Research Report DFE-RR171 A profile of pupil absence in England Education Standards Analysis and Research Division The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department for Education i Executive Summary Aim • The aim of this topic paper is to provide a comprehensive view of the latest statistical trends and analysis on absences in the maintained education sector in England. Headline absence trends • Since 2006/07, levels of overall absence across all maintained schools have dropped from 6.49% to 6.04%. During this period, the authorised absence rate has dropped from 5.49% to 5.00%; and unauthorised absences have increased from 1.00% to 1.04%. Also over this period, the persistent absentee (PA) 1 rate across all maintained schools dropped from 8.5% to 6.8%. • The majority of absences are caused by a minority of pupils. Over half of the maintained school population miss less than 5% of the school year. • Special schools have the highest levels of overall absence, followed by state-funded secondary and primary schools (rates for academic year 2009/10 were 10.27%, 6.88% and 5.21% respectively). Chapter 1: Characteristics of pupils absent from school • Although levels of absence have dropped across all ethnic groups, the largest drops were seen in Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma pupils – who historically have the highest levels of absences. • Pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) have over twice the odds of being a persistent absentee as similar pupils who are not eligible for FSM. • Pupils with Special Education Needs (SEN) have greater odds of being persistently absent than pupils without SEN. Those at School Action Plus have the highest odds of being persistently absent (almost three times that of pupils without SEN) followed by statemented pupils (2.8 times the odds) and pupils at School Action (almost twice the odds of being persistently absent than pupils without SEN). Chapter 2: Reasons for absence • Persistent absentees and other pupils have different reasons for being absent. Compared to other pupils, PA pupils have greater proportions of all absence due to unauthorised other circumstances (26% vs. 6%) and authorised other (9% vs. 8%). • Girls are more likely to have absences due to illness than boys; boys however, are more likely to have absences due to exclusions than girls. • Pakistani, Bangladeshi, African, Indian and pupils of Mixed White and Asian ethnicity report higher proportions of absences due to religious observance compared to all other ethnic groups. 1 A persistent absentee is defined as a pupil having 46 or more sessions of absence (authorised or unauthorised) during the academic year, around 15% of overall absence. ii Chapter 3: Contextual background of absentees • Persistent absentees are more likely to come from lone parent households or households with no parents, compared to their non-PA peers. • Almost a third of persistent absentees come from households where the principal adult/s are not in any form of current employment – this compares to just over a tenth of non-PAs • Evidence suggests that persistent absentees are more likely to be bullied, excluded from school and be involved in risky behaviours (experiment with drugs, alcohol etc.) than non-PAs. Chapter 4: Absence and its impact • There is a clear link between absence and attainment. As levels of pupil absences increase, the proportion of pupils reaching the expected levels of attainment at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4, decrease. • In 2009/10, pupils who have never been classified as persistent absentees over the Key Stage 2 period, were twice as likely to achieve level 4 or above (including English and maths) as pupils who were PAs for each of the four Key Stage 2 years (78% of non-PAs achieve this level compared to only 38% of PAs). • Pupils who were persistently absent over both the Key Stage 4 years in 2009/10, were just under four times less likely to achieve 5+ A*-C grades in GCSE (and equivalents) including English and maths, as other non-PA pupils. • Once a range of pupil characteristics have been controlled for, persistent absenteeism over the final Key Stage 4 year is found to have a strong relationship with GSCE attainment. This translates to PAs dropping one grade in each of their GCSEs, when compared to non-PA pupils. Chapter 5: Post 16 outcomes for young people • Just under a third of young people who were persistently absent during the final year of their compulsory school education, are not in education, employment or training (NEET) at the age of 18. This compares to just over a tenth of their non-PA peers. • Young people who were not persistently absent during the final year of compulsory school education are far more likely to be studying for a degree by the age of 18, than their peers who were persistently absent (30% vs. 7%). • Young people who were not persistently absent during the final year of compulsory school education are almost three times more likely to attend a Russell Group university than young people who were persistently absent. iii Glossary DfE : Department for Education SC : School Census NPD : National Pupil Database LSYPE : Longitudinal Study of Young People in England FSM : Free School Meal SEN : Special Educational Needs EAL : English as an Additional Language IDACI : Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index NS-SEC : National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification KS2 : Key Stage 2 KS4 : Key Stage 4 HE : Higher Education AA : Authorised Absence UA : Unauthorised Absence OA : Overall Absence PA : Persistent Absence/Absentee iv Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................... ii Glossary ....................................................................................... iv Introduction .................................................................................. 1 Aim ......................................................................................................................... 1 Background ........................................................................................................... 1 Absence measures ............................................................................................... 1 Data sources.......................................................................................................... 2 Methodological notes ........................................................................................... 3 Absence in England .............................................................................................. 4 Absence trends ................................................................................................... 4 Distribution of pupil absences ............................................................................. 6 School absences ................................................................................................. 6 Chapter 1: Characteristics of pupils absent from school ....... 13 Key findings......................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Gender............................................................................................................ 14 1.2 Ethnicity ......................................................................................................... 15 1.3 Special Educational Needs (SEN) ................................................................ 17 1.4 Age - National Curriculum Year (NCY) ........................................................ 18 1.5 English as an Additional Language (EAL) .................................................. 20 1.6 Free School Meal Eligibility (FSM)............................................................... 21 1.7 Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) ............................... 23 1.8 Modelling characteristics on the odds of being a persistence absentee 25 Chapter 2: Reasons for absence............................................... 29 Key findings......................................................................................................... 29 2.1 Distribution of reasons for absence by school type ................................. 30 2.2 Distribution of reasons for absence by gender ......................................... 32 2.3 Distribution of reasons for absence by ethnicity ....................................... 33 2.4 Distribution of reasons for absence by SEN .............................................. 34 2.5 Distribution of reasons for absence by age (NCY Groups)....................... 35 2.6 Distribution of reasons for absence by EAL .............................................. 35 2.7 Distribution of reasons for absence by FSM eligibility ............................. 36 2.8 Distribution of reasons for absence by IDACI ............................................ 37 vi 2.9 Pupil perceptions and attendance............................................................... 38 2.9.1 School utility ............................................................................................. 38 2.9.2 Class engagement ................................................................................... 39 Chapter 3: Contextual background of absentees .................... 41 Key findings......................................................................................................... 41 3.1 Family background ....................................................................................... 42 3.2 Parental attitudes .......................................................................................... 44 3.3 Young people’s attitudes ............................................................................. 45 3.4 Young people’s experiences ........................................................................ 49 3.5 Absence and exclusions .............................................................................. 52 3.6 Historic prevalence of persistent absenteeism .......................................... 54 Chapter 4: Absence and its impact........................................... 55 Key findings......................................................................................................... 55 4.1 Absence and Key Stage 2 attainment ......................................................... 56 4.2 Absence and Key Stage 4 attainment ......................................................... 60 4.3 The relationship between absence and Key Stage 4 pupil attainment .... 66 4.4 The impact of pupil absences on schools .................................................. 67 Chapter 5: Post 16 outcomes for young people ...................... 69 Key findings......................................................................................................... 69 5.1 Educational outcomes for young people .................................................... 70 5.2 Economic outcomes for young people ....................................................... 71 Annex A: Absence definitions................................................... 75 Annex B: Data sources .............................................................. 77 Annex C: School governance types ......................................... 79 Annex D: Time series of reasons for absence ......................... 81 Annex E: Contextual background of absentees ...................... 94 Annex F: Post 16 outcomes for young people ........................ 99 vii Introduction Aim The aim of this topic paper is to provide a comprehensive view of the latest statistical trends and analysis on absences in the maintained education sector in England. The paper is set out to initially expand on the absence information already available in the public domain, by providing detailed breakdowns on absences by various school and pupil characteristics in Chapters 1 and 2. Chapter 3 then investigates the attitudes, beliefs, aspirations and experiences of pupils who are persistently absent by the end of their compulsory school education, compared to those of their peers. This chapter also contrasts the family background and parental attitudes and aspirations for these pupils against that of their peers. The final two chapters (Chapters 4 and 5) examine the effects and outcomes that high levels of absences have on individuals, particularly in terms of academic achievement and post 16 destinations. This paper is not intended to be a regular publication and aims to only provide a current view of absences based on evidence available at this point in time. Background Prior to 2005 the Department for Education (DfE) collected absence data at school level via the Absence in School Survey. In 2005 the DfE began collecting termly pupil-level absence data via the School Census (SC) for maintained secondary schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies. In 2006 the scope of this data collection was extended to include maintained primary and special schools. In addition to absence data, the School Census collects information on a variety of pupil characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, Free School Meal eligibility and Special Educational Needs. This paper draws on the data collected via the School Census to present the latest trends and statistics on absence for pupils in the maintained education sector in England. It will also present analysis from the National Pupil Database (NPD) which links the School Census with attainment in national tests and examinations, and from linking the School Census to the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) and to school level perceptions information from the Tellus4 survey. Combining these data sources provides a more comprehensive view of factors leading to young people becoming absent from school and the impact this has on their lives. Absence measures Parents of children of compulsory school age (aged between 5 and 15 at the start of the academic year) are, by law, required to ensure that their children receive a suitable education through regular attendance at school. To this end, Local Authorities (LA) have a statutory duty to ensure that pupils attend school. 1 Attendance registers are taken twice a day at school: once at the beginning of the morning session and once during the afternoon session. In the registers, schools are required to record whether pupils are present, engaged in an approved educational activity or are absent. Where a day pupil of compulsory school age is absent, schools have to indicate in the register whether the absence is authorised by the school or unauthorised. Authorised absence is absence with permission from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes instances of absences for which a satisfactory explanation has been provided (for example, illness). Unauthorised absence is absence without permission from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes all unexplained or unjustified absences. Arriving late for school, after the register has closed, is recorded as unauthorised absence. This paper explores the prevalence and characteristics of authorised and unauthorised absences, as well a combination of the two, in overall absence. Also of interest are persistent absentees 2 who are defined as having 46 or more sessions of absence (authorised or unauthorised) during the academic year, around 15 per cent of overall absence. Annex A contains a full definition of each absence measure. Data sources Prior to 2005/06 the Department’s main source of absence data was the Absence in Schools Survey. This school-level survey was conducted in May each year and collected information on the number of day pupils of compulsory school age and the number of sessions missed due to authorised or unauthorised absences from maintained primary, secondary, all special and independent schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies in England. In 2006, the Department moved to collect information on pupil absences from the School Census (SC), which covered all but independent schools. This enabled us to look at the distribution of absence among individual pupils for the first time and investigate whether absences within schools are mostly accounted for by a minority of pupils or spread out more evenly across all pupils, or whether it is somewhere in between the two. The School Census is conducted three times a year for maintained primary and state-funded 3 secondary schools and annually for special schools. 2 Prior to October 2011, a persistent absentee was defined as a pupil having 64 or more sessions of absence (authorised or unauthorised) during the academic year, around 20 per cent of overall absence. However, the time series analyses in this paper has been recalculated to reflect the current definition of persistent absentees - as being absent for around 15 per cent of the school year. 3 Maintained secondary schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies are collectively referred to as state-funded secondary schools. 2 Collecting data via the SC has also allowed for a greater degree of detail to be recorded on the reasons for absence and on the characteristics of the absentees. As a result, it is now possible to link pupil absences to information held in the National Pupil Database (NPD) and other databases including: • • Tellus4 Survey Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) Full details of the data sources used in this report can be found in Annex B. Methodological notes Absence data for an academic year The School Census collects absence data on a termly basis and covers 2.5 terms out of a possible 3 in an academic year (autumn, spring and the first half of the summer term). References to data relating to an academic year in this publication are in fact for these school terms only. This is consistent with data published in other DfE publications. School coverage Unless otherwise stated, the analysis in this paper covers maintained primary, secondary and all special schools as well as City Technology Colleges and Academies in England. School Census pupil information The information collected in the census relates to pupil enrolments rather than the number of pupils. Where a pupil has moved throughout the year, they are counted more than once as they have recorded attendance in more than one school. Also, where a pupil has a dual registration, their absence may be returned from both schools, if both schools return absence data via the census. However, for ease of reference, pupil enrolments will be referred to as simply pupils throughout this publication. 3 Absence in England Absence trends The overall absence rate for all schools has generally declined 4 from 1996 to 2010 and currently stands at 6.04%. During this period, the two instances which have seen a slight increase in absences, 2000/01 and 2005/06, can be partly attributed to the impact of the ‘foot and mouth’ outbreak in 2000/01 and the ‘flu and norovirus’ in 2005/06 (Chart A). Chart A: Trend in all school absences, 1996-2010 Absence in Schools Survey 8 7.41 7.46 7.24 Absence in Schools Survey and School Census 7.44 7.01 7.19 6.98 Percentage of sessions  missed due to absence (%) 7 6.72  School Census 6.96 6.58 6.49 6.29 6.27 6.04 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Similar patterns of overall absences are observed over this period in each of the separate maintained primary, secondary and special school sectors. Since the full introduction of the absence data collection via the School Census in 2006/07, overall absence in maintained primary schools has remained fairly stable, while overall absence in state-funded secondary schools has reduced by 0.99 percentage points. During this same period, overall absences in special schools has declined by 0.35 percentage points. Table A shows the persistent absentees (PAs) rates observed across different school types since 2006/07. Table A: Persistent absentee rates by school type, 2006/07 to 2009/10 Percentage of pupils who are persistent  absentees (%) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 4.8 12.5 17.9 8.5 4.7 10.9 17.3 7.7 4.6 10.2 18.0 7.4 4.4 9.2 17.1 6.8 Maintained Primary Schools State‐funded Secondary Schools  Special Schools All schools Source: National Pupil Database 4 Note, comparisons between 1996/97 and 2006/07 should be treated with caution due to differing data collection methods and school coverage. 4 The table highlights that PA rates, overall and in mainstream schools are steadily falling. Currently 6.8% of the total pupil population in England are persistently absent, down from 8.5% in 2006/07. Of the three main school types, special schools, have the highest PA rates. These schools cater for pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) either in the form of learning difficulties (such as profound and multiple learning difficulty; behaviour, emotional and social difficulty; and speech, language and communication needs) or disabilities. This makes learning more challenging for pupils with SEN compared to pupils without SEN. As a result, pupils with SEN may be more likely to be absent from school than other pupils. Another possible reason for greater levels of absence in special schools might be due to the fact that pupils with certain types of SEN or disability may require extra medical attention that is not facilitated within the school – regular physiotherapy sessions for example – and do not count as an approved educational activity. Persistent absentee rates in state-funded secondary schools are double that observed in maintained primary schools. One possible reason for this highlevel of persistent absenteeism may be due to the growing nature of independence in pupils of secondary school age - with older pupils less likely to be supervised as far as the school gate by their parents than younger pupils. Chart B below shows the amount of absences accounted for by persistent absentees and their non-PA peers. From the chart, it is immediately clear that over a third of overall absence, a fifth of all authorised absences and over half of all unauthorised absences are caused by persistent absentees. Chart B: PA and non-PA split in absences across all schools Absence due to other pupils Absence due to persistent absentees 7 6.49 6.29 6.27 2.01 1.87 6.04 Percentage of sessions  missed due to absence (%) 6 5.49 2.24 5 5.28 1.68 1.60 5.21 1.38 1.26 3.90 3.95 5.00 1.11 4 3 2 4.25 4.28 4.40 4.36 3.89 3.88 1 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Overall absence 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Authorised absence 1.05 1.04 1.00 1.01 0.65 0.63 0.61 0.57 0.36 0.39 0.45 0.47 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Unauthorised absence Source: National Pupil Database From the above chart, it is also apparent that authorised absences for all schools in England has declined since 2006/07 (from 5.49% to 5.00% in 2009/10), while simultaneously, unauthorised absences have slightly increased (from 1.00% in 2006/07 to 1.04% in 2009/10). 5 Distribution of pupil absences The majority of absences are caused by a minority of pupils. Over half the pupil population miss less than 5% of school sessions – this includes around 7% of primary school pupils, 6% of secondary school pupils and almost 9% of special schools pupils who have no absences. In contrast, 0.65% of all pupils are absent for more than half the academic year. Chart C below presents the distribution of pupils by their overall absence rates in each school sector in 2009/10. Chart C: Distribution of pupils by overall absence rates, 2009/10 Maintained Primary Schools State‐funded Secondary Schools Special  Schools All Schools 14 12 Percentage of pupils 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Overall absence (%) Source: National Pupil Database In 2009/10 on average, primary school pupils missed almost 8 days of school. Pupils from state-funded secondary schools missed around 10 school days and pupils from special schools missed a little over 14 school days. School absences As seen earlier, levels of absence vary by school type. The following Charts show how these differences shape up across different school types, governance structures, religious denominations, and admission policies. The patterns in the levels of overall absence observed for maintained primary, state-funded secondary and special schools (Chart D) mirror that observed for persistent absentee rates in Table A earlier. As before, special schools have the highest levels of overall absences at 10.27% in 2009/10, followed by state-funded secondary schools, with overall absence rates of 6.88%. Maintained primary schools have the lowest levels of overall absence (5.21%). Around a fifth of all absences in state-funded secondary and special schools were unauthorised in 2009/10, compared to only one in eight in maintained primary schools. 6 Chart D: Absence rates by school type, 2009/10 Authorised  absence Unauthorised absence 12 Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 10.27 10 1.98 6.88 8 8.30 6.04 1.45 6 5.21 1.04 5.43 0.67 4 5.00 4.54 2 0 Maintained Primary schools State‐funded Secondary schools Special  schools All  schools Source: National Pupil Database It is also interesting to look into school-level absences (the levels of absences reported by schools for all their pupils) to see how they are distributed across different absence bands. Chart E 5 below clearly illustrates that the majority of schools have relatively low absence rates, with fewer than one in ten having extremely high rates. So, only a minority of schools actually have very high levels of absences. Chart E: School distribution of overall and persistent absence rates, 2009/10 70 70 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees in schools (%) Percentage of sessions missed due to absence in schools (%)  90% of schools have absences below this level 0 0 Maintained Primary State‐funded schools Secondary schools Special schools All schools Maintained Primary State‐funded schools Secondary schools Special schools All schools Persistent Absence Overall Absence Source: National Pupil Database 5 Note, the end-points from the box-plots in Chart E are the 1st and 99th percentile values of overall absence. The lower ends of the box-plots mark the 25th percentile values and the upper end, the 75th. The median values are represented by circles. 7 As well as variations in absence levels across different schools types, the governance structures in place across different schools also have some relationship with the absence levels observed. Chart F below shows the levels of authorised and unauthorised absences, as well as the persistent absentee rates across different governance structures for maintained primary and statefunded secondary schools. The patterns of absence across Community, Foundation, Voluntary Aided and Voluntary Controlled schools are similar for both the primary and secondary school sectors – with Community and Foundation schools having higher levels of absence compared to the voluntary sector. In 2009/10, one in ten primary school absences in Foundation, Voluntary Aided and Voluntary Controlled schools were unauthorised - this compares to one in six of secondary school absences. Academies and City Technology Colleges (CTCs) have the highest overall absence rates within the secondary school sector - with a correspondingly high proportion of absences classed as unauthorised (almost a third). This is not entirely surprising as most Academies (and CTCs) had in the past, replaced underperforming maintained secondary schools. As a result, these schools have historically had higher levels of absences. Chart F: Absence by school governance types across maintained primary and statefunded secondary schools, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence PA 9 16 2.50 7 14 1.55 6 1.45 1.26 PA 1.21 12 1.03 0.76 5 PA 0.67 0.57 0.44 0.49 PA PA 4 8 PA 3 6 PA 2 PA PA PA PA 1 4 2 5.59 5.47 4.62 5.44 4.45 5.24 4.37 5.39 4.43 0 Secondary Academies  & CTC's No. of  schools =  10 PA 206    Secondary  Primary  1,703 10,321  Community Secondary    Primary   780  430 Foundation Secondary   Primary 540 3,706 Voluntary Aided Secondary 102 Primary 2,516 5.43 4.54 All     All State ‐ funded Maintained Secondary   Primary 3,331 Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 8 18 0 16,973 Voluntary controlled Source: National Pupil Database Now to focus on absences by the different admission policies employed across the state-funded secondary school sector (Chart G). From the chart it is apparent that secondary schools with a Modern or Comprehensive admissions policy (which include Academies and CTCs) have by far the highest absence rates – with over a fifth of all absences unauthorised. 8 In sharp contrast, secondary schools with a selective admissions policy – namely Grammar schools, have the lowest levels of overall absence where only 5% of all absences are unauthorised. Again, this finding is not surprising as selective schools recruit highly academically able pupils, who intrinsically have low levels of absences – as Chapter 4 will later explore. The persistent absentee rates for schools with these admissions policies mirror the patterns observed for overall absence. Chart G: Absence by school admission in state-funded secondary schools, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence PA 16 8 1.66 14 1.52 1.45 12 6 0.49 PA 5 10 0.25 PA PA 8 4 6 3 PA PA 2 4 1 2 5.45 5.78 4.85 5.13 5.43 Comprehensive Modern Selective Other All State‐funded Secondary 159   164   222 3,331 0 0 No. of  schools =  Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 7 2,786 Source: National Pupil Database Finally, absence levels across different religious denominations also show a distinct pattern, with high degrees of variability (Chart H). In the primary sector, faith schools – bar Muslim schools - have lower absence and persistent absentee rates than other non-faith schools. In this sector, Muslim and Sikh schools have the greatest proportions of absences unauthorised, although this reduces dramatically for these same denominations in the secondary sector. Also interestingly, Muslim and Sikh schools are the only religious denominations to have lower secondary school absences compared to the levels observed in the primary sector. It should be noted however, that although absence rates for primary Hindu, primary Quaker and secondary Sikh schools are the lowest; these rates apply only to a single school under each religious denomination and so reflect the attendance policies employed in these particular schools. 9 Chart H: Absence by religious denomination across maintained primary and statefunded secondary schools, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence PA 16 1.96 7 14 1.50 1.10 6 1.15 1.45 1.08 12 2.17 PA 0.49 0.46 4 0.76 PA 5 PA 1.06 0.63 0.54 0.30 PA 0.41 0.11 PA 0.67 10 PA 0.82 8 3 6 PA 2 PA PA PA PA PA PA PA 1 2 PA 5.32 4.38 5.30 4.44 4.27 5.39 4.36 5.83 4.35 3.92 3.72 PA 3.69 3.96 0 3.88 4.05 5.46 4.61 5.43 4.54 0 Church of England   1   1 Quaker Hindu   2,715   10,757 All Maintained Primary All State ‐funded Secondary   2 Sikh Primary   1 Secondary   6 Primary Primary   5 Muslim Primary Secondary   29 Primary    9   Jewish Secondary   60 Primary   63 Christian Other Secondary Primary       26 Methodist Primary 1,681 Roman Catholic Secondary    331 Primary Secondary Primary Secondary PA PA No. of  schools =  207 4,471 4 PA PA Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 8   3,331  16,973  Other Source: National Pupil Database The final two maps in this section show the geographical distribution of overall absence and persistent absence as at 2009/10 by the Lower Layer Super Output Areas 6. In general, there is a correlation between both maps – that is, areas with high levels of overall absence, also tend to have high levels of persistent absenteeism; likewise, areas with low levels of overall absence, tend to have low levels of persistent absenteeism. It is interesting to also see that local authorities with pockets of high deprivation (Liverpool, Manchester, Kingston upon Hull and Tower Hamlets, for example) and coastal areas have some of the highest levels of overall and persistent absence. The next chapter will detail absences by pupil characteristics and show through modelling, the effects certain pupil characteristics have on the odds of being a persistent absentee. 6 For more information, see: http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/Info.do?page=aboutneighbourhood/geograph y/superoutputareas/soa-intro.htm 10 Map 1: Geographical distribution of overall absence, 2009/10 Proportion of sessions missed due to overall absence OA rate above 6.7% OA rate between 5.8% and 6.7% OA rate between 5.0% and 5.7% OA rate below or equal to 4.9% Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on b ehalf of HMSO . © Cro wn copyright a nd d ata base rig ht 2011. All rights re served Ordnance Survey Licence number 100038433 Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2011. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100038433. Map produced by Data & Statistics Division: National Pupil Database and Dissemination Unit 11 Map 2: Geographical distribution of persistent absentee, 2009/10 Proportion of pupils who are Persistent Absentees PA rate above 8.8% PA rate between 6.0% and 8.8% PA rate between 3.8% and 5.9% PA rate below or equal to 3.7% Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2011. All rights Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right 2011. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100038433. Map produced by Data & Statistics Division: National Pupil Database and Dissemination Unit 12 Chapter 1: Characteristics of pupils absent from school Key findings • • • • • • • • Gender differences in absence rates are minimal in primary schools but begin to appear in secondary, with girls having more absences than boys. Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma pupils consistently have the highest overall absence rates, compared to other ethnic groups, for each of the past four years. However, despite this, the level of absence for these ethnic groups has reduced the most over this period. In contrast, pupils from Chinese, Indian and African ethnic backgrounds, tend to have the lowest overall absence rates and are least likely to be persistently absent from school. Pupils with any Special Education Needs (SEN) provision are more likely to be absent from school than pupils with no identified SEN. In 2009/10, pupils at School Action Plus had the highest overall absence level across all SEN provision types in all schools, at 9.19% – this was 1.5 times the level for all pupils. Overall absences, particularly unauthorised absences, increase with each progressive national curriculum year in secondary school. Overall absences are highest for pupils at the end of compulsory secondary education (year 11) and lowest in the final year of primary school. Pupils with English as an Additional Language (EAL) have lower levels of absences than pupils whose first language is English. Pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) have consistently had higher rates of authorised and unauthorised levels of absence than pupils not eligible for FSM. Persistent absentee rates among FSM pupils are 2.5 times that seen in non-FSM pupils. There is a linear increase in overall absences (in both primary and secondary schools) corresponding to each additional decile of local area deprivation on the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI). In 2009/10, the overall absence rate at the most deprived IDACI decile was 1.6 times that of the least deprived, while in secondary schools it was 1.7 times that of the least deprived. Controlling for a range of factors across all schools: - Girls have 20% higher odds of being persistent absentees than boys. - Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma pupils have almost 9 and 8 times the odds (respectively) of being a PA compared to White British pupils. - Pupils with SEN have greater odds of being PA than pupils without SEN. - The odds of being PA increase for every higher year in secondary school. - Pupils with EAL have reduced odds of being a PA compared to pupils with English as a first language. - Pupils eligible for FSM have 2.2 times the odds of non-FSM pupils of being persistent absentees. - Pupils living in the most deprived IDACI quartile have almost twice the odds of being a persistent absentee compared to similar pupils living in the least deprived IDACI half. 13 This chapter will detail the patterns and trends in different absence types by the pupil characteristics available from the School Census and conclude (Section 1.8) by modelling the likelihood of being a persistent absentee, associated with each of these individual characteristics. 1.1 Gender Differences in absence rates by gender are minimal for pupils in primary schools; however in secondary schools, girls tend to have higher authorised and unauthorised absence rates than boys (Chart 1.1). In special schools (which cover all ages) girls have more authorised absence but boys have more unauthorised absence. Chart 1.1: Absence by gender and school type, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 12 10 2.28 1.20 8 1.41 6 0.68 1.48 8.11 4 2 1.04 1.05 4.95 5.05 Boys Girls 0.66 4.54 4.54 Boys Girls 5.30 5.57 Boys Girls 8.77 0 Maintained Primary schools Boys State‐funded Secondary schools Girls Special  schools All  Schools Source: National Pupil Database As observed earlier, absence rates have been steadily falling since 2006/07. Within the gender context, overall absence fell slightly more for girls than it has for boys (0.46 percentage points fall in overall absence amongst girls compared to the 0.44 percentage points for boys). In the line with the above finding, the levels of persistent absenteeism observed between boys and girls have begun to converge, as the PA rate for girls fell at a faster rate than for boys. Table 1.1: Trends in overall absence and persistent absentee rates Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) Percentage of overall sessions missed  (%) Boys Girls All pupils 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2006/07 2007/08 6.43 6.56 6.49 6.22 6.36 6.29 6.20 6.33 6.27 5.99 6.10 6.04 8.4 8.7 8.5 7.6 7.9 7.7 2008/09 2009/10 7.2 7.5 7.4 6.7 6.9 6.8 Source: National Pupil Database 14 1.2 Ethnicity Absence patterns between ethnic groups have remained fairly static over time and across different school types. Chart 1.2 illustrates these patterns for authorised and unauthorised absences across all schools in England. From the chart below it is apparent that Irish Traveller pupils, followed closely by Gypsy Roma pupils 7, have by far the highest absence rates – with levels of authorised and unauthorised absences for Irish Traveller pupils over 3 and 7 times that of all pupils (respectively). Similarly, authorised absences among Gypsy Roma pupils are double that for all pupils, while the unauthorised absence rate is over 6 times as high. Compared to all pupils, Irish pupils and pupils from a Mixed White and Black Caribbean background, consistently have higher absence rates across both primary and secondary schools. Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils also have higher than average absence rates in primary schools. In contrast, Chinese pupils have consistently had the lowest levels of absences in primary, secondary and special school since 2006/07. Chart 1.2: Authorised and unauthorised absence levels across all schools, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence 20 7.78 15 6.94 10 5.01 5.10 4.42 5.50 1.29 0.82 5.30 4.47 4.35 1.32 1.23 1.04 4.77 4.88 5.00 0.43 3.33 4.09 3.22 Chinese 4.70 1.41 All pupils 0.83 Minority Ethnic Pupils 1.34 Any other Black background 1.30 0.66 Black African 1.21 Black Caribbean 1.01 Any other Asian background 5.41 1.21 Indian 5.43 1.70 Any other Mixed background 1.41 White and Asian 5.48 11.15 White and Black African 5.03 Irish 5 1.28 Any other ethnic group 15.73 0.98 White British Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 25 Bangladeshi Pakistani White and Black Caribbean Any other White background Gypsy Roma Irish Traveller 0 Source: National Pupil Database Over the past four years, overall absence has steadily fallen for all pupils, and is almost half a percentage point below the 2006/07 level (Table 1.2). Interestingly the ethnic groups with the highest levels of overall absence, Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma, have shown the greatest reductions since 2006/07 - with reductions in overall absences of 2.49 and 2.04 percentage points respectively. Most white and mixed ethnic minority groups have also shown considerable reductions in over this period. Pakistani pupils, however, have shown a notable increase (0.29 percentage points) in overall absences across all schools. 7 Note, the population sizes for Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma pupils are comparatively very small and so, subject to greater year-on-year volatility. 15 Table 1.2: Trend in overall absence for all schools, 2006/07 – 2009/10 Percentage of overall sessions  missed (%) 2009/10 ‐ 2006/07  percentage points  difference 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 White White British Irish Irish Traveller Gypsy/ Roma Any other White background 6.52 6.46 7.45 25.99 20.13 6.95 6.26 6.18 7.12 23.77 19.98 7.08 6.27 6.19 7.11 24.44 19.05 7.01 6.09 6.01 6.75 23.50 18.09 6.84 ‐0.43 ‐0.45 ‐0.70 ‐2.49 ‐2.04 ‐0.11 Mixed White and Black Caribbean White and Black African White and Asian Any other Mixed background 6.83 7.60 6.29 6.09 6.66 6.64 7.29 6.08 6.08 6.50 6.67 7.3 6.07 6.22 6.53 6.46 7.12 5.90 6.02 6.31 ‐0.37 ‐0.48 ‐0.39 ‐0.07 ‐0.35 Asian Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Any other Asian background 5.98 5.19 6.51 6.69 5.27 6.43 5.29 7.19 7.52 5.33 6.68 5.34 7.68 7.48 5.54 6.08 5.08 6.80 6.64 5.30 0.10 ‐0.11 0.29 ‐0.05 0.03 Black Black Caribbean Black African Any other Black background 5.08 6.20 4.21 6.08 4.99 5.89 4.32 5.86 5.09 5.95 4.51 5.74 4.77 5.76 4.15 5.38 ‐0.31 ‐0.44 ‐0.06 ‐0.70 Chinese 3.66 3.45 3.59 3.65 ‐0.01 Any other ethnic group 6.25 6.38 6.56 6.09 ‐0.16 Minority Ethnic Pupils 6.22 6.36 6.49 6.11 ‐0.11 All pupils 6.49 6.29 6.27 6.04 ‐0.45 Source: National Pupil Database Persistent absentee rates (Chart 1.3) generally mirror the pattern seen above, with Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma pupils having PA rates almost 7 and 6 times the national average (respectively). Chinese and Black African pupils consistently have the lowest rates, at around a third and two fifths of that for all pupils (respectively). Chart 1.3: Persistent absentee levels across all schools, 2009/10 45.4 40 37.6 30 20 9.8 6.6 6.6 7.2 7.7 7.1 4.0 4.6 6.6 5.5 2.7 6.0 6.7 6.8 All pupils 8.0 8.8 Minority Ethnic  Pupils 6.8 Any other  ethnic  group 10 2.2 Chinese Any Other  Black Background African Caribbean Any Other  Asian Background Bangladeshi Pakistani Indian Any Other  Mixed Background White and Asian White and Black African White and Black Caribbean Any Other  White Background Gypsy Roma Irish Traveller Irish 0 White British Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) 50 Source: National Pupil Database 16 1.3 Special Educational Needs (SEN) Pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) have learning difficulties or disabilities 8 that make it more challenging for them to learn than their peers. Pupils with SEN are more likely to be absent from school. There are three levels of provision of SEN: • • • School Action (a teacher identifies a child with SEN and provides interventions); School Action Plus (as with school action, but with help from external services); Statement (the LA provides written statement of SEN needs of the child). The School Census records up two levels of special needs, classed as primary and secondary need. The scope of the analyses in this paper is restricted to the primary need. Chart 1.4 shows a distinct pattern in overall absences by SEN provision according to the school phase. Maintained primary schools have increased levels of overall absences in line with the severity of SEN provision - pupils with Statements had 1.5 times the overall absence rate of pupils with no SEN in 2009/10. Levels of unauthorised absences in primary schools were highest for pupils at School Action and School Action Plus, with just over a sixth of all absences unauthorised. Secondary schools on the other hand, have the highest overall absence rates for pupils at School Action Plus - with rates almost double that of pupils with no SEN. Over a third of all absences were unauthorised for this group in 2009/10. Chart 1.4: Overall absence rates by school types and SEN provision, 2009/10 Statements  of SEN School Action Plus School Action No identified SEN Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 14 12 11.88 10 10.16 9.24 9.06 7.41 6 9.19 8.56 8 7.37 6.85 6.31 6.02 5.37 4 4.80 2 0 Maintained Primary schools State‐funded Secondary schools *Special schools All schools *Absence figures for children with no SEN, or at School Action or School Action Plus are not included in the breakdown for special schools due    to the very small numbers in these categories – their attendance data is included in the full data for all schools. Source: National Pupil Database 8 The following special educational needs are recorded in the School Census: Specific learning difficulty; Moderate learning difficulty; Severe learning difficulty; Profound and multiple learning difficulty; Behaviour, emotional and social difficulty; Speech, language and communication needs; Hearing impairment; Visual impairment; Multi-sensory impairment; Physical difficulty; Autistic spectrum disorder; Other difficulty/disability. 17 The persistent absentee rates for each SEN provision across all schools mirror the patterns of overall absences seen above (Charts 1.4 and 1.5). In 2009/10, the persistent absentee rate for pupils with statements of SEN or at School Action Plus was over 3 times that of pupils with no identified SEN; the rate for pupils at School Action was twice that of pupils with no identified SEN. Although PA rates have steadily fallen over the past four years for all SEN provision groups (Chart 1.5), because they have fallen faster for pupils without SEN, the odds ratio for a pupil with SEN being a persistent absentee, relative to a pupil with no identified SEN, has in fact gradually increased. In 2006/07, the odds of being a persistent absentee for a pupil with a statement of SEN was 2.94 times the odds of pupil with no identified SEN; by 2009/10, the odds ratio had increased to 3.49. Similarly, the odds ratio of a pupil at School Action Plus (relative to a pupil with no SEN has increased from 3.27 to 3.58 and the odds ratio for a pupil at School Action has increased from 2.19 to 2.28. This means that the gap between pupils with and without SEN, in terms of their odds of being a persistent absentee, has grown. Chart 1.5: Trend in persistent absentee rates by SEN provision Statements of SEN 20 School Action No identified SEN 17.4 16.8 17.5 15.6 16 16.1 14 All pupils 18.8 18 Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) School Action Plus 16.1 15.3 13.4 12.2 11.5 12 10.5 10 8.2 8 6 7.7 7.4 6.8 6.6 5.8 5.4 4 4.9 2 0 Odds ratios   SEN vs. no SEN  2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10  Statements 2.99 3.12 3.35 3.49  School Action Plus 3.27 3.42 3.52 3.58  School Action 2.19 2.25 2.26 2.28 Source: National Pupil Database 1.4 Age - National Curriculum Year (NCY) We noted earlier that secondary schools have much higher levels of absences than primary schools. Investigating absence patterns across the different year groups show a clear link of increasing absence levels with increasing age. Chart 1.6 illustrates how absence rates vary by different year groups across all schools in England in 2009/10. Immediately it is apparent that there is a clear trend of increasing absences (particularly unauthorised) from the start of secondary school (year 7) onwards. Overall absences are lowest during the 18 final year of primary school (year 6) and highest during the final year of secondary school (year 11). Overall absences in year 11 are almost double year 6’s level, while unauthorised absences are over four times that of the level seen in year 6. Chart 1.6: Absence rates by National Curriculum Year group, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Percentageof    sessions missedduetoabsence(%)         9 8 2.41 7 1.34 6 1.83 1.00 0.72 5 0.68 0.67 0.65 0.63 0.62 4.42 4.38 5 6 0.60 4 3 5.11 2 4.59 4.38 4.40 2 3 4 4.78 5.32 5.56 5.52 8 9 10 6.11 1 0 1  and bel ow 7 11 National  Curriculum Year Group Source: National Pupil Database Persistent absentee rates across all schools follow the patterns observed above, with the PA rates of year 11 over 3 times that of year 6’s 9. Chart 1.7 Persistent absentee rates by National Curriculum Year group, 2009/10 Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) 16 14.2 14 12 11.0 10 9.2 7.5 8 6 5.9 5.5 4.6 4.1 4.1 3 4 4.2 4.1 5 6 4 2 0 1 and below 2 7 8 9 10 11 National  Curriculum Year Group Source: National Pupil Database Research 10 also shows that there is a continuous pattern of increased absences with age that occurs not only between year groups (as above), but also within them. 9 It is worth noting however, that year 11 pupils are given authorised study leave over this academic year to help pupils prepare for their final Key Stage 4 exams. 10 Month of Birth and Education (Jul 2010) http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/RSG/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE-RR017 19 1.5 English as an Additional Language (EAL) English as an Additional Language (EAL) is recorded in the School Census for children who have English as a secondary language. Therefore, it is important to note that this classification does not necessarily apply strictly to recent migrant pupils, but in fact also includes children who are multilingual and fully fluent in English, as well as those who are just acquiring English. Patterns in absences differ by school types for EAL pupils (Chart 1.8). The primary school sector has greater authorised and unauthorised levels of absences for EAL pupils than for pupils with English as a first language. Around 18% of all absences for EAL pupils were unauthorised in 2009/10 compared to just 12% for their non-EAL counterparts. Contrary to the above findings, absence rates for EAL pupils in secondary schools are less than that for non-EAL pupils. However, the proportion of absences unauthorised for EAL pupils remain slightly higher than that for nonEAL pupils (24% for EAL pupils compared to 21% for non-EAL pupils). Special schools show a stark difference in both authorised and unauthorised absence levels by EAL. Although the EAL pupils have higher overall absence rates (12.13% compared to 10.04%), a greater proportion of it is authorised (90%) compared to non-EAL pupils (79%). Chart 1.8: Absence rates by English as an Additional Language, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 14 12 1.26 10 2.06 8 1.45 6 1.06 0.60 10.87 1.42 4 2 1.20 1.02 4.83 5.02 Other  than English English 7.98 4.90 4.48 4.58 Other  than English English Other  than English 5.54 0 Maintained Primary schools English Other  than English State‐funded Secondary schools English Special  schools All  schools Source: National Pupil Database Persistent absentee rates follow the overall absence patterns observed above for different school types. However, EAL pupils have considerably lower PA rates than non-EAL pupils, though this difference has reduced over past four years (from 1.4 in 2006/07 to 0.7 percentage points in 2009/10). Table 1.3: Trend in persistent absentee rates by English as an Additional Language Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 First Language First language is known or believed to be other than English First language is known or believed to be English All pupils 7.3 8.7 8.5 7.3 7.8 7.7 7.0 7.4 7.4 6.2 6.9 6.8 Source: National Pupil Database 20 1.6 Free School Meal Eligibility (FSM) Pupils are eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) if their parent/s are in receipt of any of the following: • • • • • Income Support income-based Jobseeker's Allowance income-related Employment and Support Allowance support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 Child Tax Credit, provided they are not entitled to Working Tax Credit and have an annual income below the first threshold for Child Tax Credit as specified by HM Revenue & Customs for that particular financial year. the Guarantee element of State Pension Credit • The FSM analyses considered in this paper are based on pupils who were known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals. Chart 1.9 shows a stark difference in absence rates by Free School Meal eligibility within different school types. This difference is particularly pronounced for pupils in state-funded secondary schools where the overall absence rate for FSM pupils is 4.02 percentage points above that of non-FSM pupils. Significant differences also exist in the maintained primary and special school sectors where differences of 2.46 and 1.97 percentage points exist (respectively). Unauthorised absence rates among FSM pupils tend to be 3 times higher than non-FSM pupils in maintained primary and state-funded secondary schools, and almost twice as high in special schools. Chart 1.9: Absence rates by FSM eligibility for different school types 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 14 12 2.73 10 1.56 3.35 8 2.30 6 1.52 ; 1.10 0.78 0.48 8.81 4 8.01 6.94 5.69 2 6.28 5.16 4.28 4.73 0 FSM Non‐FSM Maintained Primary schools FSM Non‐FSM State‐funded Secondary schools FSM Non‐FSM Special  schools FSM Non‐FSM Total Source: National Pupil Database 21 Since 2006, the authorised absence rates among both FSM and non-FSM pupils have steadily declined. However, the levels of unauthorised absence in both groups have remained broadly stable. Also throughout this period, authorised absences have consistently been a third higher for FSM eligible pupils than for non-FSM pupils, and unauthorised absences three times higher. Chart 1.10: Trend in absence by FSM eligibility across all schools, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 10 9 8 2.21 2.25 2.37 2.30 7 1.00 6 0.78 0.79 0.80 4.99 4.93 5 1.01 1.05 5.28 5.21 1.04 0.78 4 7.11 6.85 6.72 3 6.28 5.19 2 5.49 4.73 5.00 1 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 FSM 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Non‐FSM Total Source: National Pupil Database In line with the findings above, the persistent absentee rates for FSM pupils have consistently been around two and half times higher than that for nonFSM pupils; the persistent absentee rates for both groups have declined by approximately one fifth since 2006/07 (Table 1.4). Table 1.4: Trend in persistent absentee rates by FSM eligibility FSM eligibility Known to be eligible for FSM Other pupils All pupils Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 17.2 6.9 8.5 16.0 6.2 7.7 15.1 5.9 7.4 13.7 5.3 6.8 Source: National Pupil Database 22 1.7 Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) The Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) is a measure of the proportion of children living in income deprived households within the local area. An ‘income deprived’ household is defined as either a household in receipt of Income Support and Job Seekers Allowance (Income Based) or in receipt of Working Family Tax Credit/Disabled Persons Tax Credit with an equivalent income below 60% of the national median before housing costs. The IDACI is the proportion of children under the age of 16 living in such households for a particular area and takes a value between 0 and 1. So, like FSM eligibility, the IDACI is a proxy measure of poverty among children. Whilst it captures greater variations in the circumstances of each child than FSM – here allocating them to one of ten categories based on the level of area deprivation – it reflects the area they live in rather than the individual circumstances of their family in particular. The table below shows the trend 11 in authorised and unauthorised absences in maintained primary and secondary 12 schools by the IDACI decile for pupil residence. As seen in the case of FSM eligibility earlier, absence rates tend to increase with increased levels of deprivation and from the table below it is apparent that this finding holds true when measuring area deprivation through the IDACI. Table 1.5: Absence trend by IDACI decile IDACI decile Percentage of sessions missed   due to authorised absence (%) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Percentage of sessions missed due to unauthorised absence (%) 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Maintained Primary  0‐10% most deprived 10‐20% 20‐30% 30‐40% 40‐50% 50‐60% 60‐70% 70‐80% 80‐90% 90‐100% least deprived 5.32 5.25 5.12 4.93 4.70 4.47 4.27 4.09 3.88 3.66 5.41 5.36 5.18 4.97 4.70 4.47 4.26 4.05 3.89 3.63 5.39 5.18 5.08 4.88 4.71 4.53 4.29 4.12 3.94 3.71 4.87 5.02 4.95 4.83 4.64 4.46 4.26 4.07 3.93 3.72 1.06 0.84 0.69 0.55 0.42 0.33 0.26 0.21 0.18 0.15 1.18 0.94 0.74 0.57 0.45 0.36 0.28 0.23 0.19 0.16 1.28 1.03 0.82 0.67 0.52 0.44 0.34 0.28 0.25 0.20 1.31 1.08 0.87 0.68 0.54 0.42 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.21 Maintained Secondary 0‐10% most deprived 10‐20% 20‐30% 30‐40% 40‐50% 50‐60% 60‐70% 70‐80% 80‐90% 90‐100% least deprived 7.50 7.28 7.01 6.76 6.39 6.08 5.79 5.54 5.30 5.00 6.63 6.72 6.56 6.32 5.96 5.69 5.42 5.16 4.94 4.58 6.53 6.31 6.18 5.96 5.84 5.63 5.42 5.20 5.06 4.84 5.67 5.93 5.89 5.80 5.58 5.39 5.23 4.99 4.83 4.54 2.95 2.42 2.01 1.66 1.33 1.08 0.89 0.74 0.63 0.51 2.84 2.41 1.98 1.64 1.30 1.06 0.86 0.73 0.62 0.50 2.98 2.26 1.90 1.56 1.31 1.08 0.91 0.78 0.68 0.55 2.63 2.30 1.90 1.56 1.25 1.02 0.85 0.72 0.60 0.48 Source: National Pupil Database 11 IDACI bands for 2008 to 2010 are based on 2007 IDACI scores. Care should be taken when comparing to IDACI figures for 2007 and earlier which are based on 2004 IDACI scores. 12 The maintained secondary schools sector excludes CTCs and Academies. 23 Generally every increased IDACI decile is associated with correspondingly higher levels of absences. The absence gaps between the most deprived 10% and the least deprived 10% for unauthorised absence have remained stubbornly resilient over time; they have widened in primary schools by one fifth; and only narrowed by one tenth in secondary schools, since 2006/07. By contrast, the deprivation gaps for authorised absence have shrunk considerably, by almost one third in primary schools, and by one half in secondary schools. Deprived areas tend to have a greater proportion of their overall absences unauthorised (Chart 1.11). This proportion reduces for every subsequent IDACI decile as the level of deprivation decreases. This reduction is particularly noticeable for the six most deprived deciles but less so for the remaining four. Chart 1.11: Authorised/unauthorised absences as a proportion of overall absence in all schools, 2009/10 Proportion of overall absence authorised Proportion of overall absence unauthorised 100% Percentage of overall absence 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 ‐ 10 % most deprived 10 ‐ 20 % 20 ‐ 30 % 30 ‐ 40 % 40 ‐ 50 % 50 ‐ 60 % IDACI decile 60 ‐ 70 % 70 ‐ 80 % 80 ‐ 90 % 90 ‐ 100 % least deprived Source: National Pupil Database The persistent absentee rates observed in maintained primary and secondary schools also reduce at every subsequent IDACI decile (Chart 1.12). In primary school pupils, the odds of being a persistent absentee are 4.5 times higher for pupils living in the most deprived IDACI decile compared to those living in the least deprived decile. Similarly, secondary school pupils living in the most deprived IDACI decile have 3.5 times the odds of pupils living in the least deprived IDACI decile. So there is a clear instance of higher persistent absenteeism with increased levels of deprivation. 24 Chart 1.12: Persistent absentee rate by IDACI decile, 2009/10 Maintined Primary  Maintained Secondary 14 Percentage of pupils who are persistent absentees (%) 13.4 Most deprived vs. least deprived Primary school, odds ratio       = 4.5 Secondary school, odds ratio  = 3.5 13.2 12 12.0 10.7 10 9.2 8 8.0 7.1 6 7.0 6.7 6.0 5.9 5.3 5.1 4 4.3 4.2 3.6 3.0 2 2.5 2.1 1.7 0 0‐10% most deprived 10‐20% 20‐30% 30‐40% 40‐50% 50‐60% 60‐70% 70‐80% 80‐90% IDACI decile 90‐100% least deprived Source: National Pupil Database 1.8 Modelling characteristics on the odds of being a persistence absentee So far, the analysis in this chapter has highlighted the variation in differing levels of absences recorded against different pupil characteristics. It is interesting to extend this focus further to assess how having a certain characteristic (e.g. belonging to a certain ethnic group or having a particular Special Educational Need), may affect the likelihood of having higher instances of absence. For example, does an English speaking, Year 9, Black Caribbean girl with no SEN and entitled to FSM, have a greater likelihood of being a persistent absentee compared to her White British neighbour with the same characteristics? This section attempts to answer these questions by modelling the likelihood of being a persistent absentee, using the logistic regression method, on the pupil characteristics considered earlier. The advantage of this approach is that it verifies whether the differences seen in previous sections are actually associated with a single characteristic or a combination of a number of characteristics. For example, Mixed White and Black Caribbean pupils have higher than average eligibility for Free School Meals; and pupils from this ethnic group also have a higher than average persistent absentee rate (9.8% compared to 6.8% for all pupils). Logistic regression helps isolate which of these factors – ethnicity or FSM eligibility – is responsible for the increased odds of persistent absence. Chart 1.13 shows the individual effect on the odds each characteristic has on a child of being a persistent absentee, while holding all other characteristics constant and equal. In this case, a value of an odds ratio greater than 1 implies an increased likelihood of a child with that particular characteristic 25 being a persistent absentee. Conversely, an odds ratio less than 1 implies a reduced likelihood of the child being a persistent absentee, holding all other characterises equal. The effects shown in this chart are all relative to a child with the following reference characteristics: • Male • White British • No Special Educational Need • In Primary school (national curriculum year group 6 or below) • English as first language • Not eligible for Free School Meals • Living in the least deprived half of IDACI ranked areas The findings from the regression (Chart 1.13) reiterate the patterns observed earlier in this chapter. Pupil characteristics with higher instances of absences tend to increase the likelihood of a pupil with that characteristic being a persistent absentee – compared to an equivalent pupil from the corresponding control characteristic group. Therefore, holding all other characteristics constant, it is apparent that: - The odds of being a persistent absentee are 20% higher for girls than they are for boys. - The odds of being a persistent absentee are almost 8 times higher for Gypsy Roma pupils and 9 times higher for Irish Traveller pupils than they are for White British pupils. On the other hand, Black, Chinese and Asian pupils have reduced odds of being a persistent absentee compared to their White British counterparts - with African pupils having only a quarter of the odds of White British pupils of being a persistent absentee; Chinese pupils have a third of the odds and Indian pupils have around two thirds the odds. - Pupils eligible for FSM have over twice the odds being a persistent absentee as similar pupils who are not eligible for them. - Returning to the example of Mixed White and Black Caribbean pupils who are more likely to eligible for Free School Meals than average, it becomes apparent from the model that there is only small effect on the odds of being a persistent absentee (odds ratio = 1.12) for this ethnic group once the much larger effect of FSM eligibility (odds ratio = 2.22) is controlled for in the model. - Pupils with Special Education Needs have greater odds of being persistently absent than pupils with no SEN. Those at School Action Plus have the highest odds of being persistently absent (2.97 times 26 that of non-SEN pupils) followed by statemented pupils (2.79 times the odds) and pupils at School Action (almost twice the odds of being persistently absent than non-SEN pupils). - The odds of being a persistent absentee increase for every higher year group in secondary school. Pupils in Year 7 have 1.2 times the odds, while those in Year 11 have almost 4 times the odds of being persistently absent than pupils with similar characteristics in primary school. - Having English as an Additional Language, slightly decreases the odds of a pupil being persistently absent by 8% compared to an English speaking pupil with similar characteristics. - Pupils living in the most deprived IDACI quartile have almost twice the odds of being a persistent absentee compared to similar pupils living in the least deprived IDACI half. Reviewing the importance of the various pupil characteristics to the odds of being a persistent absentee, the largest increases in odds are for pupils with Irish Traveller or Gypsy Roma heritage, older pupils, pupils with SEN and those who are eligible for FSM; the largest decreases in odds are for pupils with African, Chinese, Indian and Caribbean ethnicity It is possible to convert the odds effects described above into probabilities of being a persistent absentee for pupils with particular combinations of characteristics from the model. The individual effects (Chart 1.13) are multiplied together to find an overall effect which is then converted to a probability 13. For example, an English speaking, Year 10, Indian girl living in the least deprived IDACI half and at School Action Plus and entitled to free school meals has odds of being a persistent absentee (1.00 * 2.87 * 0.66 * 1.20 * 1.00 * 2.97 * 2.22) = 14.99 times those for the reference pupil - who is an English speaking, White British boy living in the same neighbourhood, still in primary school and with no Special Educational Needs and not eligible for Free School Meals. The model gives the odds of being a persistent absentee for the reference pupil of 0.02 or 2%. The example pupil has 14.99 times those odds of being a persistent absentee (14.99 * 0.02) = 0.30, or (0.3/ [1 + 0.3]) = 23%. So, the example pupil’s probability of being a persistent absentee is 23%, compared with the reference pupil’s 2% probability, and the overall average probability of 6.8%. 13 Probability = Odds/ (1+Odds) 27 Chart 1.13: Effect of various pupil characteristics on the odds of becoming a PA across all schools, 2009/10 0.10 Less Likely Effect on Odds 1.00 More Likely Female 1.20 10.00 100.00 Gender Male Bangladeshi 0.80 Indian Pakistani African 0.96 0.26 Caribbean Chinese 0.63 0.36 White & Asian White & African Ethnicity 0.66 1.04 0.85 White & Caribbean 1.12 Irish 1.22 Irish Traveller 8.92 Gypsy Roma 7.76 White British School Action 1.94 School Action Plus 2.97 Statemented 2.79 Special Educational  Need No SEN Year 7 1.22 Year 8 National Curriculum Year 1.76 Year 9 2.27 Year 10 2.87 Year 11 3.95 Year 6 and below EAL 0.91 English as an  Additonal Language English as first language FSM eligible 2.22 Not eligible for FSM Most deprived IDACI quartile 1.84 2nd most deprived IDACI quartile 1.56 Free School Meal Eligibility Income Deprivation  Affecting Children  Index Least deprived IDACI half Source: National Pupil Database The analyses in this chapter have shown that absences vary greatly both between different characteristics and within certain characteristics. It is useful to unpick this further and assess what might cause these variations. Chapter 2 will examine this by looking into the reasons behind absences. 28 Chapter 2: Reasons for absence Key findings • • • • • • • • • Persistent absentees and other pupils have different reasons for being absent. Compared to other pupils, PA pupils have greater proportions of all absence due to unauthorised other circumstances (26% vs. 6%) and authorised other (9% vs. 8%). Girls are more likely to have absences due to illness than boys; boys however, are more likely to have absences due to exclusions than girls. Pakistani, Bangladeshi, African, Indian and pupils of Mixed White and Asian ethnicity report higher proportions of absences due to religious observance compared to all other ethnic groups. Pupils at School Action Plus, followed by pupils at School Action, have the highest levels of absences due to unauthorised other circumstances and no reason yet. Pupils at the end of primary school have a far greater proportion of their absences due to family holidays compared to pupils at the end of secondary school (12.3% in year 6 vs. 3.0% in year 11). Pupils with EAL are more likely to be absent due to religious observance than non-EAL pupils - with 6.2% of all EAL absences due to religious observance compared to just 0.2% for non-EAL pupils. Just over a quarter of all absences reported by FSM pupils were due to unauthorised reasons – this compares to a seventh of all absences reported by non-FSM pupils. Pupils from increasingly deprived IDACI quartiles tend to have increasingly high proportions of absences classed as unauthorised other, no reason yet, and exclusions compared to pupils from wealthier/less deprived backgrounds. Evidence from the 2010 Tellus4 survey suggests that the less absence pupils have, the more they find classes engaging and the more utility they perceive to derive from school. Since the full introduction of the absence data collection via the School Census in 2006, the Department has been able to collect detailed reasons behind pupil absences. These reasons are broadly classed into the following authorised and unauthorised categories 14: Authorised absence Unauthorised absence Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet This chapter considers the reasons behind pupil absences according to their characteristics. 14 Further details on the reasons classifications can be found at: http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/doc/a/aa-ac/absence and attendance codes.doc 29 2.1 Distribution of reasons for absence by school type The largest contributor to overall absences is Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) constituting almost 60% of all absences across all schools in England (see Table D.1, Annex D). Other authorised circumstances, agreed family holidays and medical or dental appointments are the next leading authorised absence reasons, accounting for around 8%, 7% and 6% of all absences in 2009/10 respectively (Chart 2.1). The leading reason given for unauthorised absence is ‘other’, explaining 11% of all absences in 2009/10. This is followed by ‘no reason yet’ and unauthorised family holidays (contributing to 3% and 2% of all absences respectively). Interestingly since 2006/07, absences due to ‘agreed family holidays’ have steadily declined (from 0.61% in 2006/07 to 0.41% in 2009/10) while absence rates due to unauthorised family holidays over this same period have almost doubled (from 0.07% to 0.13%). Chart 2.1: Reasons for absence distribution across all schools, 2009/10 3 11 Unauthorised No reason yet Unauthorised Other circumstances Unauthorised Arrived late 2 Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Authorised Other circumstances 8 Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision Authorised Agreed extended family holiday Authorised Agreed family holiday 58 7 Authorised Traveller absence Authorised Study leave Authorised Religious  observance Authorised Medical/dental appointments 6 Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments)     Percentage of sessions missed due to stated reason (%) Source: National Pupil Database Patterns of reasons for absence are different between persistent absentees (PAs) and other pupils. Chart 2.2 breaks down the above chart to display this pattern across all schools in England. From the chart it is apparent that persistent absentees have a large proportion of the all absences due to illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) and unauthorised other absence- accounting for around 45% and 26% of all absences respectively. This compares to 63% of all absences due to illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) in other pupils and only 6% due to unauthorised other absences. Furthermore, PAs have twice the amount of absences unauthorised due to no reason yet compared to other pupils (4% compared to 2%). Authorised exclusions and traveller absence also account for a greater proportion of all absences among PA pupils than they do for other pupils. 30 Persistent absentees tend to have an almost equal proportion of all absences authorised due to other circumstances as their non-PA peers (9% vs. 8% of all absences are classed as other authorised respectively). In contrast however, PA pupils have a much smaller proportion of their overall absences due to authorised family holidays compared to other pupils. Chart 2.2: Reasons for absence for PAs and Other Pupils across all schools, 2009/10 Authorised Illness (NOT medical  or dental  appointments) Authorised Medical/dental  appointments Authorised Religious observance Authorised Study leave Authorised Traveller absence Authorised Agreed family holiday Authorised Agreed extended family holiday Authorised Excluded, no alternative  provision Authorised Other circumstances Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Unauthorised Arrived late Unauthorised Other circumstances Unauthorised No reason yet Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 4 6 2 8 26 45 8 63 6 9 3 4     Percentage of sessions missed due to stated reason (%) Source: National Pupil Database Reasons for absences vary considerably across the different school types (Chart 2.3). In general, a greater proportion of absences in primary schools are authorised compared to secondary and special schools – in 2009/10, almost 9 out of 10 absences were authorised in primary schools compared to around 8 in 10 in secondary and special schools. The Chart 2.3 illustrates the breakdown in the reasons for absences further by the different school types. Immediately it is apparent that greater proportions of absences in primary schools are due to illnesses (NOT medical or dental appointments), authorised family holidays and unauthorised family holidays (around 61%, 11% and 3% respectively) compared to both secondary and special schools. There are however, generally higher proportions of absences reported due to medical or dental appointments, exclusions, other authorised circumstances and other unauthorised circumstances across secondary and special schools. Absence rates by school types are available in Table D.1 Annex D. 31 Chart 2.3: Reasons for absence distribution across all school types, 2009/10 100% Unauthorised No  reason yet 7 17 Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%) 14 8 Unauthorised Other  circumstances Unauthorised Arrived late 80% 8 11 17 4 Authorised Other circumstances 5 60% Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed 6 5 10 Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision Authorised Agreed extended family holiday Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 61 Authorised Study  leave 56 45 20% Authorised Religious  observance Authorised Medical/dental appointments Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% Maintained Primary State‐funded Secondary Special Source: National Pupil Database 2.2 Distribution of reasons for absence by gender    Gender differences behind reasons for absences are minimal (see Chart 2.4) - boys and girls are absent for almost the same reasons. It is worth noting however, that boys are twice as likely to report absences due to exclusions compared to girls (in 2009/10, 2 % of all absences for boys were due to exclusions compared to just 1% for girls). This pattern in reasons for absences also holds true for 2008/09. Absence rates by gender are available in Table D.2 Annex D. Chart 2.4: Reasons for absence distribution by gender, 2009/10 100% Unauthorised No  reason yet 11 Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%)   11 Unauthorised Other  circumstances 80% 8 8 7 7 60% Unauthorised Arrived late Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Authorised Other circumstances 6 6 Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision Authorised Agreed extended family holiday Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 59 57 Authorised Study  leave Authorised Religious  observance 20% Authorised Medical/dental appointments Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% Boys Girls Source: National Pupil Database 32 2.3 Distribution of reasons for absence by ethnicity As seen earlier in Section 1.2, authorised and unauthorised absence rates vary significantly between different ethnic groups. Chart 2.5 below examines this in more detail. Absence rates by ethnicity are available in Tables D.3 – D.7 in Annex D. Chart 2.5: Reasons for absence distribution by ethnicity, 2009/10 Percentage of sessions  missed due to stated reason (%) 0% 20% 40% 60 British Gypsy Roma 22 3 54 White and Black African 55 White and Asian 57 Indian 55 Pakistani 1 31 White and Black Caribbean 14 2 9 5 5 49 6 African 50 6 52 7 13 4 26 10 2 5 16 10 3 5 2 2 7 9 2 9 5 8 8 3 6 11 2 4 11 13 4 13 11 4 6 3 31 11 56 11 1 1 5 5 2 11 4 5 100% 8 2 5 Caribbean Chinese 5 9 5 49 Bangladeshi 7 6 2 33 80% 6 56 Irish Irish Traveller 60% 4 11 4 5 3 6 11 4 3 12 3 15 2 12 2 5 11 3 5 5 2 Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or  dental appointments) Authorised Religious  observance Authorised Medical/dental appointments Authorised Study  leave Authorised Traveller absence Authorised Agreed extended family  holiday Authorised Agreed family holiday Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision Authorised Other circumstances Unauthorised Arrived late Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Unauthorised Other  circumstances Unauthorised No reason yet Source: National Pupil Database The ethnic groups with markedly higher absence rates, Irish Traveller and Gypsy Roma, also have the most distinct absence distribution patterns. The bulk of absences in both ethnic groups constitute of authorised traveller leave (around 31% and 14% respectively in 2009/10) and other unauthorised absences (around 26% and 31% respectively). As a result, pupils from these groups have much smaller proportions of absences due to illnesses, medical/dental appointments or authorised family holidays, than other ethnic groups. 33 Greater proportions of absences due to religious observance are reported by Pakistani, Bangladeshi, African, Indian and pupils of a Mixed White and Asian ethnic background compared to all other ethnic groups (11%, 8%, 6%, 3% and 2% respectively in 2009/10). Chinese, Indian, Mixed White and Asian and British pupils have a notably greater proportion of their absences authorised due to family holidays compared to other ethnic groups (around 13% for Chinese pupils, 11% for Indian pupils and 7% for both Mixed White and Asian and British pupils in 2009/10). Unauthorised family holidays make up a greater proportion of absences for Pakistani (5%), Indian and Bangladeshi pupils (4% each in 2009/10) than for other ethnic groups. 2.4 Distribution of reasons for absence by SEN Reiterating absence patterns observed earlier in Section 1.3, it is unsurprising to see that pupils at School Action Plus have the highest proportion of absences unauthorised due to other circumstances (21% compared to 15% for statemented pupils and pupils at School Action). They also have a greater degree of absences due to exclusions than pupils with other SEN provisions. Pupils with statements of SEN are more likely to be absent due to medical/dental appointments than pupils with other SEN provisions. Pupils with statements of SEN, followed by those at School Action Plus tend to have higher proportions of absences authorised due to other circumstances (13% and 10% respectively in 2009/10). Absence rates by SEN are available in Table D.8 in Annex D. Chart 2.6: Reasons for absence distribution by SEN, 2009/10 100% 8 Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%)   15 15 Unauthorised Other  circumstances 21 8 80% 13 3 60% 5 9 8 10 4 4 Unauthorised No  reason yet 8 5 6 Unauthorised Arrived late Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Authorised Other circumstances Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision 5 Authorised Agreed extended family holiday 6 Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 61 55 49 47 Authorised Study  leave Authorised Religious  observance 20% Authorised Medical/dental appointments Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% Statement of SEN School Action Plus School Action No SEN Source: National Pupil Database 34 2.5 Distribution of reasons for absence by age (NCY Groups) Reasons for absence vary starkly between pupils in primary (Years 2 and 6) and secondary (Year 11) schools. Chart 2.7 shows the distribution for the reasons for absence for both year groups. From the chart it is immediately apparent that by the end of secondary schools, pupils in Year 11 have a greater proportion of absences due to no reason yet (5% vs. 2%), unauthorised other (20% vs. 7%), late arrival (2% vs. 1%), and exclusions (2% vs. 1%) than pupils in Year 6. Absence rates by these year groups are available in Table D.9 in Annex D. Chart 2.7: Reasons for absence distribution by NCY, 2009/10 100% 7 7 8 9 11 10 5 Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%) 90% 20 Unauthorised Other  circumstances Unauthorised Arrived late 80% Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed 70% 9 5 Unauthorised No  reason yet 5 2 60% 50% 6 Authorised Other circumstances Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision Authorised Agreed extended family holiday Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 30% 61 62 Authorised Study  leave 45 20% Authorised Religious  observance Authorised Medical/dental appointments 10% Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% Year 2 (end of Key Stage 1) Year 6 (end of  Key Stage 2) Year 11 (end  of Key Stage  4) Source: National Pupil Database 2.6 Distribution of reasons for absence by EAL Pupils with English as an Additional Language (EAL) have slightly different reasons for absence distribution (Chart 2.8) than pupils with English as a first language. Some of the main differences lie in the proportion of absences classed as religious observance, authorised extended family holiday and unauthorised family holiday where EAL pupils have greater proportions of absences than non-EAL pupils (6.2% vs. 0.2%, 0.9% vs. 0.1% and 4.2% vs. 1.8% respectively). Pupils with English as a first language on the other hand, tend to have a greater proportion of absence classed as illness (NOT medical/dental appointments) than EAL pupils in 2009/10 (59.1% vs. 51.2%). Absence rates by EAL are available in Table D.10 in Annex D. 35 Chart 2.8: Reasons for absence distribution by EAL, 2009/10 100% Unauthorised No  reason yet Percentage of sessions missed due to stated reason (%) 90% 11 11 Unauthorised Other  circumstances 80% 8 9 70% 7 7 1 6 60% Unauthorised Arrived late Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed Authorised Other circumstances Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision 5 Authorised Agreed extended family holiday 50% Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 30% 59 Authorised Study  leave 51 Authorised Religious  observance 20% Authorised Medical/dental appointments 10% Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% English as  an Additional Language English  as   First Language Source: National Pupil Database 2.7 Distribution of reasons for absence by FSM eligibility Chart 2.9 shows the reasons for absence distributions for pupils eligible/not eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) in 2009/10. It is apparent from the chart that pupils eligible for FSM tend to have far greater absences due to unauthorised reasons compared to their non-FSM peers. Around 19% of all absences were classed as unauthorised other for FSM pupils compared to 9% for their peers. Pupils eligible for FSM are also more likely to have absences classed as unauthorised no reason yet, late arrivals, exclusions and religious observances compared to their non-FSM counterparts (around 4% vs. 2%, 2% vs. 1%, 2% vs. 1%, and 1.4% vs. 0.9% respectively). Non-FSM pupils have a greater proportion of their absences classed as Illnesses, agreed family holiday and study leave compared to FSM pupils (60% vs. 52%, 8% vs. 4% and 1.3% vs. 0.3% respectively). Absence rates by FSM are available in Table D.11 in Annex D. Chart 2.9: Reasons for absence distribution by FSM, 2009/10 100% 9 Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%) 90% 80% 70% 9 60% 4 Unauthorised No  reason yet Unauthorised Other  circumstances 19 8 Unauthorised Arrived late 8 Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed 6 Authorised Other circumstances Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision 5 Authorised Agreed extended family holiday 50% Authorised Agreed family holiday 40% Authorised Traveller absence 60 30% Authorised Study  leave 52 Authorised Religious  observance 20% Authorised Medical/dental appointments 10% Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) 0% Eligible for Free  School  Meals Not Eligible for  Free School Meals Source: National Pupil Database 36 2.8 Distribution of reasons for absence by IDACI Reasons for absence distribution differ significantly according to different IDACI classifications (Chart 2.10). Reaffirming the findings earlier in Section 1.7, the chart below shows smaller proportions of unauthorised absences with each increasingly wealthy IDACI area group. Pupils living in the most deprived IDACI quartile have the greatest proportion of absences classed as unauthorised no reason yet (almost 4%) and unauthorised other circumstances (around 17%) compared to pupils living the second most deprived IDACI quartile and the least deprived IDACI half (where absences due to unauthorised no reason yet was 3% and 2% respectively in 2009/10 and absences due to unauthorised other circumstances was 11% and 6% respectively). Absences due to exclusions and religious observance tend to decline with increasing IDACI prosperity (the proportion of absences due exclusions was 1.8%, 1.4% and 0.9% respectively; the proportion of absences due to religious observance was 2.0%, 0.8% and 0.4% respectively in 2009/10). In contrast, increasingly deprived IDACI areas have fewer absences due to agreed family holidays, authorised study leave and illnesses. Absence rates by IDACI classifications are available in Table D.12, Annex D. Chart 2.10: Reasons for absence distribution by IDACI, 2009/10 100% Percentage of  sessions missed due to stated reason (%) 90% 6 Unauthorised No  reason yet 8 Unauthorised Other  circumstances 11 17 80% Unauthorised Arrived late 8 9 70% 8 5 60% Unauthorised Family holiday not agreed 7 6 6 Authorised Other circumstances Authorised Excluded, no alternative provision 5 50% Authorised Agreed extended family holiday 40% Authorised Agreed family holiday 30% 53 62 59 Authorised Traveller absence Authorised Study  leave 20% Authorised Religious  observance 10% Authorised Medical/dental appointments 0% Authorised Illness  (NOT medical or dental appointments) Most Deprived IDACI quartile Second Most Deprived IDACI Quartile Least  Deprived IDACI Half Source: National Pupil Database 37 2.9 Pupil perceptions and attendance In 2010 the Department ran the Tellus4 pupil perception survey (see Annex B for more details) designed to gather views of children and young people across England from years 6, 8 and 10. Almost a quarter of million individual responses were received from children and young people across the maintained primary and secondary school sector 15. The analysis below considers school level aggregate responses 16 against the overall absences reported by these year groups in 2009/10, to the following statements: School Utility My school is giving me useful skills and knowledge Class Engagement Most of my teachers make my lessons fun and interesting Agree Not Sure Disagree o o o Agree Not Sure Disagree o o o 2.9.1 School utility The majority of respondents to Tellus4 agreed with the statement that school provides them with useful skills and knowledge. Chart 2.11 below shows the overall absence rates reported by the schools in the Tellus sample against the overall proportion of respondents (in the schools) who agreed with the utility statement. From the chart, it is clear that there is evidence of a relationship between the proportion of Tellus4 respondents agreeing with the statement above and the overall absence rate reported. Essentially, fewer overall absences are reported by respondents in schools where a greater proportion agree with the statement above – conversely, greater overall absences are reported by schools in which greater proportions of respondents disagree with the above statement. Almost a third of the variation in absence is explained by how useful pupils perceive their schooling to be (R2 = 0.31) - for the selection of schools that took part in the Tellus4 survey. 15 Note, Special schools and Pupil Referral Units were also surveyed as a part of Tellus, though the analysis in this chapter is restricted to maintained mainstream schools only. 16 School-level responses with 30 or more individual respondents were considered for the analysis in this section. 38 Chart 2.11: School-level Tellus4 response to the school utility statement against its overall absence rate Schools in the lower quartile Series4 Schools in the central 50th percentile Linear (Series4) Schools in the upper quartile Overall percentage of sessions missed in schools (%) 16 14 12 10 R² = 0.31 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of respondents agreeing with the statement school is giving me useful skills and knowledge Source: National Pupil Database & Tellus4 survey 2.9.2 Class engagement School responses on whether or not most teachers provide fun and interesting classes are more varied than the utility statement – with less than 40% of respondents in a quarter of schools agreeing with the statement. As in the earlier chart, Chart 2.12 shows the overall absence rates reported by the schools in the Tellus sample against the overall proportion of respondents who agreed with the class engagement statement. Chart 2.12 shows that there is evidence of a relationship between the proportion of respondents agreeing with this statement and the overall absence levels reported by these respondents, but the slope of the trend line is flatter, indicating less difference in absence according to school engagement than according to school utility. Fewer absences are reported in schools where large proportions of respondents agreed with the statements. On the contrary, schools with smaller proportions of respondents in agreement with this statement show higher levels of overall absences. In this case, just over a quarter of the variation in absence is explained by how fun and interesting pupils find their lessons (R2 = 0.27) - for the selection of schools that took part in the Tellus4 survey. 39 Chart 2.12: School-level Tellus4 response to the class engagement statement against its overall absence rate Overall percentage of sessions missed in schools (%) 16 Schools in the lower quartile Schools in the central 50th percentile Series4 Linear (Series4) Schools in the upper quartile 14 12 10 8 R² = 0.27 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of respondents agreeing with the statement that most teachers make lessons fun and interesting Source: National Pupil Database & Tellus4 survey So it is apparent that as well as legitimate reasons for absences (illnesses, holidays etc.), pupils perceptions on how interesting and fun their lessons are and how useful they find school, also have a relationship with their overall levels of absence. It is clear from this that absence is linked to a wider construct of disengagement from school. The next chapter will contextualise pupils with high levels of absences (PAs) in terms of their attitudes, beliefs, experiences and family background. 40 Chapter 3: Contextual background of absentees Key findings • • • • • Persistent absentees are more likely to come from lone parent households or households with no parents, compared to their non-PA peers. Almost a third of persistent absentees come from households where the principal adult/s are not in any form of current employment – this compares to just over a tenth of non-PAs. The parental attitudes of persistent absentees and other non-PA pupils differ significantly. Parents of non-PA pupils tend to feel personally engaged with their child’s school life and expect them to continue on with full-time education after leaving school. The parents of persistent absentees on the other hand, tend to feel less engaged with their child’s school life, with many expecting their child to start some form of trade or apprenticeship scheme, or enter full-time paid employment after leaving school. Although the parents of both PA and non-PA pupils have aspirations for their children to continue in full-time higher education, albeit to different extents – their assessment of how realistic these hopes are, differ greatly. A sizeable proportion of persistent absentees are not happy at school and think of it as a waste of time. Persistent absentees do not want to go to school and are not inclined to work exceptionally hard while at school. In line with this, a greater proportion of persistent absentees find lessons boring and a waste of time compared to their non-PA peers. Evidence suggests that persistent absentees are more likely to be bullied, excluded from school and be involved in risky behaviours (experiment with drugs, alcohol etc.) than non-PAs. The Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) is a major innovative panel study of young people which brings together data from several sources, including annual interviews with young people and their parents, and administrative sources 17. LSYPE respondents were first interviewed in the spring of 2004 (at age 13) and were interviewed annually until 2010, resulting in a total of seven ‘waves’. For the first four waves of LSYPE, the parents or guardians of the respondents were also interviewed. The analysis in this chapter is based on approximately 9,000 respondents who took part in wave 3 of LSYPE in 2006 – of which, around 1,500 were persistent absentees. At the time of the survey, the respondents were between the ages of 15 to16 and in the final year of their compulsory school education (year 11). 17 Further information on LSYPE is available in Annex B. 41 This chapter predominantly focuses on the distinct differences between persistent absentees (PAs) and other (non-PA) pupils in terms of their family background, parental attitudes and their own outlook and attitudes to life, both at present and in terms of future aspirations. Note: the number of pupils and 95% confidence intervals for the figures quoted from LSYPE in this chapter can be found in Annex E. 3.1 Family background Data from LSYPE shows that there is a significant difference in the family structures and background of pupils who are persistently absent and those that are not. Chart 3.1 below shows that persistent absentees are more likely to come from lone parent households or households with no parents compared to their nonPA peers (39% of PAs come from lone parent households compared to 20% of other pupils; 2% of PAs live in households with no parents compared to just 1% of other pupils). 80% of non-PA pupils however, tend to come from households where their parents are either married or cohabiting – this compares to almost 60% of persistent absentees. Chart 3.1: Family composition of PA and other pupils, 2006 Married couple Persistent Absentees Cohabiting couple Lone father 51 Other Pupils Lone mother 9 3 72 0% 20% No parents in the household 36 8 40% 60% 2 2 18 80% 1 100% Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Chart 3.2 shows a breakdown of the household National Statistics SocioEconomic Classification (NS-SEC) 18 groups for PA and non-PA pupils. From the chart it is immediately apparent that almost a third of persistent absentees come from households where the principal adult/s are not currently working, this compares to just over a tenth of other non-PA pupils. 18 For the purposes of LSYPE, the NS-SEC of a pupil’s family is the NS-SEC of the Household Reference Person, where the Household Reference Person is selected using the following criteria in order until a single person is chosen: (i) the person who owns/rents the home, then; (ii) the person with the highest income in the household, then; (iii) the oldest person in the household. For more on NS-SEC, see: http://www.ons.gov.uk/about-statistics/classifications/current/ns-sec/index.html 42 Generally, higher proportions of persistent absentees come from households where the principal adult/s are either in routine/semi-routine occupations or not currently employed. It is not surprising therefore to see that greater proportions of non-PA pupils come from households in which the principal adult/s are in some form of higher professional occupation. Chart 3.2: Family’s current NS-SEC class, 2006 Persistent Absentees Higher Managerial and professional occupations Lower managerial and professional occupations Intermediate occupations Small employers and own account workers Lower supervisory and technical occupations Semi‐routine occupations Routine occupations Not currently working  5 Other Pupils 17 6 13 0% 5 11 12 28 10% 20% 7 30% 40% 13 7 12 50% 60% 30 10 70% 10 80% 13 90% 100% Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 In line with the above finding, it is also evident that a great proportion of persistent absentees tend to come from the lower end of the household income distribution (Chart 3.3). Almost two-fifths of persistent absentees live in households with monthly incomes less than £1,300 - this compares to around a fifth of other pupils. The monthly income distribution for other nonPA pupils however is fairly evenly centred across the middle income ranges. Interestingly, over 5% of PAs come from the highest income band. Chart 3.3: Total monthly income from work, benefits and anything else, 2006 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 18 16 14 Percentage (%) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Up to £432 £433 up to £866 £876 up to £1,299 £1,300 up to £1,733 up to £2,167 up to £2,600 up to £3,033 up to £3,467 up to £3,900 up to £1,732 £2,166 £2,599 £3,032 £3,466 £3,899 £4,332 £4,333 or more  Family monthly income range Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 43 3.2 Parental attitudes When looking into the parental attitudes of PA and other non-PA pupils (Chart 3.4), it is apparent that a sizable proportion of the parents of PA pupils don’t feel very involved in their child’s school life. 7% of parents of PA pupils report that they personally do not feel any involvement in their child’s school life (compared to 4% of parents of other non-PA pupils), and a further 23% report that they do not feel very involved in their child’s school life (compared to 20% for other non-PA pupils). Chart 3.4: How involved parent personally feels in young person’s school life, 2006 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 60 50 49 42 Percentage (%) 40 30 27 28 23 20 20 10 7 4 0 Very involved Fairly involved Not very involved Not at all involved Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 It is interesting to explore the parental attitudes further to see what post school activity they wish for their child, and what they actually think their child will do after leaving school. Table 3.1 shows a range of activities against the proportion of parents wanting/expecting their child to become involved in that activity. From the table, it is evident that the aspirations and expectations of the parents of non-PA pupils are far more closely aligned than that of the parents of PA pupils. What is more, a far greater proportion of parents of non-PA pupils want and expect their child to continue their studies in full-time education than do parents of PA pupils (83% of the parents of non-PA pupils want their child to continue with full-time education and 81% expect that they will; this compares to 64% of the parents of PA pupils who want their child to continue to stay in full-time education, with only 56% actually believing that they will). 44 Many more parents of PA pupils want their child to enter some form of apprenticeship or learn a trade/enter placement on a training course, than do the parents of other non-PA pupils. A higher proportion of parents of PA pupils also want their child to enter fulltime paid employment (5%) compared to the parents of non-PA pupils (2%) with much a higher proportion actually expecting that their child will. Table 3.1: Post school activity parent want/will like their child to be involved in, 2006 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils What their main  What their main  What their main  What their main  parent will like them  parent thinks they'll  parent will like  them  parent thinks  they'll  do (%) to do (%) do (%) to do (%) Post school activity 64 14 13 5 2 2 Continue in full time education Start learning a trade / Get a place on a training course Start an apprenticeship Get a full‐time paid job (employee/self‐employed) Something else Don't know 56 12 10 13 4 5 83 6 7 2 1 1 81 6 7 3 1 2 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 3.3 Young people’s attitudes The future intentions of young people after leaving full-time education are very much aligned to that of their parents post-school expectations for them (Section 3.2 above). Chart 3.5 shows that 70% of persistent absentees intend to stay on in full-time education compared to 88% of their non-PA peers. A further 27% of PAs intend to leave full-time education altogether, while 3% are unsure of their future plans – this contrasts against just 10% of other non-PA pupils with intentions to leave full-time education, and a further 2% who are unsure of their future intentions. Chart 3.5: Young persons intentions after leaving compulsory education (year 11), 2006 Staying on in full‐time education Leaving full‐time education Don't know 3 2 10 27 70 88 Other Pupils Persistent Absentees Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 45 Some of the reasons behind these future choices can be unpicked further by examining the attitudes and feelings young people exhibit towards their schools, lessons and personal academic performance. Chart 3.6 shows the responses young people gave to a series of questions asked in LSYPE about their feelings towards school. When asked whether young people agree with the statement ‘I am happy when I am at school’, 87% of non-PA pupils agreed with the statement compared to only 58% of PA pupils. In contrast, 37% of PA pupils and 11% of other non-PA pupils disagreed with this statement. Also, when asked whether or not young people agree with the statement ‘School is a waste of time for me’, 92% of non-PA pupils and 77% of PA pupils disagreed. Probing further, 51% of PA pupils agreed with the statement ‘Most of the time I don’t want to go to school’, while 73% of non-PA pupils disagreed with it. In line with these sentiments, only 63% of PA pupils agree to the statement ‘I work as hard as I can at school’ compared to 79% of other non-PA pupils. Therefore, overall it appears that a significant minority of persistent absentees are not happy at school and/or think of it as a waste of time. As a consequence it appears that they do not want to go to school and are not inclined to work exceptionally hard while actually there. Following on from this, young people were also asked detailed questions on their feelings towards their lessons at school (Chart 3.7). Again, in keeping with the above findings, a greater proportion of PA pupils agreed with the statements ‘In a lesson, I often count the minutes till it ends’ and ‘I am bored in lessons’ than their non-PA peers (62% of persistent absentees agree with the first statement compared 50% of their non-PA peers while 63% of PAs agree with the latter statement compared to just 42% of their non-PA peers). When asked whether young people agree with the statement ‘The work I do in lessons is a waste of time’, over double the proportion of PAs agreed compared to other non-PA pupils (19% of PAs agreed compared to 8% of non-PAs). Similarly, when asked whether young people agree with the statement ‘The work I do in lessons is interesting to me’ 73% of non-PA pupils agreed compared to only 56% of PA pupils. So it appears that the intrinsic interest in lessons is impaired in PAs more than their sense of the extrinsic value of those lessons. 46 Chart 3.6: Feelings about schools, 2006 Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know I am happy when I am at school Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 4 3 11 2 8 14 26 23 47 61 School is a waste of time for me Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 5 2 2 7 4 11 31 33 59 46 Most of the time I don't want to go to school Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 2 4 6 18 11 19 26 34 33 47  I work as hard as I can in school Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 5 3 2 2 17 22 17 29 46 57 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 47 Chart 3.7: Feelings about lessons, 2006 Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know In a lesson, I often count the minutes till it ends Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 3 4 2 8 12 21 30 40 38 41 I am bored in lessons Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 4 3 4 6 21 8 30 34 48 42 The work I do in lessons is a waste of time Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 5 2 6 2 6 13 20 34 55 56 The work I do in lessons is interesting to me Other Pupils Persistent Absentees 6 7 2 7 4 9 20 31 49 64 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 48 Drawing on the above conclusions (Chart 3.6 and 3.7) it is not at all surprising to find that a much smaller proportion of persistent absentees feel that they obtain good marks for their school work compared to their non-PA peers. Two out of three persistent absentees felt that they received good marks for their school work compared to over four in five of their non-PA peers. Chart 3.8: Feelings about marks, 2006 Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know I get good marks for my work Persistent Absentees 8 Other Pupils 7 1 4 17 9 3 21 60 68 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 3.4 Young people’s experiences As well as differences in attitudes towards the general outlook on school life and future plans, persistent absentees and their non-PA peers tend to also have significantly different intentional and unintentional experiences. Chart 3.9 shows the proportions of PAs and non-PAs who reported being subjected to any of the following five types of bullying within the 12 month period in the academic year 2006 19: being called names (including text and email bullying), being socially excluded, being forced to hand over money or possessions, being threatened with violence and being a victim of actual violence. From the chart below it is evident that for all but extortion, a far greater proportion of persistent absentees are subjected to bullying than their non-PA peers. This discrepancy is particularly pronounced for bullying in the form of social exclusion, where almost a sixth of PAs are subjected to this type of bullying compared to only a tenth of non-PA pupils. A greater proportion of persistent absentees also experience name calling (19% of PAs vs. 14% of non-PAs), threats of violence (18% of PAs vs. 13% of non-PAs) and actual violence (13% of PAs vs. 9% of non-PAs) compared with their non-PA peers. 19 Note, pupils may report more than one type of bullying. 49 Chart 3.9: Experiences of different types of bullying within the last 12 months, 2006 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 20 18 19 18 17 16 14 Percentage (%) 14 13 12 13 10 10 8 9 6 4 2 1 1 0 Name calling Social exclusion Extortion Threatened with violence Experienced violence Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 The LSYPE survey also asked young people about their experiences with cigarettes, alcohol and drugs. Chart 3.10 below shows that 48% of persistent absentees and 22% of non-PA pupils confirmed that they had some experience smoking cigarettes at some point in their lives. Of the young people who have experienced smoking, a third of persistent absentees and one in ten other non-PAs admitted to smoking more than six cigarettes a week. Chart 3.10: Experiences of smoking cigarettes, 2006 I usually smoke more than six cigarettes a week I usually smoke between one and six cigarettes a week I sometimes smoke cigarettes now but I don't smoke as many as one a week Experimental/non‐active/unsure smoker 60 50 48 7 Percentage (%) 40 4 4 30 22 20 6 33 4 3 10 10 0 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 50 82% of persistent absentees and 75%of non-PAs reported to have had some experience of drinking a proper alcoholic drink. Chart 3.11 below shows the frequency with which these young people drink. From the chart it is clear that a greater proportion of persistent absentees drink more often than their non-PA peers. 6% of PAs admitted to drinking on most days compared to just 2% of their non-PA peers. Chart 3.11: Experiences of drinking alcohol, 2006 100 90 82 80 75 14 Percentage (%) 70 60 13 Less often 13 14 50 10 Once every couple of months Once a month Two or three times a month 10 Once or twice a week Most days Don't know 40 18 30 20 20 20 15 10 5 1 0 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 LSYPE also questioned young people on their experiences of various risky behaviours. Table 3.2 shows the proportions of persistent absentees and other pupils who report having experienced some form of risky behaviour within the 12 month period in the academic year 2006. From the table it is clear that persistent absentees are far more likely to be involved in such behaviour compared to other non-PA pupils. Involvement in some form of fighting or public disturbance was most commonly cited by both PAs and non-PAs in 2006 – with 26% of PAs and 13% of non-PAs reporting that they had some experience of this within the 12 month period. Table 3.2: Experiences of risky behaviour, 2006 Persistent  Absentees  (%) Other  Pupils  (%) Whether young person has graffitied on walls in the last year? Whether young person has vandalised public property in the last year? 9 13 4 6 Whether young person has shoplifted in the last year? 11 6 Whether young person has taken part in fighting or public disturbance in the last year? 26 13 Experiences of risky behaviour Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 51 3.5 Absence and exclusions As well as information on absences, the School Census (SC) collects information on the type, number and reasons for pupil exclusions. There are namely two types of exclusions: • Fixed Period Exclusion (FPE) –refers to a pupil who is excluded from school but the pupil remains on the school register as they are expected to return when the exclusion period is completed. • Permanent Exclusion (PE) – refers to a pupil who is excluded from school and their name is removed from its register. Such a pupil would then be educated at another school or via some other form of provision. It is worth noting that as the duration of absences due to FPEs count towards the overall absence for a pupil; a persistent absentee may well become one due to the duration of the FPE absences they have incurred. In 2009/10, 4% of persistent absentees were classed this way as a result of FPE absences. Absences due to permanent exclusions do not count towards overall absences as they are permanently removed from the school roll. In 2009/10, 3% of all persistent absentee absences were due to fixed period exclusions compared to 1% for other non-PA pupils. 86% of persistent absentees and 98% of non-PAs had no FPEs in 2009/10. Chart 3.12 below shows the distribution of the remaining population over the number of fixed period exclusions accrued during that academic year. Chart 3.12: Number of FPEs by proportion of pupil population, 2009/10 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 7 6 Percentage of pupils (%) 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11+ Number of fixed period exclusions Source: National Pupil Database From the chart, it is apparent that PAs are far more likely to receive fixed period exclusions than non-PAs – with four times as many persistent absentees receiving one FPE as their non-PA peers. 52 Persistent absentees are also far more likely to be permanently excluded from school than other non-PA pupils. In 2009/10, 0.79% of PAs were permanently excluded from school compared to just 0.03% of their non-PA peers (Table 3.3). Table 3.3: Permanent exclusions, 2009/10 Persistent Absentees Excluded Not Excluded Other Pupils Excluded Not Excluded Number (%) 3416 429664 0.79 99.21 2019 5951388 0.03 99.97 Source: National Pupil Database It is not surprising therefore to find that permanently excluded pupils tend to have far greater levels of absences than pupils who are not excluded. Chart 3.13 shows the levels of absences for pupils who were permanently excluded in 2009/10 by the reason behind the exclusion. Chart 3.13: Overall absence levels for permanently excluded pupils, by the reason for exclusion, 2009/10 35 35.21 30 34.05 30.68 30.07 31.82 30.56 30.80 31.70 28.63 30.70 27.43 25 30.99 27.31 20 15 6.02 6.04 All pupils Excluded Verbal abuse/threatening behaviour against a pupil Verbal abuse/threatening behaviour against an adult Theft Sexual misconduct Racist abuse Physical assault against a pupil Physical assault against an adult Other Damage Persistent disruptive behaviour 0 Drug and alcohol related 5 Not Excluded 10 Bullying Percentage of sessions missed due to absence (%) 40 Source: National Pupil Database 53 3.6 Historic prevalence of persistent absenteeism There is evidence to suggest that patterns of persistent absenteeism become entrenched over time for a significant minority of pupils. The analysis below tracks the historic PA levels for the two individual cohort of pupils who were in years 3 and 11 in 2009/10 20. Chart 3.14: Historic PA rates of 2009/10 year 3 and year 11 pupils Primary education phase Secondary education phase 2009/10 : Year 3 2009/10 : Year 11 1.8% 5.9% 0.6% 0.6% 1.2% 1.1% 3.6% 2007/08 : Year 1 1.1% 3.0% 3.9% 2.0% 2.6% 2008/09 : Year 2 2007/08 : Year 9 1.6% 2.8% 2008/09 : Year 10 Source: National Pupil Database For the primary education phase it is apparent that although the levels of persistent absentees exclusive to years 1, 2 and 3, reduce from 3.6% down to 2% and ultimately 1.8% (respectively), a core 1.1% of this cohort continue to be persistently absent throughout this 3 year period. In contrast to the primary phase, persistent absentee levels in secondary schools increase year on year. This increase is seen both in terms of new exclusive PAs in each subsequent year (from 2.6% of the cohort in year 9 to 2.8% in year 10 and 5.9% in year 11) and in terms of the proportion of pupils who continue to be PAs from one year to the next (1.6% of the cohort were PAs across years 9 and 10 and 3.0% across years 10 to 11). 3.9% of this year 11 cohort were PAs across years 9 and 10 as well. The next chapter details the consequences high of levels of absences have on pupils, particularly in relation to academic attainment. 20 Note, the overall PA rates for each Year group shown in Chart 3.14 will differ slightly to the figures presented earlier in section 1.4 as the above analysis looks at a cohort of pupils (for both Year 3 and Year 11 in 2009/10) who were present in the maintained education sector in England throughout the entire period from 2007/08 to 2009/10. 54 Chapter 4: Absence and its impact Key findings • There is a clear link between absence and attainment. As levels of pupil absences increase, the proportion of pupils reaching the expected levels of attainment at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4, decrease. • In 2009/10, pupils who have never been classified as persistent absentees over the Key Stage 2 period, were twice as likely to achieve level 4 or above (including English and maths) as pupils who were PAs for each the four Key Stage 2 years (78.3% of non-PAs achieve this level compared to only 38.6% of PAs). • Pupils who were persistently absent over both their Key Stage 4 years in 2009/10, were just under four times less likely to achieve 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and maths GCSEs, as other nonPA pupils. • Pupils missing more than 10% of school due to unauthorised absences, have significantly lower odds of meeting the expected level at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4 than pupils with no unauthorised absences. • Pupils who are persistently absent over both Key Stage 4 years are more likely to achieve lower (E, F and G) grades at Key Stage 4 and less likely to achieve the higher grades (A*, A and B), than other non-PA pupils. • Once a range of pupil characteristics have been controlled for, persistent absenteeism over the final Key Stage 4 year is found to have a strong relationship with GSCE attainment. This translates to PAs dropping one grade in each of their GCSEs, when compared to non-PA pupils. • Most schools with outstanding Ofsted attendance judgments have lower than expected absence rates. Conversely, many schools with inadequate Ofsted attendance judgments tend to have higher than expected absence rates. Poor attendance can disrupt a pupil’s learning and mean that they fall behind their peers in class. Persistent absence from school can put particular emphasis on this knowledge gap and place the pupil at a significant disadvantage academically. This chapter investigates how attainment at Key Stage 2 (KS2) and Key Stage 4 (KS4) are affected by different levels of pupil absences, particularly persistent absence. It also looks into the potential impact pupil absences have on schools. The analysis in this chapter relate to maintained primary and secondary schools, academies and city technology colleges only. 55 4.1 Absence and Key Stage 2 attainment The National Curriculum Key Stage 2 exams are taken by pupils at the end of their primary school education in year 6. This Key Stage is taught over the course of four years – from year 3 to 6 - and pupils are graded according to levels within the National Curriculum 21. By the end of the Key Stage, pupils are expected reach level 4 of the National Curriculum in each taught subject, with a minimum expectation to achieve at least level 4 in both English and maths 22. The analysis in this section will mostly consider pupil achievement levels against this measure. Chart 4.1 below shows a clear link between absence and attainment. As levels of pupil absences increase, the proportion of pupils reaching the expected levels in English, maths and science, decrease. In 2009/10, of pupils who miss less than 4% of school throughout the four KS2 years, 91.4% achieved level 4 or above in science, 87.4% and 87.3% achieved level 4 or above in English and maths respectively. These proportions gradually decrease for increasing levels of overall absence. In contrast to pupils with low levels of absence, 17.1% of pupils who missed more than half of KS2 schooling achieved level 4 or above in science and English, while only 14.3% achieved level 4 or above in maths. Chart 4.1: Percentage of pupils achieving the expected level in KS2 subjects by overall absence, 2009/10 Level 4 and above in Science Level 4 and above in English Level 4 and above in Maths 100 90 91.4 Percentage of pupils achieving the stated level (%) 87.4 87.3 80 87.9 83.0 82.2 83.5 77.9 76.7 70 74.6 67.8 60 66.0 59.3 50 51.6 49.4 44.1 40 34.0 33.3 30 20 17.1 17.1 10 14.3 0 <= 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of overall sessions missed over Key Stage 2 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Chart 4.2 repeats the above pattern: fewer pupils achieve level 4 and level 5 in both English and maths at Key Stage 2 as overall absences increases. 21 Further information on how pupils are expected to perform at each National Curriculum level in each subject for Key Stage 2 can be found at: http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk/key-stages-1-and-2/assessment/assessmentofsubjects/index.aspx 22 Achievement of level 4 in both English in maths will interchangeably be referred to as the expected level in this section. 56 Of pupils with less than 4% overall absence over KS2, four in five achieved the minimum expected level in both English and maths, while just under a third of pupils achieved the higher level (level 5) in both English and maths, in 2009/10. As overall absences increase, the likelihood of pupils achieving the expected level decreases. Of pupils with overall absences between 20 - 30%, less than two in five achieved level 4 or above in both English and maths and less than one twentieth achieved level 5. Chart 4.2: Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 and 5 in both English and maths at KS2 by overall absence 2009/10 Level 4 or above in both English and maths Level 5 in both English and maths 100 Percentage of pupils achieving the stated level (%) 90 80 82.1 75.9 70 69.2 60 56.9 50 40 39.5 30 29.2 24.9 20 21.7 16.4 10 14.3 9.8 4.6 0 <= 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 3.6 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of overall sessions missed over Key Stage 2 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Looking at the breakdown of absence by authorised and unauthorised absences, it is apparent that both are significantly associated to attainment (Chart 4.3). 88.8% of pupils with no authorised absences during KS2 achieve the expected level in both English and maths – this compares to 81.8% of pupils with no unauthorised absences achieving the expected level. The proportion of pupils achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths steadily reduce for authorised absences up to 10%. Subsequent higher levels of authorised absence are associated with markedly smaller proportions of pupils reaching this level. Of the pupils who missed more than half of KS2 schooling, only one in four pupils managed to reach the minimum expected level at KS2. In 2009/10, the odds of pupils achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths were 6 times higher for pupils with no authorised absences compared to pupils who missed more than 10% of KS2 schooling due to it. The proportions of pupils achieving the minimum expected KS2 level at increasing levels of unauthorised absence is significantly lower than that for similar levels of authorised absence; even at low levels of absences. 57 The odds of pupils with no unauthorised absences achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths is 9 times that of pupils with at least 10% of unauthorised absences. Chart 4.3: Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 in both English and maths at KS2 by levels of authorised and unauthorised absence, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence 100 No absence vs. more than 10% absence Authorised absence, odds ratio      = 6 Unauthorised absence, odds ratio = 9 88.8 81.8 81.0 Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above  in both English and maths (%) 80 74.7 70.0 68.4 57.5 60 49.8 44.1 43.8 40 36.1 30.9 25.0 21.2 17.5 20 0.0 0 <= 0.00 0.01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of sessions missed over Key Stage 2 (%) Source: National Pupil Database The likelihood of pupils achieving the expected KS2 level, not only differ greatly by the amount of absences accrued, but also by the different reasons behind these absences (Chart 4.4). The proportions of pupils achieving the expected level stay relatively similar for increasing levels of absence due to authorised family holidays, religious observance and study leave. However, long term absences due to exclusions or illnesses tend to be associated with significantly lower proportions of pupils achieving this expected level. Chart 4.4: Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 in both English and maths at KS2 by levels of authorised absences, 2009/10 100 Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above  in both English and maths (%) 90 Illness/Medical and dental appointments 80 Religious observance 70 Study leave  Traveller absence 60 Authorised family holiday Excluded 50 Other authorised circumstances 40 Authorised absence 30 20 10 0 <= 0.00 .01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of authorised sessions missed over Key Stage 2 (%) Source: National Pupil Database 58 Unlike the disparity seen above in levels of attainment for different authorised absence reasons, the attainment levels between different unauthorised reasons for absence are far more aligned (Chart 4.5). For all but unauthorised family holidays, the likelihood of pupils reaching the expected KS2 level are similarly low for increased levels of unauthorised absence. Chart 4.5: Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 in both English and maths at KS2 by levels of unauthorised absences, 2009/10 100 Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above  in both English and maths (%) 90 80 Unauthorised family holiday 70 Late arrival 60 Other unauthorised circumstances 50 No reason given yet 40 Unauthorised absence 30 20 10 0 <= 0.00 0.01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of unauthorised sessions missed over Key Stage 2 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Pupils who have never been classified as persistent absentees over the KS2 period, are twice as likely to achieve the expected level as pupils who were PAs for each of the four KS2 years (78.3% of non-PAs achieve this level compared to only 38.6% of PAs). This likelihood falls for each increasing year a pupil is classed as a persistent absentee (Chart 4.6). In line with this, the odds of pupil achieving the expected level, also decrease as the incidence of pupils being classed as PA, increase. Chart 4.6: The proportion of PAs and non-PAs achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths, 2009/10 100 90 Odds = 3.5  Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above   in both English and maths (%) 80 78.3 70 Odds = 1.6  60 61.7 Odds = 1.0  50 49.6 Odds = 0.6  40 38.6 30 20 10 0 Never PA PA in one Key Stage 2 year only PA in at least two Key Stage 2 years PA in all Key Stage 2 years Source: National Pupil Database 59 The proportion of persistent absentees (in the final KS2 year) achieving the minimum expected level is universally lower than other non-PA pupils across different pupil characteristics (Chart 4.7). Chart 4.7: Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 in both English and maths at KS2 by PA classification and pupil characteristics, 2009/10 Persistent Absentees Other Pupils 49.7 White 77.2 52.9 Mixed 79.3 56.9 Asian 77.9 50.6 Black 73.6 87.5 73.7 School Action 43.4 19.2 School Action Plus 30.6 14.2 Statemented 21.4 53.6 50.2 41.7 60 76.3 English as additional language 77.3 English as first language FSM eligible 60.5 55.7 80 No SEN 89.2 28.5 100 Chinese 90.9 Not eligible for FSM 80.0 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths (%) Source: National Pupil Database 4.2 Absence and Key Stage 4 attainment Key Stage 4 of the National Curriculum is taught over the final two years of secondary school education and all assessments for this Key Stage are completed by the end of year 11. Chart 4.8 shows that at increasing levels of overall absence, the likelihood of pupils achieving the following KS4 levels, reduce: - any GCSE and equivalent passes; - 5 or more GCSE and equivalents at grades 5A*-C; and - 5 or more GCSE and equivalents at grades 5A*-C including English and maths23. The vast majority of pupils tend to achieve any pass at KS4 for overall absence levels up to 20%, after which the proportions of pupils reaching this level are progressively lower. For pupils who were absent for more than 50% of the academic year 2009/10, only 72.9% managed to achieve any passes at KS4. The proportion of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents (including English and maths GCSEs) show a much starker picture. Of pupils with less than 4% of overall absence in 2009/10, 89.4% achieved 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent – 72.8% achieved this 23 Achievement of 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and math GCSEs will interchangeably be referred to as the expected level in this section. 60 including English and maths GCSEs. Of pupils missing more than half of the final KS4 year, only 5.9% managed to achieve 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents – 2.9% achieved this including English and maths GCSEs. Chart 4.8: Percentage of pupils achieving the stated level at KS4 by overall absence, 2009/10 Any Pass Achieved 5 or more GCSE and equivalents at grades A*‐C Achieved 5 or more GCSE and equivalents at grades A*‐C including GCSE English and Maths 100 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.7 98.6 95.1 Percentage of pupils achieving the stated level (%) 90 89.4 84.3 80 78.0 70 72.9 72.8 60 63.2 62.7 50 53.1 40 40.0 35.5 30 20 21.9 17.7 10 9.0 5.9 2.9 0 <= 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of overall sessions missed over Key Stage 4 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Pupils who have not been classed as persistent absentees in both KS4 years are 3.7 times more likely to achieve the expected level than pupils who have been persistently absent in each of these years. Persistent absentees over this period are 80% less likely to achieve 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and math GCSEs (Chart 4.9). Chart 4.9: The likelihood of PAs and non-PAs achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs, 2009/10 Other pupils PA over both Key Stage 4 years 100 Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*‐C grades including  English and Maths (GCSE and equivalents) 90 80 70 Odds = 1.5  60 60.0 50 40 30 Odds = 0.2 20 16.3 10 0 Other pupils PA over both Key Stage 4 years Source: National Pupil Database 61 As in the case of KS2 attainment (Chart 4.3), increasing levels of authorised and unauthorised absences are associated with progressively lower proportions of pupils achieving the expected KS4 level. Over two thirds of pupils with low levels of authorised absences (below 4%) achieve 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs. This reduces to around a third of pupils with authorised absences between 10 – 20% and fewer than one in five with authorised absences above 30%. The proportion of pupils achieving the expected KS4 level at similar levels of unauthorised absences is notably lower. Just over half of all pupils with unauthorised absence levels below 4% achieve 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and maths GCSEs. This reduces to just over one in twenty pupils with unauthorised absence levels between 20-30%. Pupils with no authorised absence have 5 times higher odds of achieving the expected KS4 level, compared to pupils with at least 10% authorised absence. Similarly, the odds of achieving the expected level are 30 times higher for pupils with no unauthorised absence compared to pupils with more than 10% unauthorised absence Chart 4.10: Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs, by levels of authorised and unauthorised absence, 2009/10 Authorised absence Unauthorised absence 100 No absence vs. more than 10% absence Authorised absence, odds ratio      =  5 Unauthorised absence, odds ratio = 30 Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*‐C grades including  English and Maths (GCSE and equivalents) 90 80 71.7 70 68.4 70.0 57.9 60 51.6 48.7 50 40 34.7 26.1 30 22.5 18.8 18.5 20 15.4 10.6 10 5.2 2.1 0.3 0 <= 0.00 .01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of sessions missed over Key Stage 4 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Patterns in KS4 attainment by different authorised reasons for absence show a general decrease in attainment as sessions of absence increase (Chart 4.11), with the exception of study leave and absence due to religious observance. Religious observance and study leave both show increases in attainment for fairly low levels of absence (under 10%). 62 Of the various authorised absence types, pupils with increasing levels of absence due to exclusions consistently have the lowest attainment rates. Chart 4.11: Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs, by levels of authorised absences, 2009/10 100 Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*‐C grades including  English and Maths (GCSE and equivalents) 90 80 Illness/Medical and dental appointments Religious observance 70 Study leave  Traveller absence 60 Authorised family holiday 50 Excluded 40 Authorised absence Other authorised circumstances 30 20 10 0 <= .00 .01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of authorised sessions missed over Key Stage 4 (%) Source: National Pupil Database Patterns in KS4 attainment across different unauthorised absence reasons are broadly similar, with parallel levels of attainment observed for increasing levels of absences (Chart 4.12). Chart 4.12: Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs, by levels of unauthorised absences, 2009/10 Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*‐C grades including  English and Maths (GCSE and equivalents) 100 90 80 Unauthorised family holiday 70 Late arrival 60 Other unauthorised circumstances 50 No reason given yet 40 Unauthorised absence 30 20 10 0 <= 0.00 .01 ‐ 4.00 4.01 ‐ 6.00 6.01 ‐ 10.00 10.01 ‐ 20.00 20.01 ‐ 30.00 30.01 ‐ 50.00 50.01+ Percentage of unauthorised sessions missed over Key Stage 4 (%) Source: National Pupil Database 63 Chart 4.13 shows that pupils who were persistently absent over both KS4 years are less likely to achieve 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and maths GCSEs, across different pupil characteristics than other non-PA pupils. The relative impact of being a persistent absentee in the final KS4 year is explored further in Section 4.3. Chart 4.13: Percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalents including English and maths GCSEs, by PA classification and pupil characteristics, 2009/10 PA over both Key Stage 4 years Other Pupils 16.3 60.1 White 15.8 60.7 Mixed Asian 62.1 19.3 Black 52.8 12.5 School Action 28.6 8.1 School Action Plus 20.2 7.6 5.1 Statemented 14.2 FSM eligible 37.8 10.1 20 Not eligible for FSM 62.9 18.9 40 English as first language 60.4 16.3 60 English as additional language 57.1 16.3 80 No SEN 69.5 24.8 100 Chinese 80.1 35.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of pupils achieving level 4 or above in both English and maths (%) Source: National Pupil Database Chart 4.14 shows the distribution of pupils who were persistently absent over both KS4 years and other non-PA pupils, over the range (and number) of grades awarded for GCSE and equivalent qualifications in 2009/10. From the chart it is immediately apparent that not only are other non-PA pupils more likely to be awarded the higher A*, A and B grades, but they are also more likely to be awarded more of them than pupils who were persistently absent over both KS4 years. Slightly higher proportions of other non-PA pupils are also awarded more C grades and almost an even proportion awarded D grades, as persistently absent pupils. The reverse however is true of the pupil distribution at the lower grades of E, F and G. In this instance, pupils who were persistently absence over both KS4 years are more likely to receive more of these grades than other non-PA pupils. 64 Chart 4.14: Pupil population distribution over grades awarded at KS4, 2009/10 PA over both Key Stage 4 years Other Pupils 100 80 Grades A* 60 40 20 Percentage  of pupils  (%) Percentage  of pupils  (%) 100 0 Grades A 80 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 1 Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications Grades B 60 40 20 0 4 5 6+ Grades C 80 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 1 Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications 2 3 4 5 6+ Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications 100 100 80 Grades D 60 40 20 Percentage  of pupils  (%) Percentage  of pupils  (%) 3 100 80 Percentage  of pupils  (%) Percentage  of pupils  (%) 100 0 80 Grades E 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 1 Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications 2 3 4 5 6+ Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications 100 Grades F 80 60 40 20 Percentage  of pupils  (%) 100 Percentage  of pupils  (%) 2 Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications Grades G 80 60 40 20 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 6+ 1 2 3 4 5 6+ Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications Number of full GCSE (and equivalent) qualifications Source: National Pupil Database 65 4.3 The relationship between absence and Key Stage 4 pupil attainment So far, this chapter has highlighted the differences in pupil attainment patterns for persistent absentees and their non-PA peers. Although these patterns give a general impression of the importance of absenteeism on attainment in relation to other pupil characteristics, we are not able to gauge just how much of an effect each characteristic has on attainment. For example, is the low attainment of a pupil with SEN, who is also a persistent absentee, down to them simply being absent from school, or is it more down to the fact that they have a Special Educational Need? This section attempts to unpick the relative impact of persistent absenteeism (during the final year of KS4), in relation to other pupil characteristics, on KS4 attainment. The multi-level multiple regression modelling technique is used to model this impact on the total point score for the best 8 GCSE (and equivalent) subjects including bonus scores for English and maths 24 (roughly corresponding to ten subjects overall). Chart 4.15 shows the impact of being a persistent absentee in the final KS4 year, in relation to other pupil characteristics for the KS4 attainment of the best 8 GCSE (and equivalent) subjects including bonus scores for English and maths. The individual effect is shown for each characteristic in this chart relative to the baseline characteristic for that group, while holding all other characteristics constant and equal. Chart 4.15: Effects of persistent absenteeism and pupil characteristics on KS4 attainment point scores, 2009/10 19 Female Male Bangladeshi Indian Pakistani African Caribbean Chinese White & Asian White & African White & Caribbean* Irish Irish Traveller Gypsy Roma White British School Action School Action Plus or Statemented No SEN English as additional language English as first language FSM eligible Not eligible for FSM Been in care Not in care Persistent Absentee Not PA 22 23 18 28 12 31 11 11 1 5 ‐20 ‐38 ‐20 ‐51 ‐22 ‐10 ‐25 ‐66 ‐75 ‐55 ‐35 ‐15 5 0 Effect on pupil’s point score for their best 8 GCSEs  with English and maths bonus (including equivalencies) 25 45 * The effect for this group was not     found to be statistically significant Source: National Pupil Database 24 This provides a measure of how well pupils did across a broad range of subjects with a particular emphasis on English and maths. 66 Using this approach we see that, once a range of other pupil characteristics have been taken into account, persistently absent pupils have a total point score 66 points lower than other non-PA pupils. To interpret these figures, consider that one grade in one GCSE subject is worth six points. Therefore, a reduction of 66 points, approximately translates to a persistently absent pupil dropping one grade in each of their 8 GCSEs 25. To put this into context, pupils who are in receipt of Free School Meals (a proxy for deprivation) on average score 10 points lower than a non-FSM pupil with otherwise the same characteristics – this roughly translates to an FSM pupil dropping one grade in two of their GCSEs 26 when compared to non-FSM pupils, for example. Similarly, the change in attainment observed for other pupil characteristics are also smaller than that observed for persistent absentees; pupils with SEN at School Action Plus or with Statements of SEN (-51 points); pupils in care (-25 points) and pupils whose first language is not English (-22 points). However, the modelling cannot isolate whether the absence from school is the cause of the poorer attainment, or whether both persistent absenteeism and poor attainment are caused by other factors – for example, since persistent absentees are more likely to report being bullied or have negative aspirations and perceptions of school, improving attendance rates might not improve attainment to this extent. 4.4 The impact of pupil absences on schools As part of the Ofsted inspection regime in schools, Ofsted inspectors are expected to pass judgments on the pupil attendance levels in schools 27. These judgments are graded as outstanding, good, satisfactory and inadequate. This section considers the overall absence levels in the maintained schools (4,600 primary and 845 secondary) which were judged for the latest inspection period 2009/10. The expected overall absence rates for these schools were modelled on the following four characteristics 28: • • • • The proportion of pupils in the school who are eligible for FSM; The proportion of pupils in the school with statements of SEN; The proportion of pupils in the school who are Gypsy Roma; and The proportion of pupils in the school who are Irish Traveller. The spread of the deviances of the actual overall absence from the modelled overall absence for the schools are plotted in Chart 4.16 below. 25 GCSE or equivalents subjects - assuming that the pupil has entered 8 or more qualifications, including English and maths. 26 In non English and Maths GCSEs 27 Further information on the full Ofsted judgment criteria can be found at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/framework-for-inspection-of-maintained-schools-england-september-2009 28 These characteristics were chosen due to the high propensity of absence among pupils with these characteristics. 67 From the chart, it is apparent that there is a relationship between the expected levels of school absence, and the Ofsted attendance judgments passed for schools. Maintained primary and secondary schools with outstanding or good Ofsted attendance grades tend to have lower than expected overall absence rates. Conversely, schools with inadequate Ofsted attendance grades, tend to have higher than expected absence rates. Chart 4.16: Deviance from the expected overall absence rates by latest Ofsted attendance judgment, 2009/10 Lower than expected  absence rates 6 4 Percentage point diffference 2 0 ‐2 ‐4 Higher than  expected  absence rates ‐6 ‐8 ‐10 Outstanding Good Satisfactory Inadequate Outstanding Maintained Primary Good Satisfactory Inadequate Maintained Secondary Source: National Pupil Database & Ofsted inspection judgments The next chapter looks into the life outcomes pupils who have been persistently absent in the final year of compulsory schooling versus those who have not. 68 Chapter 5: Post 16 outcomes for young people Key findings • Young people who were not persistently absent during the final year of compulsory school education are far more likely to be studying for a degree by the age of 18, than their peers who were persistently absent (30% vs. 7%). • Young people who were non-PAs at age 15, are almost three times more likely to attend a Russell group university than young people who were persistently absent. • Just under a third of young people who were persistently absent during the final year of their compulsory school education, are not in education, employment or training (NEET) at the age of 18. This compares against just over a tenth of their non-PA peers. • Young people who were persistently absent at age 15, are more likely to be employed on temporary fixed term contracts, or temp through an agency at age 18, compared to pupils who were not persistently absent. • Young people who were persistent absentees at age 15 a far more likely to claim state-benefits at the age of 18 compared to their non-PA peers. This chapter returns to the young people examined earlier in Chapter 3, who had taken part in the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) 29, with the aim of discovering the economic and educational outcomes for these young people by age 18 (wave 6). The focus of this chapter is to compare these outcomes for young people who were persistently absent at the age of 15 (during the final year of compulsory school education) against that of their non-PA peers 30. The analysis in this chapter is based on the same 9,000 respondents considered earlier (in Chapter 3) – of which, around 1,500 were persistent absentees. Note: the numbers of young people and 95% confidence intervals for the figures quoted from LSYPE in this chapter can be found in Annex F. 29 Further information on LSYPE is available in Annex B. For ease of reference, young people who were PAs at the age of 15 will occasionally be referred to as historic PAs – and similarly young peoples who were not PAs at the age of 15, will be referred to as historic non-PAs. 30 69 5.1 Educational outcomes for young people By the age of 18, just over a third of LSYPE respondents (approximately 3,000) were studying towards some form of academic qualification. Chart 5.1 shows the breakdown of the historic PA and non-PA population across the different qualifications studied. From the chart, it is immediately clear that far higher proportions of young people who were not persistently absent at age 15 are engaged in higher education, particularly at degree level, compared to young people who were persistently absent at age 15 (30% of historic nonPAs study for a degree by age 18 compared to just 7% of historic PAs). Conversely, historic PAs are twice as likely to be studying for their GCSE qualifications at age 18, than their non-PA peers. Chart 5.1: Distribution of qualifications studied for by age 18, 2009 PA at age 15 Other Pupils 35 30 30 Percentage (%) 25 20 15 10 8 5 7 6 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 First/Other Degree Other HE A Level GCSE Other Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Young people who were not persistently absent at age 15, were three times more likely to studying at a Russell Group university than young people who were persistently absent (Chart 5.2). Chart 5.2: Attendance at a Russell Group university, 2009 PA at age 15 Other Pupils 100 90 91 80 77 Percentage (%) 70 60 50 40 30 20 23 10 8 0 Attending Russell Group Institution Other Higher Education Institution Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 70 It is also interesting to look at the subjects both groups of young people chose to study at higher education (Chart 5.3). It appears young people who were persistent absentees at age 15 are more likely to study subjects such as education, creative arts and design, mass communication, business administration, social studies¸ architecture, building and planning, biological, veterinary sciences and subjects aligned to agriculture at higher education compared to historic non-PAs. On the other hand, young people who were not persistent absentees at age 15 are more likely to study languages, linguistics, classics and literature related subjects, as well as mathematical, computer and physical sciences and subjects allied to medicine and dentistry compared to historic PAs. Chart 5.3: Higher education subjects studied by young people, 2009 PA at age 15 Other Pupils Education Creative arts and design Languages, linguistics, classics and related subjects Mass communications and documentation Business and administrative studies Law Social studies Architecture, building and planning Engineering and technologies Mathematical, computer and physical sciences Biological sciences, veterinary sciences, agriculture and related subjects Medicine, dentistry and subjects allied to medicine 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Percentage (%) Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 5.2 Economic outcomes for young people Chart 5.4 shows that almost one half of young people who were not persistently absent at age 15, are involved in full-time education by age 18 – this compares to just under a quarter of young people who were persistently absent at age 15. Similar proportions of young people from both the historic PA and non-PA populations take part in apprenticeships or are employed with training by the age of 18. However, 28% of young people who were PA at age 15, are in employment without training compared to 22% of historic non-PAs. Just under a third of young people who were historic PAs, are not in education, employment or training (NEET) at the age of 18. This compares against just over a tenth of their non-PA peers. 71 Chart 5.4: Main activity of young people at the age of 18, 2009 Full‐time Education Apprenticeship/training PA at age 15 23 Employed With Training Unemployed/Inactive (NEET) 11 Other Pupils 28 7 47 0% 10% 20% 12 30% 40% Employed Without Training 50% 31 22 60% 70% 7 80% 12 90% 100% Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Of the young people not in any kind of education, employment or training (NEET), 74% from the historic non-PA population are actively looking for paid work, while 14% are either looking after family or are at home full-time (Chart 5.5). Comparatively, 66% of young people from the historic PA population are actively looking for paid work and a further 23% are either looking after family or are at home full-time. Chart 5.5: Activities of NEETs, 2009 PA at age 15 Other Pupils 80 74 70 66 60 Percentage (%) 50 40 30 23 20 14 10 11 12 0 Looking for paid work Looking after family/home full‐time Something else Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 72 Around 80% of young people who are employed from both the historic PA and non-PA populations, have a permanent contract with their employer. Of the young people who do hold a temporary contract, greater proportions of young people from the historic PA population, are employed on a temporary fixed term contract or are temping through an agency, compared to the historic non-PA population (Chart 5.6). Chart 5.6: Types of temporary employment contracts, 2009 Seasonal work PA at age 15 12 Other Pupils Fixed term contract 37 19 0% Agency temping 10% 27 31 20% 30% Casual work 12 13 40% 50% Other 11 24 60% 70% 13 80% 90% 100% Percentage (%) Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Young people who were persistent absentees at age 15 are far more likely to claim state-benefits 31 at the age of 18 compared to their non-PA peers. Twice as many historic PAs claim Income Support compared to historic non-PAs. Chart 5.7: State-benefits claimed at age 18, 2009 PA at age 15 Other Pupils 10.0 9.0 9 8.0 Percentage (%) 7.0 7 6.0 5.0 4.0 4 3.0 2.0 2 2 1.0 1 2 1 1 1 0.0 Unemployment related benefits, or National Insurance Credits Income support (not as an unemployed person) Child benefit for your own children Housing Benefit or Council Tax Benefit Tax Credits Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 31 Note, young people may claim more than one benefit. 73 74 Annex A: Absence definitions Authorised absence is absence with permission from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes instances of absences for which a satisfactory explanation has been provided. The following absence reasons are classified as authorised: • • • • • • • • • Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Authorised absence is defined as the total number of authorised absences, expressed as the percentage of the total number of possible sessions for the academic year, and is calculated as: ⎛X⎞ ⎜ ⎟ *100 ⎝Y ⎠ Where X = the total number of authorised absence sessions Y = the total number of possible sessions Unauthorised absence is absence without permission from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes all unexplained or unjustified reasons for absence. The following absence reasons are classified as unauthorised: • • • • Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unauthorised absence is defined as the total number of unauthorised absences, expressed as the percentage of the total number of possible sessions for the academic year, and is calculated as: ⎛X⎞ ⎜ ⎟ *100 ⎝Y ⎠ Where X = the total number of unauthorised absence sessions Y = the total number of possible sessions 75 Overall absence is defined as the total number of absences (authorised and unauthorised), as the percentage of the total number of possible sessions, for the academic year, and is calculated as: ⎛X ⎜ ⎝Y ⎞ ⎟ *100 ⎠ Where X = the total number of absent sessions (authorised and unauthorised) Y = the total number of possible sessions Persistent absentees 32 are defined as having 46 or more sessions of absence (authorised or unauthorised) during the academic year, around 15 per cent of overall absence. The percentage persistently absent (% PA) is the number of pupil enrolments with 46 or more sessions of absence over the academic year, expressed as a percentage of the total number of pupil enrolments: ⎛X⎞ ⎜ ⎟ *100 ⎝Y ⎠ Where X = the number of pupil enrolments with 46 or more sessions of absence Y = the number of pupil enrolments with valid absence data 32 Prior to October 2011, a persistent absentee was defined as a pupil having 64 or more sessions of absence (authorised or unauthorised) during the academic year, around 20 per cent of overall absence. 76 Annex B: Data sources Below is a brief description of the data sources used in this paper: National Pupil Database (NPD) The National Pupil Database (NPD) is a longitudinal database which matches the attainment and characteristics of pupils in maintained schools across England. The NPD holds pupil and school characteristics e.g. age, gender, ethnicity, attendance and exclusions (sourced from the School Census for maintained primary, state-funded secondary and all special schools only), matched to pupil level attainment data (Foundation Stage Profile (FSP), Key Stage (KS) assessments and external examinations), collected from schools and Local Authorities (LAs) by the Department for Education, and the Standards and Testing Agency (formerly, the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency (QCDA)) and awarding bodies. The School Census (SC) collects pupil level absence data on a termly basis (spring, summer and autumn collections) for maintained primary and statefunded secondary schools as well as City Technology Colleges and Academies, and annually for special schools. The following four Statistical First Releases of the absence data are published annually: • Pupil Absence in schools in England: Autumn Term (http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001003/index.shtml) • Pupil Absence in schools in England: Spring Term (http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001020/index.shtml) • Pupil Absence in schools in England: Autumn and Spring Term (http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001030/index.shtml) • Pupil Absence in schools in England: Including Pupil Characteristics (Annual) (http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000994/index.shtml) More information on the School Census is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schooladmin/ims/datacollectio ns/schoolcensus Tellus4 Survey The Tellus Survey was a self-completion survey designed to gather information from children and young people about their behaviour and to seek their views on aspects of their lives, schools and local areas. Children and young people in years 6, 8 and 10 complete the survey online at school. Tellus4 was the final in a series of Tellus pupil perception surveys. This paper will only examine the views held by children and young people in relation to their schools, and assess how absence levels vary accordingly. For more information on the Tellus survey, and latest results, see http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/STR/d000908/index.shtml 77 Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) The Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) is a major innovative panel study of young people which brings together data from several sources, including annual interviews with young people and their parents, and administrative sources. LSYPE respondents were first interviewed in the spring of 2004 (at age 13) and were interviewed annually until 2010, resulting in a total of seven ‘waves’. For the first four waves of LSYPE, the parents or guardians of the respondents were also interviewed. In the first wave, around 15,500 young people were interviewed as part of the survey and we returned to the existing survey respondents every year for interviews. The study has achieved response rates of 74%, 86%, 92%, 92%, 89%, 87% and 90% through Waves 1 to 7 respectively. The final sample size at Wave 7 was around 8,700. The analyses in this paper primarily focus on wave 3 of the survey, which collected a wide range of information on the attitudes, behaviour and background of the young person taking part in the survey as well as their parent(s). The scope of the analysis is later extended to wave 6 of the survey, when outcomes on further education and employment are made available for the cohort. A little over 9,000 respondents continued to provide information for LSYPE over waves 3 and 6. The analysis in this paper applies to these 9,000 respondents. The table below shows the LSYPE wave schedule and characteristics to wave 6: For more information on LSYPE, see http://www.esds.ac.uk/longitudinal/access/lsype/L5545.asp or https://ilsype.education.gov.uk/workspaces/public/wiki/Welcome. 78 Annex C: School governance types Community school • • • • • • The local education authority owns the land and buildings, but the governing body is responsible for running the school. The local education authority funds the school. The local education authority employs the staff. The local education authority provides support services, for example, psychological services and special educational needs services. The pupils have to follow the National Curriculum. The admissions policy is usually determined and administered by the local education authority. Voluntary Controlled schools • • • • • • • The land and buildings are owned by a charity, often a religious organisation such as a church. The charity appoints some of the members of the governing body, but the local education authority is responsible for running the school. The school is funded by the local education authority. The local education authority employs the staff. The local education authority provides support services. The pupils have to follow the National Curriculum. The admissions policy is usually determined and administered by the local education authority. Voluntary Aided schools • • • • • • The land and buildings are normally owned by a charity, often a religious organisation such as a church, but the governing body is responsible for running the school. The school is funded partly by the local education authority, partly by the governing body and partly by the charity. The governing body employs the staff. The local education authority provides support services. The pupils have to follow the National Curriculum. The admissions policy is determined and administered by the governors in consultation with the local education authority and other relevant schools in the area. 79 Foundation schools • • • • • • The land and buildings are owned by a governing body, who are also responsible for running the school. The local education authority funds the school. The governing body employs the staff. The governing body buys in and administers most of the support services. The pupils have to follow the National Curriculum. The admissions policy is determined and administered by the governing body, in consultation with the local education authority and other relevant schools in the area. Academies • Academies are publicly funded independent schools that give heads and teachers greater freedoms and flexibilities including; o the ability to set their own pay and conditions for staff o freedom in delivering the curriculum o greater control of their budget o freedom to change the length of terms and school days o freedom to spend the money the local authority currently spends on their behalf. Academies receive the same level of per-pupil funding as they would receive from the local authority as a maintained school, plus additions to cover the services that are no longer provided for them by the local authority. Academies receive their funding directly from the Young People’s Learning Agency (an agency of the Department for Education) rather than from local authorities. Each academy is set up as a company limited by guarantee with charitable status and has a board of governors responsible for the governance and strategic leadership of the school. Traditionally academies have replaced underperforming schools, or, in some cases, provided extra places (either as entirely new schools or as successful independent schools wishing to better serve their local community and broaden their intake). Academies replacing an underperforming school will usually have a sponsor. Sponsors come from a wide range of backgrounds including successful schools, businesses, universities, charities and faith. More recently well performing schools have been able to convert to Academy status. The schools classified as Academies in this report were Academies at the time of the 2010 School Census and are therefore all traditional sponsor led Academies. 80 Annex D: Time series of reasons for absence This annex contains the following detailed time series on each pupil characteristic by reasons for absence and the distribution of the reasons for absence: • Table D.1 – Reasons for absence by School Type • Table D.2 – Reasons for absence by Gender • Table D.3 – Reasons for absence by White Ethnic Group • Table D.4 – Reasons for absence by Mixed Ethnic Group • Table D.5 – Reasons for absence by Asian Ethnic Group • Table D.6 – Reasons for absence by Black Ethnic Group • Table D.7 – Reasons for absence by Chinese Ethnic Group • Table D.8 – Reasons for absence by Special Education Need Type • Table D.9 – Reasons for absence by National Curriculum Year Groups 2,6 & 11 • Table D.10– Reasons for absence by English as Additional Language status • Table D.11– Reasons for absence by Free School Meal Eligibility • Table D.12– Reasons for absence by IDACI placement Reason for absence was collected for the first time for the autumn term 2006. Schools were able to provide absence data using a reason code or by using total figures for the number of sessions missed due to authorised or unauthorised absence. It was not expected that schools would use both. However, in some instances both absence by reason and total authorised and unauthorised absence have been returned. In addition, some schools do not have the required software to provide absence data by reason, and therefore are only able to provide overall totals. To derive absence rates, the sum of absence by reason has been used unless this is missing or is less than the total provided, in which case overall totals have been used To note in the following tables: • • (1): Percentages are based on absence totals as reported by reason (not overall totals). (2): Includes absence returned as either authorised or unauthorised totals but not broken down by reason. 81 Table D.1: Reasons for absence by School Type Reasons for absence by School Type Maintained Primary 2008/09 2009/10 State‐funded  Secondary 2008/09 2009/10 Special   2008/09 All Schools 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 61.0 5.0 2.3 0.0 0.4 12.1 0.4 0.3 6.3 87.8 60.9 5.0 1.4 0.0 0.4 10.6 0.3 0.3 8.2 87.1 55.3 6.0 1.2 2.0 0.1 4.7 0.1 2.4 7.7 79.4 56.0 6.1 0.7 2.0 0.1 3.7 0.1 2.2 8.0 79.0 43.1 9.5 0.9 0.3 0.1 5.7 0.3 2.7 17.1 79.8 44.69 9.69 0.58 0.35 0.20 5.40 0.40 2.65 16.54 80.50 57.6 5.6 1.7 1.1 0.2 8.0 0.2 1.5 7.3 83.2 58.0 5.7 1.0 1.1 0.2 6.9 0.2 1.4 8.2 82.7 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 2.2 1.1 6.4 2.4 12.2 2.6 1.1 7.0 2.1 12.9 1.7 1.1 13.6 4.1 20.6 1.8 1.1 14.5 3.6 21.0 0.5 0.6 17.8 1.3 20.2 0.48 0.62 17.09 1.30 19.50 1.9 1.1 10.5 3.3 16.8 2.2 1.1 11.1 2.9 17.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.00 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.23 0.26 0.12 0.00 0.02 0.64 0.02 0.02 0.33 0.02 4.66 3.17 0.26 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.55 0.02 0.02 0.42 0.02 4.54 3.98 0.43 0.09 0.14 0.01 0.33 0.01 0.17 0.56 0.04 5.76 3.84 0.42 0.05 0.14 0.01 0.25 0.01 0.15 0.55 0.02 5.43 4.51 0.99 0.10 0.03 0.01 0.60 0.03 0.29 1.79 0.23 8.58 4.49 0.97 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.54 0.04 0.27 1.66 0.20 8.30 3.59 0.35 0.10 0.07 0.01 0.50 0.01 0.09 0.45 0.03 5.21 3.49 0.34 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.41 0.01 0.08 0.50 0.02 5.00 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.12 0.06 0.34 0.12 0.00 0.64 0.14 0.06 0.36 0.11 0.00 0.67 0.12 0.08 0.98 0.30 0.01 1.49 0.13 0.08 0.99 0.24 0.01 1.45 0.05 0.07 1.86 0.14 0.03 2.14 0.05 0.06 1.72 0.13 0.02 1.98 0.12 0.07 0.65 0.20 0.01 1.05 0.13 0.07 0.67 0.17 0.00 1.04 Total Overall Absence 5.30 5.21 7.25 6.88 10.72 10.27 6.27 6.04 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 82 Table D.2: Reasons for absence by Gender Boys Reasons for absence by Gender 2008/09 Girls 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 56.6 5.5 1.7 1.1 0.2 8.0 0.2 2.2 7.6 83.1 57.2 5.6 1.1 1.1 0.2 6.8 0.2 2.1 8.5 82.6 58.7 5.7 1.6 1.1 0.2 8.0 0.2 0.7 6.9 83.3 58.9 5.8 1.0 1.1 0.2 6.9 0.2 0.7 8.0 82.8 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.9 1.1 10.6 3.3 16.9 2.2 1.1 11.2 2.9 17.4 2.0 1.1 10.4 3.2 16.7 2.2 1.1 11.0 2.8 17.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.48 0.34 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.49 0.01 0.14 0.47 0.03 5.15 3.41 0.33 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.41 0.01 0.12 0.50 0.02 4.95 3.70 0.36 0.10 0.07 0.01 0.51 0.01 0.05 0.44 0.03 5.28 3.58 0.35 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.42 0.01 0.04 0.49 0.02 5.05 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.12 0.07 0.66 0.20 0.01 1.05 0.13 0.07 0.67 0.17 0.00 1.04 0.12 0.07 0.65 0.20 0.01 1.06 0.13 0.07 0.67 0.17 0.00 1.05 Total Overall Absence 6.20 5.99 6.33 6.10 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 83 Table D.3: Reasons for absence by White Ethnic Group Reasons for absence by White Ethnic Group White British 2008/09 White Irish 2009/10 2008/09 White Irish Traveller 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 White Gypsy Roma 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 59.8 5.8 0.1 1.2 0.1 8.3 0.1 1.5 7.3 84.1 60.0 5.8 0.1 1.1 0.1 7.1 0.1 1.4 8.0 83.7 55.5 5.4 0.1 1.1 1.9 5.4 0.1 1.5 9.3 80.2 55.6 5.6 0.1 0.9 1.2 4.9 0.1 1.5 11.2 81.1 22.6 1.7 0.1 0.0 32.7 1.3 0.0 1.3 8.5 68.3 22.3 1.9 0.1 0.1 31.0 1.0 0.0 1.5 9.0 66.9 33.8 2.5 0.1 0.2 15.6 2.1 0.1 1.5 9.0 64.7 33.1 2.6 0.1 0.2 14.1 1.6 0.1 1.4 8.6 61.6 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.6 1.1 10.2 3.0 15.9 1.8 1.1 10.8 2.6 16.3 1.3 1.4 12.5 4.6 19.8 1.3 1.3 12.7 3.6 18.9 0.9 1.4 24.4 5.1 31.7 0.8 1.3 26.3 4.7 33.1 1.5 1.1 26.5 6.2 35.3 1.7 1.1 31.0 4.5 38.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.68 0.35 0.00 0.07 0.01 0.51 0.00 0.09 0.45 0.03 5.20 3.59 0.35 0.00 0.07 0.01 0.43 0.01 0.08 0.48 0.02 5.03 3.89 0.38 0.01 0.07 0.13 0.38 0.01 0.11 0.65 0.07 5.70 3.72 0.37 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.33 0.01 0.10 0.75 0.06 5.48 5.51 0.42 0.02 0.01 7.99 0.32 0.01 0.31 2.08 0.03 16.70 5.23 0.44 0.03 0.02 7.29 0.24 0.00 0.35 2.10 0.02 15.73 6.41 0.48 0.02 0.03 2.96 0.39 0.01 0.28 1.70 0.08 12.35 5.95 0.46 0.01 0.03 2.53 0.30 0.02 0.25 1.54 0.05 11.15 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.10 0.07 0.63 0.19 0.01 0.99 0.11 0.06 0.65 0.15 0.00 0.98 0.09 0.10 0.88 0.32 0.02 1.41 0.09 0.09 0.85 0.24 0.01 1.28 0.21 0.33 5.95 1.24 0.01 7.74 0.19 0.30 6.17 1.10 0.01 7.78 0.28 0.20 5.02 1.18 0.02 6.70 0.31 0.20 5.58 0.82 0.03 6.94 Total Overall Absence 6.19 6.01 7.11 6.75 24.44 23.50 19.05 18.09 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 84 Table D.4: Reasons for absence by Mixed Ethnic Group Reasons for absence by Mixed Ethnic Group White and Black  Caribbean 2008/09 2009/10 White and Black  African 2008/09 2009/10 White and Asian 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 54.1 5.0 0.2 0.7 0.0 5.1 0.1 2.9 8.9 77.0 53.6 5.1 0.1 0.6 0.0 4.3 0.1 2.7 9.6 76.1 55.0 5.5 1.6 0.6 0.0 6.9 0.2 1.8 8.2 79.9 54.9 5.4 1.0 0.8 0.0 5.5 0.2 1.9 10.0 79.6 56.4 5.2 3.4 1.0 0.0 8.6 0.4 1.1 7.8 83.9 56.5 5.3 2.1 1.0 0.0 7.4 0.3 1.0 9.5 83.2 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.5 2.2 14.8 4.5 23.0 1.5 2.2 16.1 4.1 23.9 2.1 1.8 11.8 4.4 20.1 2.2 1.7 12.6 3.9 20.4 2.0 1.3 9.9 3.0 16.1 2.2 1.2 10.7 2.6 16.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.92 0.37 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.37 0.01 0.21 0.65 0.04 5.62 3.80 0.36 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.30 0.01 0.19 0.68 0.01 5.41 3.31 0.33 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.41 0.01 0.11 0.50 0.03 4.85 3.22 0.31 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.32 0.01 0.11 0.59 0.02 4.70 3.49 0.32 0.21 0.06 0.00 0.53 0.02 0.07 0.48 0.03 5.22 3.39 0.32 0.13 0.06 0.00 0.45 0.02 0.06 0.57 0.03 5.01 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.11 0.16 1.08 0.33 0.01 1.68 0.11 0.15 1.14 0.29 0.01 1.70 0.13 0.11 0.71 0.27 0.01 1.22 0.13 0.10 0.74 0.23 0.01 1.21 0.12 0.08 0.61 0.18 0.00 1.00 0.13 0.07 0.64 0.16 0.00 1.01 Total Overall Absence 7.30 7.12 6.07 5.90 6.22 6.02 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 85 Table D.5: Reasons for absence by Asian Ethnic Group Reasons for absence by Asian Ethnic Group Asian Indian 2008/09 Asian Pakistani 2009/10 2008/09 Asian Bangladeshi 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 54.0 5.4 5.3 1.4 0.0 12.8 1.5 0.4 6.3 87.1 55.5 5.5 3.3 1.4 0.0 10.7 1.3 0.4 8.9 87.1 45.3 4.4 17.9 0.4 0.0 6.1 1.4 0.8 5.6 81.9 48.7 4.8 11.5 0.5 0.0 5.5 1.4 0.9 7.8 80.9 52.0 4.4 14.5 0.3 0.0 3.6 1.0 0.8 4.3 80.9 56.0 4.7 7.8 0.4 0.0 3.4 0.9 0.7 5.8 79.8 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 3.8 0.6 5.9 2.6 12.9 4.2 0.6 6.1 2.1 12.9 3.9 0.8 10.4 3.1 18.1 4.9 0.8 10.6 2.8 19.1 3.3 0.9 11.2 3.7 19.1 4.3 0.9 11.8 3.2 20.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 2.86 0.29 0.28 0.07 0.00 0.68 0.08 0.02 0.33 0.03 4.65 2.80 0.28 0.17 0.07 0.00 0.54 0.07 0.02 0.45 0.02 4.42 3.47 0.34 1.37 0.03 0.00 0.46 0.11 0.06 0.42 0.02 6.28 3.31 0.32 0.78 0.03 0.00 0.37 0.09 0.06 0.53 0.01 5.50 3.83 0.33 1.07 0.02 0.00 0.27 0.07 0.06 0.32 0.08 6.05 3.68 0.31 0.52 0.03 0.00 0.22 0.06 0.05 0.38 0.05 5.30 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.20 0.03 0.31 0.14 0.00 0.69 0.21 0.03 0.31 0.11 0.01 0.66 0.30 0.06 0.79 0.24 0.00 1.39 0.34 0.05 0.72 0.19 0.00 1.30 0.24 0.06 0.83 0.27 0.02 1.43 0.28 0.06 0.78 0.21 0.01 1.34 Total Overall Absence 5.34 5.08 7.68 6.80 7.48 6.64 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 86 Table D.6: Reasons for absence by Black Ethnic Group Black Caribbean Reasons for absence by Black Ethnic Group 2008/09 Black African 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 50.6 5.8 0.3 0.8 0.0 4.8 0.2 3.8 9.9 76.3 49.4 5.7 0.2 0.9 0.0 3.9 0.2 3.9 11.4 75.5 47.4 6.2 10.0 0.8 0.0 4.8 0.3 2.3 8.4 80.4 49.5 6.5 6.1 0.9 0.0 3.9 0.3 2.4 10.7 80.3 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.9 2.8 12.9 6.1 23.7 1.9 2.7 14.7 5.1 24.5 2.3 1.5 10.4 5.5 19.6 2.3 1.4 11.1 5.0 19.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 2.98 0.34 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.28 0.01 0.22 0.59 0.04 4.53 2.83 0.33 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.22 0.65 0.02 4.35 2.12 0.28 0.45 0.04 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.10 0.38 0.04 3.62 2.04 0.27 0.25 0.04 0.00 0.16 0.01 0.10 0.44 0.02 3.33 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.11 0.16 0.76 0.36 0.03 1.42 0.11 0.16 0.84 0.29 0.01 1.41 0.10 0.06 0.46 0.24 0.02 0.89 0.09 0.06 0.46 0.20 0.01 0.82 Total Overall Absence 5.95 5.76 4.51 4.15 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 87 Table D.7: Reasons for absence by Chinese Ethnic Group Reasons for absence by Chinese Ethnic  Group Chinese 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 50.8 7.3 0.6 3.2 0.0 16.9 0.9 0.4 8.3 88.2 51.6 7.0 0.1 2.9 0.0 13.5 0.9 0.4 11.9 88.2 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 3.1 0.9 4.7 3.1 11.8 3.1 1.0 5.2 2.5 11.8 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 1.81 0.26 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.60 0.03 0.01 0.29 0.03 3.17 1.87 0.25 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.49 0.03 0.01 0.43 0.02 3.22 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.11 0.03 0.17 0.11 0.00 0.42 0.11 0.04 0.19 0.09 0.00 0.43 Total Overall Absence 3.59 3.65 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 88 Table D.8: Reasons for absence by Special Educational Needs Reasons for absence by SEN Provision Statement of SEN 2008/09 School Action Plus 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 School Action 2008/09 No SEN 2009/10 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 47.5 9.1 1.0 0.5 0.2 5.4 0.2 3.5 13.6 80.9 48.6 9.4 0.6 0.5 0.2 4.9 0.3 3.3 13.4 81.2 46.3 5.5 1.1 0.5 0.4 4.5 0.1 4.7 9.7 72.8 46.6 5.7 0.7 0.5 0.4 3.8 0.1 4.3 9.9 72.1 54.9 5.1 1.8 0.6 0.4 6.1 0.2 2.0 7.2 78.2 55.5 5.2 1.1 0.6 0.4 5.1 0.2 1.8 7.8 77.6 60.8 5.5 1.8 1.3 0.2 9.2 0.2 0.7 6.5 86.3 61.2 5.6 1.1 1.3 0.1 8.0 0.2 0.6 7.7 85.9 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.0 1.0 14.7 2.5 19.1 1.1 1.0 14.5 2.2 18.8 1.4 1.7 19.5 4.6 27.2 1.6 1.7 20.7 3.9 27.9 1.9 1.4 14.4 4.0 21.8 2.2 1.5 15.2 3.6 22.4 2.1 0.9 7.8 2.9 13.7 2.4 0.9 8.3 2.5 14.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 4.41 0.84 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.50 0.02 0.32 1.26 0.11 7.63 4.35 0.84 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.02 0.30 1.20 0.10 7.36 4.44 0.53 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.43 0.01 0.45 0.93 0.05 7.02 4.27 0.53 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.35 0.01 0.39 0.91 0.02 6.62 4.21 0.39 0.14 0.05 0.03 0.47 0.01 0.15 0.55 0.03 6.03 4.07 0.38 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.37 0.01 0.13 0.57 0.02 5.72 3.37 0.31 0.10 0.07 0.01 0.51 0.01 0.04 0.36 0.03 4.80 3.27 0.30 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.43 0.01 0.03 0.41 0.02 4.61 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.09 0.09 1.37 0.23 0.02 1.80 0.10 0.09 1.30 0.20 0.02 1.70 0.13 0.16 1.87 0.44 0.02 2.62 0.14 0.16 1.89 0.36 0.01 2.57 0.15 0.11 1.10 0.31 0.01 1.68 0.16 0.11 1.11 0.26 0.01 1.65 0.11 0.05 0.43 0.16 0.00 0.76 0.13 0.05 0.44 0.13 0.01 0.76 Total Overall Absence 9.43 9.06 9.64 9.19 7.72 7.37 5.56 5.37 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 89 Table D.9: Reasons for absence by selected National Curriculum Year Groups Reasons for absence by National  Curriculum Year Group National Curriculum  Year 2 National Curriculum  Year 6 National Curriculum  Year 11 2008/09 2008/09 2008/09 2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 61.2 5.2 2.4 0.0 0.4 12.3 0.4 0.2 5.8 87.9 61.0 5.1 1.5 0.0 0.3 10.9 0.4 0.2 7.7 87.1 61.7 5.3 2.1 0.0 0.3 11.0 0.3 0.6 7.1 88.5 61.7 5.3 1.3 0.0 0.3 9.6 0.2 0.6 9.0 88.0 44.3 5.6 0.8 7.8 0.1 2.5 0.0 2.0 8.6 71.7 45.4 5.8 0.5 7.9 0.1 1.7 0.0 1.9 8.5 71.8 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 2.3 1.3 6.2 2.3 12.1 2.8 1.2 6.8 2.0 12.9 2.2 0.9 6.2 2.2 11.5 2.5 0.9 6.6 2.0 12.0 1.3 1.8 19.6 5.6 28.3 1.3 1.8 20.3 4.8 28.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.28 0.28 0.13 0.00 0.02 0.66 0.02 0.01 0.31 0.02 4.73 3.20 0.27 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.57 0.02 0.01 0.41 0.02 4.59 3.07 0.26 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.55 0.01 0.03 0.36 0.01 4.42 3.06 0.26 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.47 0.01 0.03 0.44 0.02 4.38 3.95 0.50 0.07 0.69 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.18 0.77 0.05 6.45 3.85 0.49 0.04 0.67 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.16 0.72 0.02 6.11 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.12 0.07 0.33 0.12 0.00 0.65 0.15 0.07 0.36 0.11 0.00 0.68 0.11 0.05 0.31 0.11 0.00 0.57 0.12 0.04 0.33 0.10 0.00 0.60 0.11 0.16 1.75 0.50 0.02 2.55 0.11 0.15 1.72 0.41 0.02 2.41 Total Overall Absence 5.38 5.27 5.00 4.97 8.99 8.52 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 90 Table D.10: Reasons for absence by English Language Status Reasons for absence by English as an  Additional Language English as an Additional  Language 2008/09 2009/10 English as First Language 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 49.1 5.0 10.4 0.6 0.0 7.6 1.0 0.9 6.3 80.9 51.2 5.1 6.2 0.6 0.0 6.5 0.9 0.9 8.6 80.1 59.0 5.7 0.3 1.2 0.3 8.1 0.1 1.6 7.4 83.6 59.1 5.8 0.2 1.1 0.3 6.9 0.1 1.4 8.2 83.2 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 3.7 0.9 10.6 3.9 19.1 4.2 0.9 11.2 3.6 19.9 1.6 1.2 10.5 3.2 16.4 1.8 1.2 11.1 2.7 16.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.17 0.32 0.67 0.04 0.00 0.49 0.07 0.06 0.41 0.04 5.27 3.07 0.31 0.37 0.04 0.00 0.39 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.02 4.83 3.65 0.35 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.50 0.01 0.10 0.46 0.03 5.20 3.56 0.35 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.42 0.01 0.09 0.49 0.02 5.02 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.24 0.06 0.68 0.25 0.01 1.24 0.25 0.05 0.67 0.21 0.01 1.20 0.10 0.07 0.65 0.20 0.00 1.02 0.11 0.07 0.67 0.16 0.01 1.02 Total Overall Absence 6.51 6.03 6.23 6.04 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 91 Table D.11: Reasons for absence by Free School Meal Eligibility Eligible for Free School  Meals Reasons for absence by Free School Meal  Eligibility 2008/09 2009/10 Not Eligible for Free  School Meals 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 51.1 5.0 2.5 0.3 0.3 4.1 0.2 2.3 8.3 73.9 51.7 5.1 1.4 0.3 0.2 3.6 0.1 2.1 8.7 73.2 59.6 5.8 1.4 1.3 0.2 9.2 0.2 1.2 7.0 86.0 60.1 5.9 0.9 1.3 0.2 7.9 0.2 1.1 8.1 85.8 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 1.6 1.8 18.0 4.7 26.1 1.8 1.8 19.0 4.2 26.8 2.0 0.9 8.2 2.8 14.0 2.3 0.9 8.5 2.4 14.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 4.61 0.45 0.22 0.03 0.02 0.37 0.02 0.21 0.75 0.04 6.72 4.42 0.43 0.12 0.03 0.02 0.30 0.01 0.18 0.74 0.02 6.28 3.39 0.33 0.08 0.07 0.01 0.52 0.01 0.07 0.40 0.03 4.92 3.30 0.32 0.05 0.07 0.01 0.44 0.01 0.06 0.44 0.02 4.73 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.14 0.16 1.63 0.43 0.01 2.37 0.15 0.16 1.63 0.36 0.01 2.30 0.12 0.05 0.47 0.16 0.00 0.80 0.13 0.05 0.47 0.13 0.00 0.78 Total Overall Absence 9.09 8.58 5.72 5.51 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 92 Table D.12: Reasons for absence by IDACI Placement Reasons for absence by IDACI Most Deprived IDACI  quartile 2008/09 2009/10 Second Most Deprived  IDACI Quartile 2008/09 2009/10 Least Deprived IDACI Half 2008/09 2009/10 DISTRIBUTION OF REASONS FOR ABSENCE Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Total Authorised Absence 52.2 4.9 3.4 0.4 0.2 5.3 0.3 1.8 7.4 75.9 53.3 5.0 2.0 0.4 0.2 4.6 0.3 1.8 8.1 75.5 58.2 5.5 1.5 0.8 0.2 7.3 0.2 1.6 7.2 82.4 59.1 5.7 0.8 0.9 0.2 6.6 0.2 1.4 8.0 83.0 62.2 6.3 0.6 1.8 0.3 10.5 0.2 1.0 6.8 89.6 62.4 6.3 0.4 1.7 0.3 9.0 0.2 0.9 8.1 89.3 Percentage of absent sessions due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Total Unauthorised Absence 2.0 1.3 16.3 4.4 24.1 2.3 1.4 16.9 3.9 24.5 2.0 1.2 10.9 3.5 17.6 2.2 1.2 10.8 2.9 17.0 1.8 0.9 5.5 2.2 10.4 2.1 0.9 5.9 1.9 10.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Illness (NOT medical or dental appointments) Medical/dental appointments Religious observance Study leave Traveller absence Agreed family holiday Agreed extended family holiday Excluded, no alternative provision Other authorised circumstances Unclassified (2) Total Authorised Absence 3.98 0.37 0.26 0.03 0.01 0.41 0.02 0.14 0.56 0.04 5.83 3.79 0.36 0.14 0.03 0.01 0.33 0.02 0.13 0.57 0.02 5.39 3.91 0.37 0.10 0.06 0.01 0.49 0.01 0.11 0.48 0.02 5.56 3.73 0.36 0.05 0.06 0.01 0.42 0.01 0.09 0.51 0.02 5.26 3.23 0.33 0.03 0.09 0.01 0.54 0.01 0.05 0.35 0.03 4.67 3.19 0.32 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.46 0.01 0.04 0.42 0.02 4.59 Percentage of possible sessions missed due to (1): Family holiday not agreed Arrived late Other unauthorised circumstances No reason yet Unclassified (2) Total Unauthorised Absence 0.15 0.10 1.24 0.34 0.01 1.85 0.16 0.10 1.20 0.28 0.01 1.75 0.13 0.08 0.74 0.23 0.01 1.19 0.14 0.08 0.68 0.18 0.01 1.08 0.09 0.05 0.29 0.12 0.00 0.54 0.11 0.04 0.30 0.10 0.00 0.55 Total Overall Absence 7.69 7.14 6.75 6.33 5.22 5.14 Total Overall Absence ABSENCE RATES BY REASON Source: National Pupil Database 93 Annex E: Contextual background of absentees This annex provides information on the sample sizes and lower and upper bounds to the 95% confidence intervals for the proportions reported from the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) in Chapter 3. The following tables are included in this annex: • Table E. 1 – Family composition (Chart 3.1) • Table E. 2 – Family NS-SEC class (Chart 3.2) • Table E. 3 – Family monthly income (Chart 3.3) • Table E. 4 – Parental involvement (Chart 3.4) • Table E. 5 – Parental aspirations for post 16 activity (Table 3.1) • Table E. 6 – Young persons post 16 intentions (Chart 3.5) • Table E. 7 – Feelings about school (Chart 3.6) • Table E. 8 – Feelings about lessons (Chart 3.7) • Table E. 9 – Feelings about marks (Chart 3.8) • Table E.10 – Experiences of bullying (Chart 3.9) • Table E.11 – Experiences of smoking cigarettes (Chart 3.10) • Table E.12 – Experiences of drinking alcohol (Chart 3.11) • Table E.13 – Experiences of risky behaviour (Table 3.2) 94 Table E.1: Family composition of PA and other pupils, 2006 Family composition Married couple Cohabiting couple Lone father Lone mother No parents in the household Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 810 137 49 574 24 50.8 8.6 3.1 36.0 1.5 48.4 7.2 2.2 33.6 0.9 53.3 10.0 3.9 38.3 2.1 5040 551 137 1262 45 71.6 7.8 1.9 17.9 0.6 70.6 7.2 1.6 17.0 0.4 72.7 8.5 2.3 18.8 0.8 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.2: Family’s current NS-SEC class, 2006 Family NS‐SEC class Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Higher Managerial and professional occupations Lower managerial and professional occupations Intermediate occupations Small employers and own account workers Lower supervisory and technical occupations Semi‐routine occupations Routine occupations Not currently working  83 257 98 70 166 186 203 459 5.5 16.9 6.4 4.6 10.9 12.2 13.3 30.2 4.3 15.0 5.2 3.5 9.4 10.6 11.6 27.9 6.6 18.7 7.7 5.6 12.5 13.9 15.0 32.5 886 1898 446 477 842 689 673 917 13.0 27.8 6.5 7.0 12.3 10.1 9.9 13.4 12.2 26.7 5.9 6.4 11.5 9.4 9.2 12.6 13.8 28.9 7.1 7.6 13.1 10.8 10.6 14.2 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.3: Total monthly income from work, benefits and anything else, 2006 Family income range Up to £432 £433 up to £866 £876 up to £1,299 £1,300 up to £1,732 £1,733 up to £2,166 £2,167 up to £2,599 £2,600 up to £3,032 £3,033 up to £3,466 £3,467 up to £3,899 £3,900 up to £4,332 £4,333 or more Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 71 257 257 168 145 130 93 55 41 39 86 4.6 16.6 16.6 10.8 9.3 8.4 6.0 3.6 2.7 2.5 5.6 3.5 14.7 14.7 9.3 7.9 7.0 4.8 2.6 1.9 1.7 4.4 5.6 18.4 18.4 12.4 10.8 9.7 7.2 4.5 3.5 3.3 6.7 124 462 690 676 646 707 596 458 356 388 1013 1.8 6.8 10.2 10.0 9.5 10.4 8.8 6.7 5.2 5.7 14.9 1.5 6.2 9.4 9.2 8.8 9.7 8.1 6.2 4.7 5.2 14.1 2.1 7.4 10.9 10.7 10.2 11.1 9.5 7.3 5.8 6.3 15.8 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.4: How involved parent personally feels in young person’s school life, 2006 Parental involvement Very involved Fairly involved Not very involved Not at all involved Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 423 673 368 117 26.6 42.3 23.1 7.4 24.5 39.9 21.1 6.1 28.8 44.7 25.2 8.6 1979 3451 1400 252 27.9 48.7 19.8 3.6 26.9 47.5 18.8 3.1 29.0 49.8 20.7 4.0 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 95 Table E.5: Post school activity parent want/will like their child to be involved in, 2006 Parental aspirations Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) What their main parent will like them to do Continue in full time education Start learning a trade / Get a place on a training course Start an apprenticeship Get a full‐time paid job (either as an employee or self‐employed Something else Don't know 1018 216 200 86 33 36 64.1 13.6 12.6 5.4 2.1 2.2 61.7 11.9 10.9 4.3 1.4 1.5 66.5 15.3 14.2 6.5 2.8 3.0 5877 406 511 138 70 86 82.9 5.7 7.2 1.9 1.0 1.2 82.0 5.2 6.6 1.6 0.8 1.0 83.8 6.3 7.8 2.3 1.2 1.5 What their main parent thinks they'll do Continue in full time education Start learning a trade / Get a place on a training course Start an apprenticeship Get a full‐time paid job (either as an employee or self‐employed Something else Don't know 892 196 154 200 64 84 56.1 12.3 9.7 12.6 4.0 5.3 53.7 10.7 8.2 10.9 3.0 4.2 58.5 13.9 11.2 14.2 5.0 6.4 5762 418 462 235 96 116 81.3 5.9 6.5 3.3 1.4 1.6 80.4 5.3 5.9 2.9 1.1 1.3 82.2 6.4 7.1 3.7 1.6 1.9 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.6: Young persons intentions after leaving compulsory education (year 11), 2006 Young persons post 16 intentions  Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Staying on in full‐time education Leaving full‐time education Don't know 927 358 44 69.7 26.9 3.3 67.3 24.5 2.4 72.2 29.3 4.3 5134 587 105 88.1 10.1 1.8 87.3 9.3 1.5 89.0 10.8 2.1 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.7: Feelings about schools, 2006 Feelings about school Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) I am happy when I am at school Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know 182 757 373 217 67 1597 11.4 47.4 23.4 13.6 4.2 100.0 9.9 45.0 21.3 11.9 3.2 13.0 49.9 25.5 15.2 5.2 1804 4323 571 206 144 7049 25.6 61.3 8.1 2.9 2.0 100.0 24.6 60.2 7.5 2.5 1.7 26.6 62.5 8.7 3.3 2.4 112 183 729 499 74 1597 7.0 11.5 45.7 31.2 4.6 100.0 5.8 9.9 43.2 29.0 3.6 8.3 13.0 48.1 33.5 5.7 126 267 2345 4157 154 7049 1.8 3.8 33.3 59.0 2.2 100.0 1.5 3.3 32.2 57.8 1.8 2.1 4.2 34.4 60.1 2.5 283 529 551 175 58 1597 17.7 33.2 34.5 11.0 3.6 100.0 15.9 30.8 32.2 9.5 2.7 19.6 35.5 36.8 12.5 4.6 405 1347 3283 1855 160 7049 5.7 19.1 46.6 26.3 2.3 100.0 5.2 18.2 45.4 25.3 1.9 6.3 20.0 47.7 27.3 2.6 268 732 464 84 49 16.8 45.8 29.1 5.3 3.1 14.9 43.4 26.8 4.2 2.2 18.6 48.3 31.3 6.4 3.9 1535 4000 1231 134 149 21.8 56.7 17.5 1.9 2.1 20.8 55.6 16.6 1.6 1.8 22.7 57.9 18.3 2.2 2.5 School is a waste of time for me Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Most of the time I don't want to go to school Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know I work as hard as I can in school Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 96 Table E.8: Feelings about lessons, 2006 Feelings about lessons Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) In a lesson, I often count the minutes till it ends Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know 342 658 486 66 45 1597 21.4 41.2 30.4 4.1 2.8 100.0 19.4 38.8 28.2 3.1 2.0 23.4 43.6 32.7 5.1 3.6 811 2709 2825 529 174 7049 11.5 38.4 40.1 7.5 2.5 100.0 10.8 37.3 38.9 6.9 2.1 12.3 39.6 41.2 8.1 2.8 332 666 477 53 69 1597 20.8 41.7 29.9 3.3 4.3 100.0 18.8 39.3 27.6 2.4 3.3 22.8 44.1 32.1 4.2 5.3 536 2403 3408 443 259 7049 7.6 34.1 48.3 6.3 3.7 100.0 7.0 33.0 47.2 5.7 3.2 8.2 35.2 49.5 6.8 4.1 93 204 897 323 80 1597 5.8 12.7 56.2 20.2 5.0 100.0 4.7 11.1 53.7 18.3 3.9 7.0 14.4 58.6 22.2 6.1 147 439 3881 2412 170 7049 2.1 6.2 55.1 34.2 2.4 100.0 1.8 5.7 53.9 33.1 2.0 2.4 6.8 56.2 35.3 2.8 105 786 497 116 92 6.6 49.2 31.1 7.3 5.8 5.4 46.8 28.9 6.0 4.6 7.8 51.7 33.4 8.5 6.9 654 4494 1411 175 316 9.3 63.7 20.0 2.5 4.5 8.6 62.6 19.1 2.1 4.0 9.9 64.9 21.0 2.8 5.0 I am bored in lessons Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know The work I do in lessons is a waste of time Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know The work I do in lessons is interesting to me Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.9: Feelings about marks, 2006 Feelings about marks Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) I get good marks for my work Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know 108 959 340 56 134 6.8 60.1 21.3 3.5 8.4 5.5 57.7 19.3 2.6 7.0 8.0 62.5 23.3 4.4 9.7 1222 4821 644 61 301 17.3 68.4 9.1 0.9 4.3 16.5 67.3 8.5 0.6 3.8 18.2 69.5 9.8 1.1 4.7 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.10: Experiences of different types of bullying within the last 12 months, 2006 Experiences of bullying Name calling Social Exclusion Extortion Threatened with violence Experienced violence Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 295 266 19 283 212 18.6 16.8 1.2 17.9 13.4 16.7 14.9 0.7 16.0 11.7 20.6 18.6 1.8 19.7 15.1 953 674 73 880 602 13.6 9.6 1.0 12.5 8.6 12.8 8.9 0.8 11.7 7.9 14.4 10.3 1.3 13.3 9.2 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 97 Table E.11: Experiences of smoking cigarettes, 2006 Experiences of smoking cigarettes Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Experimental/non‐active/unsure smoker I sometimes smoke cigarettes now but I don't smoke as  many as one a week I usually smoke between one and six cigarettes a week I usually smoke more than six cigarettes a week 112 7.1 5.8 8.3 393 5.6 5.1 56 3.5 2.6 4.4 300 4.3 3.8 6.2 4.8 70 526 4.4 33.3 3.4 31.0 5.4 35.6 184 685 2.6 9.8 2.3 9.1 3.0 10.5 Any experience of smoking cigarettes 763 48.3 45.9 50.8 1562 22.4 21.5 23.4 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.12: Experiences of drinking alcohol, 2006 Experiences of drinking alcohol Less often Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Once every couple of months Once a month Two or three times a month Once or twice a week Most days Don't know 214 208 152 290 317 78 33 13.5 13.1 9.6 18.3 20.1 4.9 2.1 11.9 11.5 8.2 16.4 18.1 3.9 1.4 15.2 14.8 11.1 20.2 22.0 6.0 2.8 877 959 730 1394 1071 99 126 12.5 13.7 10.4 19.9 15.3 1.4 1.8 11.8 12.9 9.7 19.0 14.5 1.1 1.5 13.3 14.5 11.2 20.9 16.2 1.7 2.1 Any experience with alcohol 1293 81.7 79.8 83.6 5256 75.2 74.2 76.2 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 Table E.13: Experiences of risky behaviour, 2006 Experiences of risky behaviour  Whether young person has graffitied on walls in the last year? Whether young person has vandalised public property in the last  year? Whether young person has shoplifted in the last year? Whether young person has taken part in fighting or public  disturbance in the last year? Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 135 8.5 7.2 9.9 254 3.6 3.2 206 12.9 11.3 14.6 418 5.9 5.4 4.0 6.5 180 11.3 9.8 12.9 417 5.9 5.4 6.5 404 25.6 23.4 27.7 878 12.5 11.7 13.3 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 3 98 Annex F: Post 16 outcomes for young people This annex provides information on the sample sizes and lower and upper bounds to the 95% confidence intervals for the proportions reported from the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE) in Chapter 5. The following tables are included in this annex: • Table F. 1 – Qualifications studied at age 18 (Chart 5.1) • Table F. 2 – Attendance at Russell Group University (Chart 5.2) • Table F. 3 – Higher education subjects studied (Chart 5.3) • Table F. 4 – Main activity of young people (Chart 5.4) • Table F. 5 – NEET activity (Chart 5.5) • Table F. 6 – Types temporary employment contract (Chart 5.6) • Table F. 7 – State-benefits claimed at age 18 (Chart 5.7) 99 Table F.1: Distribution of qualifications studied for by age 18, 2009 Qualifications studied at age 18  Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) First/Other Degree Other HE A Level GCSE Other 111 14 94 30 22 6.9 0.9 5.8 1.9 1.4 5.6 0.4 4.6 1.2 0.8 8.1 1.3 6.9 2.5 1.9 2123 110 578 83 53 29.7 1.5 8.1 1.2 0.7 28.7 1.3 7.5 0.9 0.5 30.8 1.8 8.7 1.4 0.9 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Table F.2: Attendance at a Russell Group University, 2009 Attendance at Russell Group University  Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Attending Russell Group Institution Other Higher Education Institution 10 119 7.9 90.8 3.3 85.9 12.5 95.8 525 1779 22.7 77.0 21.0 75.2 24.4 78.7 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Table F.3: Higher education subjects studied by young people, 2009 Higher education subjects studied  Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Medicine, dentistry and subjects allied to medicine Biological sciences, veterinary sciences, agriculture and  related subjects Mathematical, computer and physical sciences Engineering and technologies Architecture, building and planning Social studies Law Business and administrative studies Mass communications and documentation Languages, linguistics, classics and related subjects Creative arts and design Education 7 5.6 1.6 9.5 217 9.4 8.2 16 12.0 6.4 17.5 252 10.9 9.6 10.6 12.2 10 6 7 12 7 17 8 11 18 6 7.6 4.2 5.3 9.1 5.4 12.8 6.0 8.6 13.8 4.7 3.1 0.8 1.5 4.2 1.5 7.1 1.9 3.8 7.9 1.1 12.1 7.7 9.2 14.0 9.3 18.6 10.1 13.4 19.7 8.3 309 99 45 175 124 265 108 280 290 63 13.4 4.3 2.0 7.6 5.3 11.5 4.7 12.1 12.5 2.7 12.0 3.5 1.4 6.5 4.4 10.2 3.8 10.8 11.2 2.0 14.8 5.1 2.5 8.7 6.3 12.8 5.5 13.5 13.9 3.4 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Table F.4: Main activity of young people at the age of 18, 2009 Main activity Full‐time Education Employed With Training Employed Without Training Apprenticeship/training Unemployed/Inactive (NEET) Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 379 172 448 117 500 23.4 10.6 27.7 7.2 30.9 21.4 9.1 25.6 6.0 28.7 25.5 12.1 29.9 8.5 33.2 3345 821 1596 487 877 46.9 11.5 22.4 6.8 12.3 45.8 10.8 21.4 6.3 11.5 48.1 12.3 23.4 7.4 13.1 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 100 Table F.5: Activities of NEETs, 2009 NEET activity Looking for paid work Looking after family/home full‐time Something else Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 249 89 42 65.5 23.4 11.1 60.7 19.1 7.9 70.3 27.6 14.2 403 75 64 74.2 13.9 11.9 70.6 11.0 9.1 77.9 16.8 14.6 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Table F.6: Types of temporary employment contracts, 2009 Temporary employment contract Seasonal work Fixed term contract Agency temping Casual work Other Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 15 44 32 14 14 12.4 37.1 27.0 12.1 11.4 6.4 28.4 19.0 6.3 5.7 18.3 45.8 35.0 18.0 17.2 94 155 63 117 66 18.9 31.3 12.7 23.7 13.3 15.5 27.2 9.8 20.0 10.3 22.4 35.4 15.7 27.5 16.3 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 Table F.7: State-benefits claimed at age 18, 2009 Benefits claimed at age 18 Unemployment related benefits, or National Insurance Credits Income support (not as an unemployed person) Child benefit for your own children Housing Benefit or Council Tax Benefit Tax Credits Persistent Absentees Other Pupils Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) Weighted base Proportion  95% Confidence interval N (%) Upper limit (%) Lower limit (%) 15 68 21 119 143 0.9 4.2 1.3 7.3 8.8 0.5 3.2 0.7 6.1 7.4 1.4 5.2 1.9 8.6 10.2 72 159 65 132 144 1.0 2.2 0.9 1.8 2.0 0.8 1.9 0.7 1.5 1.7 1.2 2.6 1.1 2.2 2.3 Source: National Pupil Database & LSYPE, wave 6 101 Ref: DFR-RR171 ISBN: 978-1-78105-028-6 Department for Education November 2011