The government should consider reducing the range of A Levels on offer in order to make them more financially viable for providers.

This is one of the options layed out in a DfE research report which looked into the decision-making process behind A Level class sizes in 16 to 19 settings, and the impact this has on the cost of provision.

The report suggests that reducing the range of A level subjects on offer nationally, or providing a clearer indication of which A levels are deemed to be of “national importance” could help to make more A Levels financially sustainable for providers in the future.

Other options include: more active management of the A Level market, for example, imposing more stringent criteria for demonstrating the viability of A Level provision locally similar to area-based reviews; promoting collaboration between institutions; and creating a more managed, UCAS-style system of post-16 applications to better translate student applications into confirmed places.

The research found:

• The minimum, financially viable A Level class size was judged on average to be 11 students.  Delivering a large number of classes below this minimum financial threshold would ultimately affect whether A Level provision in the institution was affordable.
• Reduction in class sizes as students moved from 4 to 3 A levels was distributed unevenly across subjects – as was student drop outs - making planning difficult
• Providers deemed it essential to continue to run very small class sizes in minority subjects in order to retain existing students or attract new ones.  This was particularly acute for school sixth forms where there was little benefit in discontinuing an A Level subject if the teacher was still required to teach GCSE
• Responding to student choice played an important part in determining the breadth of the curriculum on offer
• Whilst many institutions made reference to financial considerations as part of their decision-making process around subject breadth and class size, finance was a determining factor for only around a third. Many providers did not routinely review the cost of delivering A Levels.