Concerns over the impact of increasing funding pressures have long been voiced by colleges, but new evidence suggests that squeezed budgets are preventing students from switching or ditching A-level courses.
A survey of more than half of the country’s sixth-form colleges has identified a trend towards offering three A levels instead of four. And the majority of colleges say that they will either insist that all students who enrol in September continue with their original choice of subjects or take a “safety net” alternative, rather than allowing them to change A-level course or continue with just two subjects.
Some 61 per cent of colleges surveyed by the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association (SFCA) say that they will offer three subjects as standard for 2017-18, with only the most able students having the option of starting four subjects. There has also been an increase in colleges only offering three subjects in both years of study, with a corresponding decrease in those offering four subjects in the first year of sixth-form (see graphic, opposite).
Fifty-five per cent of colleges say they will not allow a student to drop one of their three subjects in the first term. A quarter (27 per cent) say that they plan to offer a “safety net” programme for those who decide to drop one A-level subject.
The trend has been prompted by funding pressures, as well as the decision to decouple AS levels from A levels. Bill Watkin, SFCA chief executive, says that the move from four to three subjects will result in “a curriculum that requires fewer classes, fewer resources and fewer teachers, and therefore a cost saving”.
“If students make an ill-judged choice at the start of Year 12 and subsequently want to drop a subject, those starting with three will be left with only two - unlikely to meet university entrance requirements,” he adds. “The result is that those who previously might have been able to drop a subject they didn’t like must now persevere with it for two years.”
The 16-19 sector has found itself under increasing financial pressure in recent years. In October, a survey by the SFCA revealed that 90 per cent of colleges were concerned or extremely concerned about their financial health, with two-thirds dropping some academic courses as a result.
The Association of Colleges is “concerned that this change is having an impact on student choice and could limit the breadth of their post-16 experience”, says Kim Clifford, associate director of sixth-form colleges.
Outgoing Ucas chief executive Mary Curnock Cook has concerns about the narrowing of the sixth-form curriculum if students are unable to change their A-level subject choices. “I think this probably will be problematic and will narrow the curriculum a bit, and mean that some students end up not doing as well as they might have done if they’d been able to drop a weaker subject,” she says.
Shrewsbury Sixth Form College reduced its A-level programme to three subjects in 2015. Principal James Staniforth says that decision had to be made because of financial pressures, but the college made sure that it offered alternative programmes deliverable in one year for learners who dropped a course to fall back on. “As long as you have the student outcome at the heart of what you are doing, it is fine,” he adds.
Brighton Hove and Sussex Sixth Form College also made the move to three subjects in 2015. Principal William Baldwin says that this was down to reduced funding and the switch to linear A levels, but it allowed the college to increase student numbers to offset the funding cuts.
“There is undoubtedly less room for students to drop subjects in this model and still leave college with three full qualifications, but we continue to offer a course change window at the start of the year,” he adds. “For students who do end up dropping a subject, we offer a ‘recovery’ AS or BTEC qualification in a limited set of subjects. We are even looking at the possibility of teaching an A level in a year, but this would be very limited, if at all.”
John Blake, head of education at the Policy Exchange thinktank, says that while he sees “no especial reason to be concerned” about a three-subject study programme, colleges should ensure that students have access to “high-quality qualifications appropriate to their aptitude and aspirations...even in an era of less generous funding”.
