The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 4 - THE IMPACT OF THE EMA

Introduction

4.1 The views of all stakeholders and young people involved in this research are used in this chapter to draw out common themes around the effects of the EMA at a local authority, establishment and pupil/student level.

4.2 However, the primary desired impact of the EMA is a positive influence on young people's choices and pathways and it is an exploration of this using the views of various stakeholders that this section addresses first.

Young People's Choices and Pathways

4.3 Chapter 3 explored the responses from young people about their decision making and influences for post-16 activity. This is further addressed with the perceptions of stakeholders in schools and colleges and summarised in this section.

4.4 Stakeholders, pupils and students strongly identified with two factors that heavily influenced young people's decision making processes. These were parental advice/ expectation and career or educational aspirations.

4.5 When young people had specific career aspirations or a university course to aim for then the decision making was generally informed by the subjects and grades they needed to achieve in order to pursue their preferred route. This was portrayed as the case for the majority of school pupils who chose to stay on.

4.6 Where parents offered encouragement to continuing their education it often sat alongside the desire to gain better qualifications, pursue a particular career and in most cases reflected the young person's educational ability.

4.7 Some young people recognised that they were not ready to leave school and teachers felt many pupils staying on primarily to delay decisions about their future. This was viewed as a positive in some cases as it provided them with time to decide on career choices whilst attaining higher qualifications. There were also some pupils that teachers felt benefited in ways not necessarily related to education by staying on - " there are some who are too immature to leave at 16" - and another year allowed them to develop some more personal skills that would better prepare them for life beyond school.

4.8 The stakeholders in schools also identified a number of less positive effects of this 'time filling'.

"I would argue that a lot of pupils stay on that shouldn't, as it tends to be a safe option for them".

4.9 For those pupils who they felt were not educationally progressing, often taking Intermediate 1s, they identified alternative routes at 16, like modern apprenticeships or other vocational training as perhaps more appropriate options.

"Sometimes I worry about them especially when they are doing Intermediate 1 level qualifications in 6 ^th year which will not enhance the qualifications that they previously have gained and then these kids are 17, almost 18, and they might miss out on an apprenticeship because employers are taking on the 16 year olds".

4.10 This concern that a handful of pupils were staying on when they would have benefited more from leaving school at 16 was held by the majority of stakeholders in schools.

4.11 Negative experiences of school meant for some that a job or college course were the only realistic options for them and several teachers acknowledged that there were some young people in their establishments that, "couldn't wait to leave". A college course or the workplace were sometimes the only options for those pupils who had a specific career in mind and where school did not offer the variety or relevant experience that the young person sought. Most of those young people who wanted to work in particular trades recognised and commented on this deciding factor.

4.12 In areas where there were less employment opportunities, limited access to apprenticeships or the absence of a nearby college, stakeholders pointed out that staying on at school was sometimes the only viable option. The financial opportunities that staying on at school or attending college presented - the EMA, no loss of existing state benefits - meant that for a small group of pupils, money was one of the key incentives

4.13 The influences and decision-making variables that have been discussed are generalised in the Figure 4.1 overleaf. The colour of the ovals depicts the different level of the influence, with the influences in the orange coloured ovals having the smallest impact.

Figure 4.1: Influences on Decision Making Post-16

4.14 The presence, number and relative importance of each influence will vary for pupil or student. Ascertaining patterns in choices and pathways is challenging - what appears to be true for one individual cannot be easily transferred to another. In general, the EMA alone does not appear to be a key influence. However, for a handful of learners, who could potentially be at risk of becoming NEET, it can make the choice of staying on in education a more attractive proposition.

The Effect of the EMA

4.15 Looking beyond the impact of the EMA on choices and pathways, all stakeholders and young people in receipt of the EMA could identify positive and some less positive effects of the EMA. These are summarised in the rest of this section.

Staying On Rates

4.16 In all 5 areas, the EA stakeholders did not identify any discernible difference in staying on figures since the introduction of the EMA, this is confirmed by the national statistics ²⁴ which show that S4 group staying on to S5 (post Christmas) has dropped slightly since the introduction of the EMA in August 2004. In 2003/4 64.2% of S4 stayed on to S5 and 2005/06 63.8% of pupils stayed on.

4.17 The school stakeholders gave different accounts. Some were quite clear that there had been no effect on their staying on figures but some schools had clearly experienced an increase in their 16+ roll but pointed out that the newer qualifications like Intermediate levels and Higher Stills could be aiding that growth by encouraging the less academic pupils to stay on. Some of the stakeholders questioned the value of pupils studying for Intermediate ones, and suggested that intermediate one, intended to be roughly equivalent to general level Standard Grade, was not a particularly productive way to spend time and that many would be better off taking an alternative EET route.

4.18 Even though the EA staying on figures had not increased, the SFC identified a slight reduction in the percentage of students aged 16-18 in college education over the EMA period. It had been assumed that this may be due to students staying on at school as a result of the EMA. Again this contrasts with the observations of some of the colleges who had experienced an increase in the enrolment of 16-18 year olds. This is likely to be a result of local fluctuations and initiatives, e.g. stronger links with schools and taster courses but not an overall increase nationally.

NEET Prevention Tool

4.19 As discussed in Chapter 1, at a national level the EMA is now viewed as a NEET prevention tool. However, at the EA and establishment level it is still considered and promoted as a form of financial assistance for some young people. As a result, EA and college stakeholders were not convinced that the EMA is helping to prevent young people from becoming NEET and school stakeholders felt that educational disengagement amongst the 'at risk of NEET' group starts much lower down the school. Some would have already become disengaged and left before the end of S4.

Attendance and Attainment

4.20 Stakeholders were confident about commenting on improved attendance and this was the most visible effect of the EMA in schools and colleges. This was supported by the comments made by some young people, covered in Chapter 3, that the EMA encouraged them to attend more regularly and improved their punctuality. One teacher said " at best it has motivated some pupils to occupy a seat a few more times" Some stakeholders suggested that where attendance had improved and pupils were in more lessons then they, could be learning more which could lead to improved results. However no school stakeholders stated that they believed that the EMA had led to increased attainment.

4.21 The college stakeholders were very positive about the retention and achievement effect of the EMA on students who were attending their establishments. They all recognised an improvement in retention figures which they attributed to the fortnightly payment of the allowance and the bonus payments in January that encouraged learners to return after Christmas.

4.22 Although most teachers felt that pupils in S5 and S6 "' would have stayed on anyway" and that "success at Higher level is to do with self-motivation, not money". There were mixed responses to the EMA's effect on pupils' effort and progress.

4.23 In schools that attached greater importance to progress and attendance within the conditions of their weekly and bonus payments, then there was anecdotal evidence of a positive effect. Progress in these cases did not relate to educational achievement but progress in terms of attitude, effort and behaviour in class. This was particularly evident in when the bonus was used by teachers to motivate and encourage pupils so that they did not risk the loss of the bonus payment " I try to remind them about the bonus when I have to pull them up on their attendance or behaviour in class, it normally does the trick".

Less Positive Effects of the EMA

4.24 The availability of the EMA sometimes encouraged a small group of pupils to stay on who were " taking Intermediate 1 or 2 when they would be better off out there doing a job or going to college". During the qualitative interviews young people commented on the presence of other pupils who were there " just to make up their hours and get the money" - and they felt that this small number could act as a distraction to the teacher or other pupils. Many stakeholders commented on presence of this small group of pupils in their school, as mentioned earlier in this Chapter, there was concern that the level of qualification was too low for this age group and a vocational course at college would have been more beneficial.

4.25 A handful of stakeholders, in schools where attendance was the main condition monitored, also commented that for young people accustomed to seeing their parents receiving benefits, the payment of the EMA could act to reinforce a 'benefits culture'. They felt that by just 'turning up', i.e. attending school but not being required to achieve specific outcomes like an educational qualification, it was similar to their parents 'signing on' and receiving a payment, "if you have been brought up in a house that is on benefits then they get paid and don't need to do anything".

4.26 Views from stakeholders were split about the need for stricter conditions attached to the EMA. In some schools, it was felt that the conditions were adequate or in fact too stringent, others felt that they needed to link more clearly to educational attainment or educational progress but recognised the difficulties in measuring this. Others viewed the EMA as simply a financial aid for some students and therefore attending school was the correct key measure and increased rigidity in learning agreements conditions could be self-defeating.

Young People's Interaction with School/College

4.27 Several teachers and pupils acknowledged that the increased interaction between particular members of staff about the EMA had led to regular communications and as result improved relationships with staff and pupils. The downside of the increased involvement was the less positive circumstances when a young person's payment was stopped. In schools this could lead to tensions with parents who complained or between the pupil and guidance teacher which impacted on the effect of their pastoral role with that young person. In colleges where the payment of EMAs sat within the student support unit, similar tensions could arise and affect the provision of other services that those members of staff could offer. For example if a student had their payments stopped and complained to the office then they could be more reluctant to go for assistance in relation to other matters, e.g. housing or debt.

4.28 There were a number of attendance strategies and policies in place across establishments or changes in leadership within a school and stakeholders recognised that in some cases it is impossible to accurately assess whether improvements have come about due to these or the EMA. For example, some schools and colleges had experienced improved attendance but this was alongside the introduction of a new attendance policy or the introduction of electronic registration system that recorded attendance for each period not just the start of the morning and afternoon sessions.

4.29 As the young people's and stakeholders interviews have highlighted, those school pupils who were not in receipt of the EMA were sometimes disgruntled by the perceived 'unfairness' of the system, particularly if they have good attendance and progress records and are holding down a part time job. In colleges the differences in the bursary and EMA weekly amounts and the bonus payments could lead to tension and confusion amongst the student body. Even though information was circulated to students about the financial support available, bursary students questioned the absence of bonus payments within their funding and EMA students queried the higher weekly rate for the bursary (£65) and the lower attendance requirements - 80% compared to 100% attendance for the EMA.

Further Benefits to Young People

4.30 In addition to the issues that have been identified earlier in the section, the EMA has other beneficial effects on pupils and students.

4.31 It was recognised by young people and stakeholders that the EMA acted as a bolster or support mechanism for some. This could be through providing a level of financial independence, removal of the need to seek part time work or in the form of a reward for continuing their education. The reduction in the need to find part time work was highlighted by comparing the data within the proformas, 55% of non- EMA recipients worked part time compared to 29% of EMA recipients. Whilst pupils and stakeholders considered this to be an advantage, in that they could spend more time studying, there was no acknowledgement of the benefits of part time working, in that it helps develop work-relate experience, personal and social skills.

4.32 Stakeholders recognised that the EMA taught young people about taking personal responsibility (connected to learning agreement issues) and that the EMA set up could be viewed as mirroring the work setting. Money was received in exchange for effort, paid directly in their bank accounts and individuals had to take timely actions to address their absences, e.g. self certificated sicknesses, in order to avoid negative consequences, " the EMA makes them a better person rather than a better student".

4.33 Figure 4.1 and 4.2 summarise the EMA effects at an individual level. The effects have been classed as positive and negative.

Figure 4.2: EMA Effect on Young People in Schools

Figure 4.3: EMA Effect on Young People in Colleges

Proposed Changes

4.34 Stakeholders and young people were invited to comment on the changes that they would like to see in relation to EMA process. The most consistent comment from school and EA stakeholders was that the EMA should be an entitlement, so that all pupils received it. In addition, common responses for changes included;

• discounting family income to take account of additional children
• bonus payments to all pupils in S5/S6
• a high profile national marketing campaign, similar to the English one advertised on television

4.35 Overall, young people, both EMA and non- EMA recipients, strongly felt that the EMA should be paid to all pupils. Some identified a lower flat rate for all or the extension of bonus payments to all pupils. Other suggestions included:

• the amount of EMA being related to type of qualification
• EMA paid in vouchers for items that would assist studying, e.g. book tokens, travel tickets
• changes in the timing and frequency of weekly payments and bonuses

Summary of Key Points

• There was a level of consistency in the responses of young people across the pre and post 16 age bands with regard to the decision making influences. Predominantly, parental advice/expectation along with career or HE aspirations were the key influencers. However these were always interconnected with other factors like educational ability, school experience and specific course requirements. Less influential, but still identifiable considerations were:
• uncertainty and indecision which led to maintaining the status quo
• readiness to move into a different learning or working environment
• availability of other options
• the EMA

• The post-16 pathways that young people pursue appear to be mainly influenced by:
• parental advice/encouragement
• educational ability
• specific vocational/career aspirations
• experience of school
• the desire to gain more qualifications

• It was recognised that the EMA was having both positive and negative effects on young people and the educational establishments. From a negative perspective the EMA could:
• be an administrative burden
• lead to tensions/difficulties between staff and young people or staff and parents
• result in a sense of unfairness amongst non-recipients
• encourage young people to stay on at school when alternative EET routes were more appropriate

• It has however had a number of other positive effects:
• it has led to an improvement in the attendance and punctuality of some young people
• in colleges the frequency and timing of EMA payments has helped to improve retention
• it has led to more interaction amongst staff and students/pupils
• the self reporting requirements of the EMA has increased the personal responsibility of young people
• greater financial independence amongst pupils
• the financial support it offered college students

• Stakeholders and young people felt that the EMA had created a sense of unfairness amongst recipients and non-recipients and a regular suggestion from participants was the extension of the EMA to all young people in post compulsory education
• The EMA was not an influential factor for the majority of young people and has not had a significant impact in preventing young people in Scotland from becoming NEET. This is due to a number of factors, it is not overtly used as a NEET prevention tool and many young people who would fall into this category are already disengaged and have left school or disillusioned with education per se.
• A minority of disengaged pupils were included in the S3/S4 group but most of those at risk of becoming NEET were already absenting themselves from school.
• EMAs seemed to help those who do not need an incentive to stay on.

« Previous | Contents | Next »