The announcement this week of a review of university funding, made by the Theresa May and her new education secretary, is a welcome one. Young people face a dizzying range of options when they leave school or college. They need to be confident that all the options available to them will deliver a good return on their time and money.

New research, published recently by the Department for Education, has revealed stark variation in the age-25 earnings yielded by different universities and different university courses. The research is enabled by a new dataset, which links information from the education system to tax records. This data enables us to see how individuals who make different educational choices fare in the labour market. Quite rightly, it has spurred a debate about the value offered by degrees in a context in which many people are concerned about the rising cost of university education.

In the past, data on earnings associated with different university courses has been limited to six months after graduation. As a result, it has been hard for young people, their families or their schools and colleges to make decisions informed by an understanding of longer-term earnings. The new data allows us to track, for the first time, the employment outcomes of young people for up to 10 years after their education. It reveals, for example, that both maths and economics are middle-ranking subjects in terms of salary immediately after graduation, but 10 years later are some of the best-rewarded degrees.

Linked data has also been used to start to understand the returns to apprenticeships and FE qualifications. Over time, it will allow comparison of different routes.

Important data

Of course, salaries are not everything. However, this data can provide an important plank in our understanding of what constitutes a good course, subject or educational institution. High-performing courses that have previously been overlooked can now be given the focus they deserve. Conversely, weaker courses are also identifiable. We can also see if young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are accessing the most high-performing courses.

The depth of the data means that, over time, it should be possible to understand how much value courses add. This should lead to a fairer attribution of value. It has led to a call for evidence-led policy, something that the prime minister and secretary of state’s announcements this week look set to address. It also raises the question of how this data can be used directly by young adults and as part of careers support.

The answer to this question is not straightforward. Our research has found that young people often feel overwhelmed by careers data available to them and instead make decisions driven by experience and instinct.

Much of the work of The Careers and Enterprise Company aims to help young people take control of their options. By connecting young people to employers and creating vivid, real-world experiences of work, we aspire to help young people visualise their future. This is often an important prelude to a young person making use of this sort of information.

Evidence from other industries points to some of the shortcomings of relying on data to drive changes in behaviour. For example, adults who are presented with cheaper electricity alternatives do not always switch.

There is also a risk that in data-led system of choice, those with the means and support to use the data will do disproportionately well - potentially entrenching inequalities.

Roles of educators

We should not rely on young people interpreting complex data to solve the problem of poorly performing courses. As well as helping young people access and make use of the data in its most usable possible form, there is an important role for schools and colleges to play.

Headteachers are focused on making sure their young people transition into post-school and post-college education. Often, however, they are not equipped with information to support this. Neet (not in education, employment or training) destinations are clearly poor, but it can be difficult to evaluate the relative value of alternative options.

The government’s careers strategy, published in December last year, requires all schools and colleges to have in place a “careers leader” by September, whose role will be to run a structured and comprehensive careers programme. A key role of this person should be to build understanding of this data, to help support young people in their choices.

A degree in economics has excellent age-25 earning, on average, but also a large range in outcomes. What drives these? Is it the academic institution? Is it personal fit and interest in the subject? Or is it the part of the country that the graduate ends up working in? Understanding the nuance in the data will be crucial to provide a personalised advice.

We need to support young people to make transitions. To do this, we need to ensure that all of the options facing them are of the highest possible quality. We also need to make sure that the best data is made available to young people, their parents, their schools and colleges. There is an opportunity to build on the strong approach found in the government’s recent careers strategy by creating a renewed focus on destinations and transitions.

The impact of this approach should be allowing young people to pursue opportunities that both strengthen their futures - and the growth of the economy.

Claudia Harris is chief executive of the Careers and Enterprise Company