4 ) that were held by each learner . This is the primary measure of prior attainment used throughout this analysis . 43
6 . In designing this measure of prior attainment , we balanced the need for granularity with the risk of creating unique groups of learners which were too small when later being used for the matched counterfactual analysis . It is of course possible that the exact grade profile of two learners with the same number of grades A * to C ( or 9 to 4 ) will differ . Nonetheless , as the analysis in this section shows , this measure holds a strong relationship with application outcomes .
7 . Figure A1 below shows that the number of GCSEs at grades A * to C ( or 9 to 4 ) is very strongly related to the proportion of a cohort that applies to higher education .
8 . It also shows that this relationship is very similar for each year , but that in more recent cohorts , learners with more grades A * to C ( or 9 to 4 ) have been increasingly likely to apply to higher education , as previously shown in Table 2 .
9 . Although it was not an aim of the Uni Connect programme to raise attainment among participating learners , it is possible that it has indirectly had this effect for the two most recent cohorts of learners , whose Uni Connect engagement potentially began in school years 9 and 10 respectively .
43
Grade ‘ 4 ’, rather than ‘ 5 ’, was chosen as the equivalent of grade ‘ C ’, because this resulted in similar progression rates for learners with similar attainment in the earlier years in the time series .
49