« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 4 CONSULTATION ON A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF YOUTH TRANSITIONS
4.1 A key element of the options appraisal was to consider the needs of the Scottish Executive and those of the 'wider user group' in respect of longitudinal data on youth transitions and in this chapter we report on the responses of external stakeholders and of policy and analytical staff in the Scottish Government. As outlined in Chapter 1, we interviewed a range of external stakeholders including academics and a number of national and public bodies, drew on a prior internal information gathering exercise in the Scottish Government supplemented by two seminars with policy teams and analysts in the Schools and Lifelong Learning Directorates and discussion with the research advisory group.
4.2 As we noted in chapter one, most of those interviewed were aware of the SSLS but their knowledge of it varied widely. The consultation process brought the SSLS and its potential use to the attention of stakeholders, highlighting issues about its lack of visibility in recent years.
4.3 We now report on the key points arising from the consultation with external stakeholders. We do so without commenting on their responses, but consider them and the issues they raise later in relation to the options that we have developed. Also, as we pointed out in chapter one, as agreed with the Government, we have not weighted the views of stakeholders, and in any case, there was a large element of unanimity in their responses.
The responses of external stakeholders
The need for a longitudinal study
4.4 Stakeholders were asked if they thought that a longitudinal study of young people's transitions in Scotland is necessary. All of them responded positively and supported the funding of such a study. The caveat added by those who had more detailed knowledge of the SSLS was that a new study would have to deliver a more robust sample.
4.5 There were several common themes which emerged in respect of stakeholders' support for a longitudinal study. One was that now, more than ever, Scotland needs a longitudinal study to follow young people's transitions through an increasingly diverse education and training system and a more complex economic and social world. A second theme was that as youth transitions become more complicated, prolonged and differentiated, a longitudinal study is necessary to enable understanding of these transitions. There are two aspects to this: an understanding of the reasons behind individual young people's transitions - why did they make certain 'choices', and who and what influenced them? A second aspect of understanding transitions better is the need to gain a greater understanding of progression patterns and 'learning journeys'. Although there is considerable information about how many young people are in a particular status at any one time, stakeholders identified the lack of a continuous picture of individuals' movement through the system. A longitudinal study is necessary to identify and track individuals' transition pathways, including alternative and cross-sectoral routes.
Coverage
4.6 While the transitions of disadvantaged young people (including low attainers, those with low socio-economic status, and those not in education, training or employment or likely to be so) were a concern for all stakeholders, virtually all of them thought that it is essential that a longitudinal study includes all young people. Without this comprehensive coverage it would be impossible to compare the outcomes of different groups of young people and to assess whether inequalities are declining or not.
4.7 It was also seen as necessary to include all young people to enable a comparison of the alternative routes that are increasingly available to young people e.g. the outcomes of those who choose the work-based route via Modern Apprenticeships, compared with those who go into HE; a comparison of those who enter the labour market when they have achieved Higher National qualifications with those who continue on to a degree.
4.8 While entering higher education might be seen as a successful outcome, the point was made that in a time of mass higher education, the higher education sector and higher education student body is so differentiated that, on the one hand, it may no longer be appropriate to make a key distinction between those who are in higher education and those who are not and, on the other hand, there is an increasing need to look within higher education and examine the experiences and outcomes of different students.
4.9 Stakeholders thought that a future longitudinal study should continue to include the independent school sector as is currently the case in the SSLS. The Scottish Council of Independent Schools ( SCIS) strongly supported the inclusion of independent schools. Overall, it was felt that this is necessary to provide a full picture of education and the experience of young people in Scotland. It was also pointed out that it is important to have the capacity to make comparisons between publicly-funded and independent schools.
4.10 A number of stakeholders identified specific groups of interest to them, including young people from minority-ethnic backgrounds; young people with disabilities; and 'looked after' children. They hoped that a new longitudinal study would be designed both to identify these young people and also to provide sufficient numbers to enable meaningful analysis, something that is not possible using the SSLS.
Age
4.11 Currently the SSLS first surveys young people in the year after S4 (the end of compulsory education) when they are approximately age 16/17. The most recent survey design includes three subsequent sweeps at the ages of 18/19, 21/22 and 23/24. Only a minority of stakeholders were satisfied with the present starting point of 16/17, most thought that a new study should contact young people earlier when they are still in compulsory education. This view reflected, in part, the perceived need to assess and track the effect of the reforms of the compulsory schooling system and the growing curricular flexibility and differentiation within this stage on young people's later experiences and outcomes.
4.12 The desire for earlier contact with young people also reflected the recognition that to understand their later outcomes, it is necessary to gather contemporaneous data on their experiences, attitudes and expectations at an earlier stage.
4.13 Stakeholders' views were more mixed about the best timing for a survey within the compulsory stage. There was some interest in a survey trying to pick up on the transition from primary to secondary. A number of stakeholders noted that earlier contact with young people might encourage them to 'buy into' the study and contribute to better response rates to later sweeps.
4.14 Nearly all stakeholders thought that a new longitudinal study should continue until the young people were at least in their mid 20s in view of the more prolonged nature of youth transitions. But there was substantial support for a sweep beyond this at around the age of 27, 28 or 29, a point at which graduates would be more likely to have started to establish themselves in a career and to enable the study to pick up on those returning to education.
Data needs
4.15 It was not part of the remit of the options appraisal to consider questionnaire content in any detail but rather to explore with stakeholders their general data needs of a new longitudinal study. The SSLS currently collects information on young people's attainment in secondary education; their experience and views of secondary school; their educational, training and employment activities after leaving school (up to their mid 20s); and a variety of background information including ethnicity, parental education and social class, personal and family circumstances and housing tenure.
4.16 These were all areas identified by stakeholders as relevant to them although sometimes expressing the need for better data on particular areas, for example, in respect of additional support needs, government-supported training, and on young people in the labour market after 18/19.
4.17 They also identified a number of other areas for inclusion or which they thought should have much greater emphasis; this largely reflected the desire to gain a better understanding of young people's transitions. The aspects identified by stakeholders fall into several broad areas:
- The need for more data on young people's attitudes, motivations, aspirations and expectations. This was seen as critical to understanding their transitions, in particular, to enable examination of the interaction between attitudes etc and their movement between statuses. Related to this is information on sources of influence (both informal via family and friends and formal via career guidance interventions).
- The need for data on young people's wider achievement and 'soft skills', not just on their attainment of qualifications. The four capacities set out in a Curriculum for Excellence were mentioned specifically.
- The value of assessing aspects such as individual's self esteem, self efficacy and resilience.
- The need to gather data other than the strictly educational, training and employment aspects, to be able to understand transitions and outcomes, for example, young people's leisure activities, who they socialise with, family relationships.
- The need to ensure that activities are captured at sufficiently frequent intervals to be able to track individuals' routes, distinguish specific pathways and identify alternative and cross - sectoral learning routes.
- The ability to distinguish within the group of young people not in education, employment or training.
Contact with parents/carers
4.18 A number of stakeholders suggested that it would be valuable to collect data directly from young people's parents/carers on, for example, their involvement in their child's education and their aspirations for their child as well as information about their own education and employment and other data about the family.
Dissemination and use
4.19 Stakeholders felt strongly that much more attention and resource needs to be given to the marketing, dissemination and use of a new longitudinal study than has been the case with the SSLS, especially in more recent years. The publicising and marketing of a longitudinal study, arrangements for data analysis, reporting and dissemination of findings, and the availability of data for secondary analysis, were all areas that stakeholders believed need to be reviewed. This view was shared by those who had considerable knowledge of SSLS and those who were less familiar with it.
4.20 The current system of reporting, funded as part of the SSLS contract, was seen as inadequate and as not able to meet the needs of various user groups. The lack of funding for longitudinal analysis as part of the contract was noted as a specific gap since it has meant that one of the key potential benefits of SSLS has not been realised. The common view was that instead of long descriptive reports on a cross-sectional basis, it would be better to focus on the production of short summary briefings and perhaps issues papers for general dissemination. This should be combined with a process that would identify and fund more in-depth analysis of specific issues of interest to policy makers and stakeholders.
4.21 The necessity for a much more proactive and dynamic approach to the marketing of a longitudinal study and dissemination activities was suggested by stakeholders. The creation of a dedicated website for the study was a common suggestion and the examples of websites for other studies such as Growing Up in Scotland, the LSYPE and the British Household Panel Study were mentioned. It was also felt important that the Scottish Government (or whoever is responsible for the study) should be active in briefing the media and in feeding relevant findings through to the range of relevant groups and organisations.
4.22 There was support for the idea of staff, within or external to the Executive, who would be available to carry out analysis at the request of stakeholders. Several thought that some public bodies and voluntary organisations in Scotland might be willing to contribute to the funding of such a facility.
4.23 While stakeholders from academic backgrounds were most concerned about the need to facilitate the secondary analysis of survey data, interest in this was not confined to them. It was suggested that the best approach would be a website with easily understood and navigable data files along with good documentation and a library of key derived variables. It was again noted that a number of other studies have taken this approach.
4.24 Stakeholders thought that at a time when evidence-based policy and practice is a dominant model, a range of professionals should be made aware of the data, its potential to inform their policy and practice and that mechanisms should be established to educate them about how to use the findings and how to access the data directly. Several stakeholders commented on the approach that has been taken to publicising the Standard Tables and Charts ( STACS) data and its use to the teaching profession.
4.25 Stakeholders involved in the training of teachers and other professionals identified the potential value of having datasets from a longitudinal study to use in their teaching and for students to access.
4.26 Finally, a new name for the study would assist in publicising it and promoting its relevance to a range of organisations.
Management
4.27 Stakeholders with knowledge of SSLS commented on what they perceived as the lack of any real drive or impetus behind the study in recent years. Responsibility for SSLS has been shared between the former Scottish Executive Education Department and Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Department and no-one has had a full-time remit for it. As already described, the contract for SSLS has been limited, focussing on the collection of data and a descriptive report of each sweep. There was a strong feeling that for a new study to be successful new management arrangements are necessary, a central element of which would be allocating responsibility for the study to specific individuals or groups with a remit to develop and promote it.
4.28 The role of individuals or groups external to the Scottish Executive in the management and development of a new longitudinal study was raised, including some quite fundamental questions about the ownership and direction of a longitudinal study. Several stakeholders felt that the Scottish Executive does not have the critical mass of staff to support and develop a quantitative longitudinal study and that different models of management and governance should be explored. We consider this in chapter 8 in the context of the ESRC's model for the governance of longitudinal data.
4.29 In discussing the management of SSLS and any new study, stakeholders raised wider questions including the place of a study of youth transitions alongside the other surveys that the Scottish Executive funds, and suggested that it is timely for the Executive to develop an overall strategy for its longitudinal data.
The response of Scottish Government staff
4.30 The response of staff from policy teams and analysts in the Scottish Government was similar in many respects to that of the external stakeholders. As in the previous section, we outline the views expressed without commenting on them.
The need for a longitudinal study
4.31 Overall, there was interest in a longitudinal study that would track individuals' routes through different activities and statuses and enable a better understanding of young people's pathways and outcomes. In one of the seminars with the SG, for example, it was noted that in preparing the recent consultation on Lifelong Learning it had proven difficult to find information on individuals' 'learning journeys'. However, support for a longitudinal study was not unanimous; a minority of staff wondered whether their information needs could be met just as well from other data sources or from a different approach, for example, cross-sectional surveys. (See Chapter 2 for an outline of relative merits of longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches).
4.32 Attitudes, attitudinal change and the interaction with and impact on behaviours was another area identified by policy and analytical staff where a longitudinal study could provide valuable information. A longitudinal study could also provide evidence of the longer-term impacts of earlier policy initiatives and inputs on young people's transitions and outcomes, for example, a Curriculum for Excellence and policies to assist young people at risk of not participating in education, employment or training. Education, enterprise and lifelong learning, culture, sports, volunteering and rural affairs were all areas of policy where staff could identify significant benefits that a longitudinal study could bring to the development of their policies.
Data needs
4.33 Data needs centred on providing the Government with the capacity to evaluate the impact of its policies and interventions.
4.34 There was a demand for more data on young people's wider experiences at school (including in relation to the four CfE capacities), on their attitudes, aspirations and motivations, the guidance and support they had received at school and beyond, as well as data on wider aspects of their lives including participation in leisure, cultural and volunteering activities, on health and on housing and living arrangements. Better data on government-supported training and other training was identified as a need as was more data on finance and funding, especially the impact of different funding policies on young people's attitudes to, and participation, in education and training. There was interest in tracking the destinations and outcomes of young people who followed different post-school learning routes.
4.35 Policy and analytical staff identified certain groups of young people as being of particular policy interest, including those who are not in education, employment or training and sub-groups within this group; looked after children; young people with Additional Support Needs; those from socio-economic disadvantaged backgrounds; and young people from rural areas and their patterns of migration. For most of these groups, sample size is a key consideration. The recruitment of sufficient numbers of young people in disadvantaged or vulnerable groups and their retention during the study were seen as crucial aspects that a new study must deliver.
Age
4.36 There was consensus among policy and analytical staff that a new longitudinal study should contact young people at an earlier age and stage than happens under the current SSLS arrangements (the first sweep of SSLS is at 16/17). This view was shared across policy areas. The reasons given echoed those of the external stakeholders already reported above. While there was unanimity that a new study should start earlier, opinions differed on the most appropriate age and stage. Suggestions ranged from P7 to S3 with considerable support for two survey sweeps during the compulsory stage of schooling.
4.37 It was generally thought that respondents should be surveyed until at least their mid 20s if response rates could be maintained; there were more mixed views about a later sweep when respondents would be in their late 20s.
Coverage
4.38 There was more debate among policy and analytical staff than among external stakeholders about the coverage of a new study (ie should it include all young people or focus on specific groups?) But the general view was that while it is essential for a new study to provide the capacity to examine the transitions of disadvantaged and vulnerable young people, much of the information that is required is also needed for all young people. It would be impossible, for example, to assess the value of alternative learning pathways without a comparison with the more common routes. Also at a time when increasing proportions of young people gain formal qualifications, it is important to examine their outcomes and understand why some may make more successful transitions than others.
4.39 The question of the inclusion of independent schools in the sample was raised and the general view seemed to be that their inclusion is necessary to have a full understanding of Scottish education.
Contact with parents/carers
4.40 In common with some external stakeholders, there was support for surveying young people's parents/carers, at least in conjunction with the first survey sweep of the young people.
Dissemination and analysis
4.41 Policy and analytical staff made similar points to those of external stakeholders about the need for better and more active dissemination of a new longitudinal survey than is currently the case in respect of the SSLS. Concise briefings covering the findings and highlighting their policy relevance were suggested rather than longer descriptive reports of each sweep. A new name for the study would be required to reflect better the focus on transitions and the linkage between earlier schooling and later outcomes.
4.42 There was limited awareness of SSLS including of the secondary analysis of SSLS that has been carried out and the resulting publications. Staff suggested that a study website would be helpful including the provision of the facility to carry out analyses. In common with external stakeholders, there was also support for the idea of staff (whether internal or external) with expertise with the data to have a remit to undertake analyses as required by policy teams.
Management
4.43 It was felt that the division of responsibility between the former Scottish Executive Education Department and the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Department for the management of SSLS has not been helpful and has contributed to a lack of 'ownership'. But apart from the joint responsibility, another factor is that it has not been a central remit of the staff concerned.
Qualitative add-on projects
4.44 While policy teams identified the need for robust quantitative data on large representative samples, there was also interest in additional in-depth qualitative work with sub-groups who could be identified from the main study.
Implications of the consultation
4.45 The requirements of the Scottish Government and external stakeholders of a longitudinal study of young people's transitions have a range of implications for a new study.
4.46 The wish for more attitudinal questions and questions on wider aspects of young people's lives beyond education, training and employment requires some re-design of the questionnaire content. The re-design of questionnaire content is not part of the remit of this options appraisal but rather would be most appropriately considered if and when a study is commissioned.
4.47 A second requirement concerns better and more robust information on certain groups of young people. This requires changes to the design and administration of the study including the choice of sampling frame, sample selection, the other data that should be linked into the survey; and the administration of the survey. These are all issues that we have responded to in the development of the options.
4.48 Other requirements of the Scottish Government and stakeholders suggest the need for a new approach to the analysis of data and changes to the nature of the contract for the study. In particular, much more longitudinal analysis is necessary to track young people's transitions and examine the relationship between their early circumstances and experiences and their later outcomes. It is also clear that there needs to be a shift of emphasis away from a focus on data collection to one which considers the analysis, dissemination and use of the data as an equal part of the total process. New management arrangements that would enable the active development, promotion and utilisation of any new longitudinal study need also to be considered.
4.49 Clearly the longitudinal study needs to provide data that is comparable over time if it is to monitor trends in transition and to assess the impact of policy change. A further consideration is whether the data collected in Scotland should be comparable across the territories of the UK and with other countries to enable national policy-makers and researchers to understand Scotland's experience in the context of global trends and to 'benchmark' its performance against that of other countries.
« Previous | Contents | Next »