering in higher education.

Our analysis suggests that the gender gaps are apparent at GCSE. There is little difference in the proportion of male and female students entering and passing “triple science” GCSEs (ie studying the three single subject sciences). However, looking at the rate at which students achieve a “high pass” (grades 9-7), a higher proportion of male students in physics, while female students achieving a “high pass” in biology. The gaps in physics and biology are substantial (over 1% of the cohort) but chemistry results are much closer.

These gender gaps in GCSE sciences are crucial: students achieving “high pass” grades will be more confident and schools are more likely to allow them to progress to A levels in these subjects. Our analysis of attainment in STEM A levels confirms that a greater proportion of male students progress to take physics, while more female students take biology. Interestingly, there is little difference in pass rates between male and female students for those who do enter science A levels, although a greater proportion of male students achieve a high pass in chemistry, more female students achieve a high pass in biology and physics.

The roots of underrepresentation: (2) Socioeconomic disadvantage

The impact of disadvantage on STEM at GCSE is reflected in the type of science GCSEs taken by students. Every GCSE student in England is supposed to take at least two GCSEs in science. Around a quarter of students take “triple science”, taking physics, chemistry and biology as three single subjects. However, 69% students take “combined science”, a “double award” qualification that counts as two GCSEs. Combined science covers all three sciences but students study less of each.

Our analysis shows a clear correlation between socioeconomic disadvantage and less intensive engagement with GCSE science. 80% of students from disadvantaged backgrounds take combined science compared to 66% of their peers. In some cases, this will reflect the fact that triple science is not on offer at their school - in 2019, 269 schools entered no students for GCSE triple science. On average, 38% of students at these schools were from disadvantaged backgrounds – compared to an average of 12% students at schools that entered at least three quarters of their students for triple science.

Furthermore, students from disadvantaged backgrounds also perform less well in their science GCSEs – whether they take combined science or triple science, they are less likely to pass and less likely to attain a high grade.

M=male, F=female, FSM = eligible for free schools meals (also includes looked after/in care)

The disadvantage gap grows even wider at A level regardless of gender. Students from non-disadvantaged backgrounds are around twice as likely to take science or mathematics A levels compared with students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Moreover, there is a clear attainment gap between these two groups, with students from non-disadvantaged backgrounds more likely to achieve a pass (A*-E) and a high grade (A*-A).

The roots of underrepresentation: (3) Ethnicity and STEM attainment in schools

There are substantial variations in the pattern of STEM attainment across different ethnic groups, as can be seen in the charts below which map the grades achieved in GCSE physics. The analysis separates disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged, male and female students.

Similar patterns can be seen across other science GCSEs – as can be seen in the full set of charts available at www.stem.org.uk/impact-and-evaluation/data.

As with differences between male and female students – and the gaps created by disadvantage – these differential patterns of achievement in GCSE sciences are even wider at A level. For example, the two charts below show attainment in STEM A levels by White British and Chinese students. Corresponding charts are available for Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani, Black African and Black Caribbean students.[2]

Addressing underrepresentation in STEM: Education and Engagement

To improve diversity in STEM, we must address underrepresentation in STEM attainment at school. There is compelling evidence of the impact of disadvantage on STEM attainment as well as differential patterns by gender and ethnic background. Fortunately, we do know something about what works.

First and foremost, it is important that Government continues to invest to raise the standards of STEM education in schools, with an additional focus on closing the disadvantage gap. Investing in the quality of teaching is fundamental - this has a greater impact than any other factor on a young person’s engagement, enjoyment and attainment in STEM subjects. As one international study put it “No education system can exceed the quality of its teachers. The only way to improve outcomes is to improve instruction.”[3] Quantitative analysis supports this, with clear evidence of the positive impact of continuing professional development for teachers of science.[4]

Secondly, it is also important to challenge stereotypes around STEM - and inspire students, raising their aspiration and building their understanding of the opportunities opened up through continued engagement with STEM. STEM Learning manages the Government’s flagship STEM Ambassador programme, connecting inspirational volunteers with young people via schools, colleges and community groups. The Government’s investment in this programme - routed via UKRI - provides national infrastructure - a UK wide network that mobilises over 37,000 STEM Ambassadors.

These passionate, committed volunteers come from the widest range of backgrounds imaginable. They are relatable – the majority (57%) are under 35. Their visible diversity challenges stereotypes - nearly half (45%) are female and 15% are from UK minority ethnic backgrounds. STEM Ambassadors also bring a wealth of diverse jobs and experience, working for over 7,000 different employers with around 1,400 working in technician or other technical roles.

STEM Ambassadors engage and inspire young people from all backgrounds about STEM. But this kind of engagement is particularly important for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and those who do not have access to the support networks and connections that create “science capital”. As one teacher put it: “We’ve got children who don’t have many life experiences, who don’t visit beyond their estates. If they don’t know a job exists, they can’t set their goals to do that sort of thing... previously 80% said they wanted to be Youtubers, vets, footballers or gamers but the children were amazed when STEM Ambassadors showed them all these global projects. They suddenly had their horizons broadened and started to consider different careers.”[5]

(January 2022)