Read on Twitter
1/6. I'm not a lawyer but I understand it's possible for DFE to treat different age groups differently in its education funding policies. Generally best to have an objective justification https://twitter.com/PeterMarsh_PMC/status/1273908572355727361
2/6. Give the absence of research on needs/costs for different age groups, it's hard to justify the variations in the current system. Education spending by year group rises to a peak at age 15/16 then falls - by at least 20% from Year 11 to 12. Drops further at 18 ("Year 14")
3/6. There's also no justification from DfE for the various differences in funding of institutions. A couple of years ago I counted up 21 ways in which DFE funded schools better than colleges. Missed a few so there were probably actually 23. Today's announcement makes it 24
4/6. Some of the funding differences are justifiable but others involve a department propping up less efficient modes of delivery (school sixth forms) which, on the whole, focus more on the top half by family income
5/6. Pupil premium stops at 16; only 25% in the PP group stay in school sixth forms (compared to 40% for all pupils). Only 35% of those on PP at secondary reach Level 3 by age 18. That was the situation pre-crisis
6/6. So a sensible next step for DFE to level up opportunities and replace lost learning time is a plan for FE to supplement today's school catch up plan lhttps://www.aoc.co.uk/news/avoid-the-mistakes-past-recessions-government-should-focus-skills-get-the-most-risk-764000-people
