Headline evidence · Education · England · state-funded schools · 2024/25 final, with provisional 2025/26 beside it
In 2024/25, 25.8% of disadvantaged pupils in England got a strong pass (grade 5 or above) in both English and maths, against 53.1% of other pupils. That is about half the chance. DfE's provisional 2025/26 figures, 27.5% and 54.3%, could still change. The gap is a difference between two groups, not proof that either group improved or worsened.
Proposed outcome: Improve learning and opportunity, especially for pupils missing effective support. What could change →
How many disadvantaged pupils get grade 5+ in both English and maths?
25.8%of disadvantaged pupils
Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are much less likely to earn strong passes in both English and maths.
England, state-funded schools · 2024/25 · Published statistics
Against 53.1% of all other pupils: a gap of 27.3 percentage points, up from 25.2 points in 2018/19, the last pre-pandemic exam year. Grade 5 is a “strong pass” (grade 4 is the standard pass), in both English and maths — not all GCSE subjects.
Published statistics · DfE, Key stage 4 performance, academic year 2024/25, National characteristics data file (disadvantage status; SEN provision)
How many pupils miss one day in ten or more?
18.1% of pupils
Pupils missing at least a tenth of lessons. Absence has eased from its peak but remains above the pre-pandemic level.
England, state-funded schools · 2024/25
Persistently absent (10% or more of sessions missed) in 2024/25, down from 22.5% in 2021/22 but well above 10.9% in 2018/19. Primary, secondary and special schools.
Published statistics · DfE, Pupil absence in schools in England, 2024/25, Absence for persistent and severe absentees (time series)
Do children get special needs plans on time?
46.1% within 20 weeks
Fewer than half of new special-needs plans meet the legal deadline. A completed plan does not prove that support has started.
England, ages 0–25 · 2025
Share of new education, health and care plans issued within the 20-week legal limit in 2025, excluding statutory exceptions; 60.4% in 2019. On-time paperwork is not the same as support delivered.
Published statistics · DfE, Education, health and care plans, reporting year 2026, Timeliness of new EHC plans (20 weeks)
The disadvantage gap is not the only divide. Pupils with special educational needs are far less likely to leave school with strong English and maths: 7.6% of those with an education, health and care plan did in 2024/25, against 45.4% of all pupils. Many pupils are in both groups. Whether support for special needs arrives in time is a question of its own — the SEND chapter takes it up.
Budget 2026 · 28 October 2026
6
Budget measures on this topic
£100m
Net cost, 2026–27
£210m
Net saving or gain, 2029–30
Biggest single-year effect of each measure · red costs money, teal saves or raises it
−£230m
cost in 2026–27
Student Loans
+£225m
saving or gain in 2031–32
Higher Education
+£140m
saving or gain in 2027–28
Local Authority Spending
−£70m
cost in 2028–29
Youth Employment and Skills
−£20m
cost in 2027–28
Skills
−£5m
cost in 2026–27
Early Years
Treasury costings certified by the OBR, not measured results. Topic links are UK Facts’ classification.
School measures cover England and the stated pupil cohort; international comparisons and UK youth outcomes are labelled separately.
Is the disadvantage gap already there before secondary school?
Age 11: expected standard in reading, writing and maths, 2024/25
Year 6 pupils, key stage 2. Published to whole percentages.
Age 16: grade 5 or above in English and maths GCSE, 2024/25
Year 11 pupils, key stage 4. Grade 5 is a “strong pass”.
Children from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to reach the expected level at primary school or earn strong exam passes at 16. These gaps have widened since before the pandemic.
England · Academic year 2024/25 · Official statistics (key stage 2: revised; key stage 4: final)
Share of pupils reaching each stage’s standard, disadvantaged pupils and all other pupils, England, 2024/25. Two separate measures on two separate cohorts.
By age 11, 47% of disadvantaged pupils reach the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, against 69% of their peers. At 16 the gap in strong English and maths passes is 27.3 points. Both gaps are wider than in 2018/19, the last exam year before the pandemic. This shows how far apart the groups are, not why: disadvantage overlaps with special educational needs, attendance and where pupils live, and the chart does not separate those.
Source: DfE, Key stage 4 performance, academic year 2024/25, National characteristics data file (disadvantage status; SEN provision) (released 23 April 2026 (updated 4 August 2026)).
| Measure | Year | Disadvantaged | Other pupils | Gap (points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age 11: expected standard, reading, writing and maths | 2024/25 | 47% | 69% | 22.0 |
| Age 11: expected standard, reading, writing and maths | 2018/19 | 51% | 71% | 20.0 |
| Age 16: grade 5+ in English and maths | 2024/25 | 25.8% | 53.1% | 27.3 |
| Age 16: grade 5+ in English and maths | 2018/19 | 24.7% | 49.9% | 25.2 |
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
Newer and provisional: DfE’s 2025/26 release (published 15 October 2026) has 27.5% and 54.3%, a 26.8-point gap, and can still be revised. The figures on this page stay on the latest final year, 2024/25. See the provisional figures.
These charts follow successive cohorts, not the same children. A thirty-year perspective is useful for policy history, but today’s attainment measures do not have thirty years of comparable results. Explore the reforms and measurement breaks.
Has the gap narrowed?
% reaching the expected standard in reading, writing and maths
England · 2015/16–2024/25 · Published statistics
Source: DfE, Key stage 2 attainment, academic year 2024/25 (revised), ks2 by pupil characteristics data file.
| Academic year | Disadvantaged (%) | Other pupils (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 2015/16 | 39 | 60 |
| 2016/17 | 47 | 67 |
| 2017/18 | 51 | 70 |
| 2018/19 | 51 | 71 |
| 2019/20: no comparable observation | Not available | Not available |
| 2020/21: no comparable observation | Not available | Not available |
| 2021/22 | 43 | 66 |
| 2022/23 | 44 | 66 |
| 2023/24 | 46 | 67 |
| 2024/25 | 47 | 69 |
Has the gap narrowed?
% achieving grade 5+ in both English and maths
England · 2016/17–2024/25 · Published statistics
Source: DfE, Key stage 4 performance, academic year 2024/25, National characteristics data file (disadvantage status; SEN provision) (released 23 April 2026 (updated 4 August 2026)).
| Academic year | Disadvantaged (%) | Other pupils (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 2016/17 | 24.5 | 49.4 |
| 2017/18 | 24.9 | 50.1 |
| 2018/19 | 24.7 | 49.9 |
| 2019/20: no comparable observation | Not available | Not available |
| 2020/21: no comparable observation | Not available | Not available |
| 2021/22 | 29.6 | 57 |
| 2022/23 | 25.2 | 52.4 |
| 2023/24 | 25.8 | 53.1 |
| 2024/25 | 25.8 | 53.1 |
End-of-primary pupils in England. The current expected-standard measure starts in 2016; earlier levels are not spliced in. Writing assessment changed in 2018, so the line breaks there. Tests were cancelled in 2019/20 and 2020/21. Each year follows different children; these are not individual progress trajectories. A dash means no comparable observation is supplied; it is not zero. Values describe separate cohorts.
1996–2026; % reaching the expected standard in reading, writing and maths. No change is calculated across definition or assessment breaks.
| Year | Disadvantaged pupils | Other pupils |
|---|---|---|
| 1996–2015 | No comparable observations supplied | |
| 2016 | 39 | 60 |
| 2017 | 47 | 67 |
| 2018 | 51 | 70 |
| 2019 | 51 | 71 |
| 2020–2021 | No comparable observations supplied | |
| 2022 | 43 | 66 |
| 2023 | 44 | 66 |
| 2024 | 46 | 67 |
| 2025 | 47 | 69 |
| 2026 | No comparable observations supplied | |
End-of-KS4 pupils in state-funded schools, England. Grade 5 began in 2017. The 2017 and 2018 observations are calculated from DfE archived pupil counts; later years use the published EES percentages. Teacher-assessed 2019/20 and 2020/21 omitted; 2021/22 grading was transitional. Free-school-meal protections also change group composition. A dash means no comparable observation is supplied; it is not zero. Values describe separate cohorts.
1996–2026; % achieving grade 5+ in both English and maths. No change is calculated across definition or assessment breaks.
| Year | Disadvantaged pupils | Other pupils |
|---|---|---|
| 1996–2016 | No comparable observations supplied | |
| 2017 | 24.5 | 49.4 |
| 2018 | 24.9 | 50.1 |
| 2019 | 24.7 | 49.9 |
| 2020–2021 | No comparable observations supplied | |
| 2022 | 29.6 | 57 |
| 2023 | 25.2 | 52.4 |
| 2024 | 25.8 | 53.1 |
| 2025 | 25.8 | 53.1 |
| 2026 | No comparable observations supplied | |
Earlier GCSE sources: DfE’s 2017 national characteristics tables and revised 2018 tables. Percentages use pupils reaching grade 5 in both subjects divided by the same group’s pupil count. Earlier A*–C results are a different threshold.
The Education Policy Institute’s 2026 report estimates a 19.0-month secondary attainment gap in 2025, against 18.8 months in 2024 on its revised EverFSM definition. These are attainment units, not months of teaching missed. Its earlier 19.1-month estimate for 2024 used Ever6 FSM: the two report vintages must not be joined into a trend. Read EPI’s method and findings.
Three illustrative situations, not real people, testimony or predictions. Illustration generated with AI.
A disadvantaged Year 10 pupil attends lessons but needs extra practice in English and maths.
Possible response: Assess specific learning gaps, then offer structured small-group or individual tuition linked to classroom teaching.
Average trial effects cannot predict this pupil’s grades. Attendance, teaching quality and the match to their needs matter.
Track learning against a baseline and participation, without promising a pass.
A child needs specialist support while the family waits for an assessment and, if required, an EHC plan.
Possible response: Coordinate school, health and local-authority support around the child, and track what is actually provided.
A plan issued within 20 weeks is a timeliness measure. It does not show whether provision starts or meets the child’s needs.
Monitor time to support, provision delivered and family experience alongside statutory deadlines.
A 17-year-old is weighing college, an apprenticeship and the cost of travelling to a placement.
Possible response: Provide clear route advice, access to placements and support to complete the chosen qualification.
Apprenticeship starts are not completions. UK 16–24 NEET estimates include older young adults and economic inactivity.
Follow sustained participation, completion and destinations for the same cohort.
Parents’ reported confidence · England · May–June 2025
DfE asked parents whether they were confident their child’s school would listen to concerns about a potential special educational need. This measures confidence, not whether support was delivered or children’s needs were met.
80% very or fairly confident
Published 95% interval: 77.2–83.2%. Unweighted sample: 1,138.
72% very or fairly confident
Published 95% interval: 69.0–75.3%. Unweighted sample: 1,694.
Exact question: “How confident are you that [YPFnam]’s school would listen to any concerns you may have about a potential special educational need affecting your child's learning or development?”
Parents of pupils in state-funded primary and secondary schools, years 1–11; fieldwork 21 May–13 June 2025. Online panel; probability recruitment from National Pupil Database; subsequent email/SMS invitations. Recruitment weights plus wave-specific response/attrition weighting; technical report pp.30–35.
Published 95% confidence intervals, calculated with SPSS Complex Samples; not a simple-random-sample approximation. Self-reported confidence, not measured school provision. Special-school parents excluded from this question. Nonresponse and panel attrition can remain after weighting. One dated wave; no trend or causal comparison.
Source table: senidentification_listen. Estimates use the published combined response and its interval; the intervals for separate answers were not added together.
Pupils cannot learn in lessons they miss. Persistent absence roughly doubled after the pandemic and has come down only part of the way: in 2024/25, 18.1% of pupils missed at least one day in ten. It is shown here on its own, not laid over the attainment gap, because the two measure different things and the data do not show that one drives the other.
Is persistent absence back to where it was before the pandemic?
1996–2026 · recorded figures. Shading marks years without figures: this series starts in 2016.
Fewer pupils are regularly absent than at the peak, but absence is still much higher than before the pandemic. The number missing half their lessons has continued to rise.
England · 2015/16 to 2024/25 (no data for 2019/20) · Official statistics
Pupil enrolments missing 10% or more of their possible sessions, state-funded primary, secondary and special schools, England, 2015/16 to 2024/25. Each academic year is plotted at the year it ends (2025 = 2024/25).
Persistent absence rose from 10.9% of pupils in 2018/19 to 22.5% in 2021/22, and has fallen in each year since, to 18.1% in 2024/25. Severe absence — missing half of sessions or more — has kept rising, to 2.4% (176 thousand enrolments), three times the 2018/19 rate. Absence and low attainment go together, but this chart does not show that one causes the other.
Source: DfE, Pupil absence in schools in England, 2024/25, Absence for persistent and severe absentees (time series) (released 26 March 2026).
| Academic year | Persistent absence (%) |
|---|---|
| 2015/16 | 10.5 |
| 2016/17 | 10.8 |
| 2017/18 | 11.2 |
| 2018/19 | 10.9 |
| 2019/20 | no data |
| 2020/21 | 12.1 |
| 2021/22 | 22.5 |
| 2022/23 | 21.2 |
| 2023/24 | 20.0 |
| 2024/25 | 18.1 |
A sequence of questions, not a measured causal chain: each step has its own data, population and date, and the arrows do not mean one step causes the next.
Questions explored — not a quantified causal model
Being in school, with the right support
Persistent absence 18.1% (2024/25); 46.1% of new EHC plans on time (2025).
More on this stepQualifications
At 16, a 27.3-point gap in strong English and maths passes between disadvantaged pupils and the rest.
More on this stepPost-16 destinations
Sixth form, college, apprenticeships, university or none — and whether pupils stay there. Measured separately, years later.
More on this stepWork and pay
Young people not in education, employment or training are counted in a different survey, for the whole UK.
More on this stepAre trained teachers staying?
Share still teaching five years later; horizontal axis is qualification year
1996–2026 · recorded figures.
England · Qualifying cohorts 1997–2020 · Published statistics
Source: Teacher retention (released 2026-06-04).
| Qualification cohort and observation year | Retained (%) |
|---|---|
| Qualified 1997; observed 2002 | 71.1 |
| Qualified 1998; observed 2003 | 71.6 |
| Qualified 1999; observed 2004 | 71.2 |
| Qualified 2000; observed 2005 | 71.9 |
| Qualified 2001; observed 2006 | 70.5 |
| Qualified 2002; observed 2007 | 71.4 |
| Qualified 2003; observed 2008 | 71.7 |
| Qualified 2004; observed 2009 | 71.6 |
| Qualified 2005; observed 2010 | 73.9 |
| Qualified 2006; observed 2011 | 73.6 |
| Qualified 2007; observed 2012 | 73.8 |
| Qualified 2008; observed 2013 | 73.7 |
| Qualified 2009; observed 2014 | 72.8 |
| Qualified 2010; observed 2015 | 70.8 |
| Qualified 2011; observed 2016 | 70.1 |
| Qualified 2012; observed 2017 | 68.5 |
| Qualified 2013; observed 2018 | 67.9 |
| Qualified 2014; observed 2019 | 67.2 |
| Qualified 2015; observed 2020 | 68.8 |
| Qualified 2016; observed 2021 | 69.1 |
| Qualified 2017; observed 2022 | 69 |
| Qualified 2018; observed 2023 | 67.9 |
| Qualified 2019; observed 2024 | 68 |
| Qualified 2020; observed 2025 | 67.4 |
How much funding is available for each pupil?
Revenue funding per pupil, 2025/26 prices
England · 2010/11–2026/27 · Official statistics; latest settlement includes estimates
Source: Revenue funding to state-funded schools in England for pupils aged 5-16, in cash and real terms, 2010-11 to 2026-27 (released 2026-01-29).
| Financial year | £ per pupil (2025/26 prices) | Pupils FTE | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010/11 | 7760 | 6761000 | published funding |
| 2011/12 | 7760 | 6788000 | published funding |
| 2012/13 | 7760 | 6834000 | published funding |
| 2013/14 | 7740 | 6902000 | published funding |
| 2014/15 | 7720 | 6967000 | published funding |
| 2015/16 | 7760 | 7063000 | published funding |
| 2016/17 | 7600 | 7183000 | published funding |
| 2017/18 | 7500 | 7305000 | published funding |
| 2018/19 | 7480 | 7404000 | published funding |
| 2019/20 | 7530 | 7502000 | published funding |
| 2020/21 | 7560 | 7581000 | published funding |
| 2021/22 | 7830 | 7613000 | published funding |
| 2022/23 | 7820 | 7673000 | published funding |
| 2023/24 | 7950 | 7745000 | published funding |
| 2024/25 | 8140 | 7772000 | published funding |
| 2025/26 | 8400 | 7725000 | published funding |
| 2026/27 | 8390 | 7685000 | estimate |
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
Which subjects meet recruitment targets?
Postgraduate initial teacher training entrants against targets, 2025/26
England · 2025/26 · Official statistic; current intake provisional
Source: DfE, Initial teacher training census.
| Subject | Entrants | Target | Target met (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 878 | 730 | 120.3 |
| Computing | 723 | 895 | 80.8 |
| English | 2083 | 1950 | 106.8 |
| Mathematics | 2628 | 2300 | 114.3 |
| Physics | 1095 | 1410 | 77.7 |
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
Statements were replaced by EHC plans from September 2014, which can run to age 25 (statements usually ended at 16–19). Part of the rise since 2015 is that wider age range, mostly young people in further education. 2014 reform: statements → EHC plans, age range extended to 0–25.
Source dataset →| Period | plans | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 2010 | 228,221 | Outturn |
| Jan 2011 | 229,017 | Outturn |
| Jan 2012 | 230,156 | Outturn |
| Jan 2013 | 233,431 | Outturn |
| Jan 2014 | 237,111 | Outturn |
| Jan 2015 | 240,183 | Outturn |
| Jan 2016 | 256,315 | Outturn |
| Jan 2017 | 287,290 | Outturn |
| Jan 2018 | 319,819 | Outturn |
| Jan 2019 | 353,995 | Outturn |
| Jan 2020 | 390,109 | Outturn |
| Jan 2021 | 430,697 | Outturn |
| Jan 2022 | 473,255 | Outturn |
| Jan 2023 | 517,048 | Outturn |
| Jan 2024 | 576,474 | Outturn |
| Jan 2025 | 638,745 | Outturn |
| Jan 2026 | 718,838 | Outturn |
Plan numbers describe caseload. Timeliness describes the assessment process. Neither establishes how much support children receive or how well it works.
Plans, specialist capacity and supportThe National Audit Office’s school-buildings audit identifies condition and safety risks. Its dated estimates are not a current count of unsafe schools. Funding allocations, actual expenditure and estate condition need separate scrutiny.
Read the NAO auditPISA 2022 assessed samples of 15-year-olds. These means and approximate 95% confidence intervals show uncertainty, not a precise league table. All four UK nations carry OECD sampling cautions. The UK aggregate is omitted here to avoid counting the same pupils twice.
PISA 2022 score · axis 440–530 (not zero)
95% interval 487.1–497.3
95% interval 469.3–481.0
95% interval 465.5–475.8
95% interval 459.5–471.9
Dashed reference: OECD average 472.4.
PISA 2022 score · axis 440–530 (not zero)
95% interval 490.9–501.8
95% interval 478.6–491.8
95% interval 486.1–499.4
95% interval 458.3–472.9
Dashed reference: OECD average 475.6.
PISA 2022 score · axis 440–530 (not zero)
95% interval 497.5–508.2
95% interval 482.0–494.7
95% interval 477.2–489.4
95% interval 465.5–480.2
Dashed reference: OECD average 484.6.
| Subject | Nation | Mean score | Standard error | Sampling caution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| maths | England | 492.22 | 2.59 | Yes |
| maths | Northern Ireland | 475.14 | 2.97 | Yes |
| maths | Scotland | 470.62 | 2.63 | Yes |
| maths | Wales | 465.71 | 3.17 | Yes |
| reading | England | 496.38 | 2.78 | Yes |
| reading | Northern Ireland | 485.20 | 3.38 | Yes |
| reading | Scotland | 492.78 | 3.40 | Yes |
| reading | Wales | 465.62 | 3.74 | Yes |
| science | England | 502.84 | 2.73 | Yes |
| science | Northern Ireland | 488.37 | 3.24 | Yes |
| science | Scotland | 483.31 | 3.11 | Yes |
| science | Wales | 472.81 | 3.75 | Yes |
Intervals calculated as mean ± 1.96 × published standard error. Overlap is not a test of whether two means differ. * One or more sampling standards were not met; intervals do not account for possible non-response bias. Scores across subjects are different constructs. These results cannot establish the effect of funding, curriculum or a particular policy. PISA 2022 Results, Volumes I and II, published 2023-12-05.
Compare with Europe and inspect the full data · University funding across countries
Our analysis
Disadvantage starts before school. Extra teaching and early help can support children, but schools need trained staff and time to provide them.
Which pupils are least likely to leave school with strong English and maths?
Pupils with special educational needs are much less likely to earn strong passes in English and maths. Their needs and other disadvantages often overlap; these figures do not explain the gap on their own.
England · 2024/25 and 2018/19 · Official statistics
Pupils achieving grade 5 or above in English and maths GCSE, by disadvantage and by special educational needs, England, 2024/25 (filled dot) and 2018/19 (open dot).
Disadvantage and special educational needs both mark wide divides in GCSE results. 22.5% of pupils on SEN support and 7.6% of pupils with an EHC plan got a strong pass, against 51.8% of pupils with no identified need. The groups overlap — pupils with SEN are more likely to be disadvantaged — so these are not independent effects. Every group did better than in 2018/19, but disadvantaged pupils gained least — which is why the gap widened.
Source: DfE, Key stage 4 performance, academic year 2024/25, National characteristics data file (disadvantage status; SEN provision) (released 23 April 2026 (updated 4 August 2026)).
| Group | 2024/25 | 2018/19 |
|---|---|---|
| Not known to be disadvantaged | 53.1% | 49.9% |
| Disadvantaged | 25.8% | 24.7% |
| No identified SEN | 51.8% | 48.2% |
| SEN support | 22.5% | 16.8% |
| EHC plan | 7.6% | 5.5% |
Local figures differ again: how do Hampshire’s schools and SEND services compare?
Proposals to consider. The bodies named below would need to agree to deliver them; responsibility is not a recorded commitment. Follow the links for costs and evidence.
Develop the skills needed to build homes.
Who could deliver it: education departments, skills bodies, colleges and employers; nation-specific systems.
Displacement of existing trainees; low completion; insufficient trainers.
Identify trades and locations; secure paid placements, trainers, facilities and employer demand; measure completion and retention.
Cost: The extra cost is not yet known.
Costs, drawbacks and evidence →Add childcare places and hours where local shortages stop parents working.
Who could deliver it: councils, education departments and providers in England; separate devolved arrangements.
The main risks still need to be assessed.
Verify unmet demand, existing awards and provider viability; cost places, workforce, premises, operating subsidy and parental fees. Track access and sustained parental work. Proposed owners: councils, DfE and providers in England; separate devolved arrangements.
Cost: The extra cost is not yet known.
Costs, drawbacks and evidence →Give children missing out on early language help the tested Reception programme, with trained staff and time to deliver it.
Who could deliver it: schools, education bodies and councils as appropriate.
The main risks still need to be assessed.
Audit reach, eligibility and delivery fidelity; cost trained staff, release time, screening, materials and follow-up. Protect SEND provision. Measure language outcomes and access. Proposed owners: schools, education bodies and councils as appropriate.
Cost: The extra cost is not yet known.
Costs, drawbacks and evidence →Use the successful features of Sure Start in family hubs, starting where access is poorest and testing results as services expand.
Who could deliver it: education departments, councils and health partners in England.
Thin provision; failure to reach families most in need; long benefit horizon.
Specify service intensity and target reach; staff health/family services; measure uptake, fidelity and long-term outcomes.
Cost: Only part of the cost has been estimated.
Costs, drawbacks and evidence →See all options and what is still unknown →
Some problems have no assessed solution yet: see coverage and gaps.
Recorded
Some help for children who are behind is well tested: an early-language programme added three months’ language progress in a 193-school randomised trial.
England · 2018–19 trial
Small-group tuition adds about four months’ progress on average across 62 studies, less in secondary schools.
Studies in several countries · Review updated July 2021
School transport is an access and delivery constraint, especially for children with SEND. The NAO found rising costs and risks from reductions in discretionary services, but insufficient data to measure the effect on attendance.
England · NAO audit, October 2025 · risk
25.8% of disadvantaged pupils got grade 5+ in English and maths GCSE, against 53.1% of other pupils — a 27.3 points gap, against 25.2 points in 2018/19.
England · 2024/25 (2018/19 comparison)
18.1% of pupils were persistently absent, against 10.9% in 2018/19.
England · 2024/25 (2018/19 comparison)
The funded childcare hours reach fewest of the children with the greatest need: 71.6% of eligible disadvantaged two-year-olds were registered in January 2026 (74.8% in 2024), against an estimated 8 in 10 eligible under-threes of working parents.
England · January 2024 to January 2026
Construction apprenticeships have the lowest achievement rate of any subject area — 58.3% in 2024/25 — and about 24,500 started that year, while the industry training board estimates 41,200 extra workers a year are needed from 2026 to 2030 (a need across all routes into the trade, not an apprenticeship target).
England (apprenticeships); United Kingdom (CITB) · 2024/25 (apprenticeships); 2026–2030 (CITB forecast)
Targeting tested support at diagnosed gaps — early language in reception, small-group tuition later — and rebuilding integrated early-years help could address the gap at different ages.
Depends on: Staff time is protected, delivery stays close to the tested design, and pupils are in school to receive it.
our synthesis
Staff shortages and absence can dilute tested programmes: the language programme needs about 20 weeks of teaching-assistant time, and pupils who are absent miss it.
risk
Proposed
Possible steps for government and the bodies responsible. These describe the order of work, not promised dates: starting an action and seeing results take different amounts of time.
Short term · prepare
Identify pupils missing support and schools struggling to provide it.
Medium term · deliver
Build teaching, early-language and childcare capacity around those needs.
Long term · judge results
Check whether learning and the gap between pupils improve.
Disadvantaged pupils in England are about half as likely as other pupils to get a strong GCSE pass in English and maths.
In 2024/25, 25.8% of disadvantaged pupils got grade 5+ in both English and maths at 16, against 53.1% of other pupils: a gap of 27.3 percentage points. At age 11 the gap was 22 points (reading, writing and maths). Different cohorts and assessments: not one widening gap.
| Group | Disadvantaged | All other pupils | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age 11: expected standard in reading, writing and maths | 47% | 69% | 22 points |
| Age 16: grade 5+ in English and maths | 25.8% | 53.1% | 27.3 points |
Disadvantaged pupils in England are about half as likely as other pupils to get a strong GCSE pass in English and maths. In 2024/25, 25.8% of disadvantaged pupils got grade 5+ in both English and maths at 16, against 53.1% of other pupils: a gap of 27.3 percentage points. At age 11 the gap was 22 points (reading, writing and maths). Different cohorts and assessments: not one widening gap.
| Measure | Value | Period | Geography | Type | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KS2 disadvantage threshold gapCalculation: other pupils − disadvantaged pupils (threshold gap, percentage points) | 22 points | 2024-25 | England | derived calculation | Department for Education, Key stage 2 attainment |
| KS4 disadvantage threshold gap (grade 5+ English and maths)Calculation: other pupils − disadvantaged pupils (threshold gap, percentage points) | 27.3 points | 2024-25 | England | derived calculation | Department for Education, Key stage 4 performance |
Available images and their source records are listed on Shareable visuals.