Official statistic: Key performance measure 5

Gap in degree outcomes (1sts or 2:1s) between disabled students and non-disabled students

1.3 percentage points

In 2019-20, there was a difference of 1.3 percentage points between the proportion of disabled and non-disabled students getting a 1st or 2:1


Learn more about the target for this measure

What does this show?

KPM 5 shows the percentage point gap between the proportions of disabled and non-disabled students receiving a 1st or a 2:1 over time.

Evidence shows that disabled students receive proportionately fewer 1sts and 2:1s than their non-disabled peers. This gap decreased by 1.2 percentage points between 2018-19 and 2019-20.

We have identified this attainment gap as a strategic priority.

Impact of coronavirus pandemic on assessments and classifications

Please note that as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, a number of providers made changes to assessment and classification arrangements to ensure students were not disadvantaged by the impact of the pandemic when it came to assessment in 2019-20.

Providers did not adopt a single approach. As a result, the impact of these changes will have varied from provider to provider.

It is not possible to determine the extent to which these actions by providers may have influenced the reduction in the size of KPM5 between 2018-19 and 2019-20.

Between 2018-19 and 2019-20, the attainment rate of disabled students increased 6.1 percentage points while the attainment rate of non-disabled students increased 5.0 percentage points.

This differential increase in attainment rates should not be interpreted as meaning disabled students specifically received preferential awarding.

Between 2018-19 and 2019-20, students with low tariff entry qualifications experienced the largest increase in attainment rate (there was a 7.3 percentage point increase in attainment rate between these years) while students with high tariff entry qualifications experienced the smallest increase (3.2 percentage point increase).

As can be seen above, disabled students are slightly more likely than non-disabled students to enter their degree with lower tariff entry qualifications.

Students with low tariff entry qualifications have lower attainment rates than high and medium tariff students so the potential for increase in attainment rate is larger.

Note entry qualification tariff group is based on IPTARGRP, see our access and participation technical documentation for more details. The data used to produce this chart can be found in the KPM 5 datafile. A similar chart related to changes in attainment and ethnicity can be found on our KPM 4 page.

Get the data

About the measure

The measure shows degree outcomes by disability (self-declared). Specifically, the measure shows the percentage point difference in the proportions of disabled and non-disabled students receiving a 1st or a 2:1 over time.

  • Frequency: Annual
  • Population: Full-time (or apprenticeship) undergraduate degree (first degree and degrees including a postgraduate component) graduates domiciled in the UK obtaining classified honours degrees from higher education providers in England
  • Data sources: Individual student data from HESA, and the Individualised Learner Record from ESFA
  • Available: March.

Updates

Update to include data for academic year 2019-20 and small change to population used to derive measure (apprenticeship students are now included in the population to fully align with our access and participation data dashboard definitions).

Update to include data for academic year 2018-19.

Update to include data for academic year 2017-18 and change to population used to derive measure (change from England domiciled graduates to UK domiciled graduates).

First publication.

About the target for this measure

Target: To eliminate the gap in degree outcomes (1sts or 2:1s) between disabled students and non-disabled students by 2024-25.

Feedback

If you have any queries about the statistics published as KPM 5, please contact William Rimington at [email protected].

If you have any queries about our overall approach or on individual measures, please contact Josh Fleming at [email protected].

Published 13 September 2018
Last updated 11 March 2021
11 March 2021
Annual update and change to population
15 February 2021
Availability changed to March
09 September 2020
Information on the target for this measure
02 April 2020
Annual update
21 March 2019
Annual update and change to population used

Describe your experience of using this website

Improve experience feedback
* *

Thank you for your feedback