Most secondary schools do not prioritise poorer pupils for admission – study
Affluent parents have the resources to ‘buy admission to popular schools’ through the housing market, a report has suggested.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The majority of secondary schools in England do not prioritise poorer children in their admissions policies, a report has found.
Some families are “priced out” of oversubscribed schools due to higher property prices around the school as local pupils are often given priority, according to research by the University of Bristol.
Only a small minority of secondary schools prioritise pupils eligible for Pupil Premium support, which is linked to free school meals and used as a measure of disadvantage, when they are oversubscribed, the analysis has found.
It comes as hundreds of thousands of families across England are finding out what secondary school their child will be joining this autumn, on what is commonly known as National Offer Day.
Top-performing schools get to indirectly select pupils from affluent households in the vicinity, effectively freezing out those less fortunate and hindering social mobility
England’s school system has been put under pressure in recent years as a population bulge has been moving into secondary schools.
The report, which was funded by the Nuffield Foundation, suggests that using geographical location in school admissions policies can “establish or reinforce segregation” across neighbourhoods as more affluent parents have the resources to “buy admission to popular schools” through the housing market.
The majority of secondary schools in England are academies or free schools, which allows them to set their own admissions criteria for allocating places when oversubscribed, independent of the local authority.
Parents in some areas lack the required information to make informed school choices in the “complex system of multiple school types and diverse admissions arrangements”, the research suggested.
The analysis, which looks at the admissions arrangements across all secondary schools in England for entry in September 2020, found that just 5% of schools prioritised pupils eligible for Pupil Premium.
Grammar schools that use Pupil Premium eligibility as a criterion are no more socially inclusive than those that do not as the priority is conditional on achieving the required test score, the researchers said.
The report calls on the Department for Education to consult on whether the Pupil Premium criterion should be required in the School Admissions Code.
Apart from meeting legal obligations, having a sibling already at the school was the most common criterion used by oversubscribed schools when deciding how to allocate places, the analysis found.
Most (88%) secondary schools use some form of geographical criteria, such as a catchment area or priority by straight-line or travel distance, in entry rules.
Co-author Dr Ellen Greaves, who completed a PhD on the economics of school choice at the University of Bristol, said: “Picking pupils according to where they live can mean students from the poorest families are assigned to the least effective schools.
“Top-performing schools get to indirectly select pupils from affluent households in the vicinity, effectively freezing out those less fortunate and hindering social mobility.”
This research highlights the very real barrier that pupils from lower-income households face when applying for their secondary school place
Lead author Simon Burgess, professor of economics at the University of Bristol, said: “The report provides a much-needed comprehensive overview of how secondary schools are accepting pupils.
“Its findings raise important concerns about the chances of England successfully levelling up achievement and opportunity for children and young people from all social backgrounds.”
Ruth Maisey, programme head of education at Nuffield Foundation, said: “This research highlights the very real barrier that pupils from lower-income households face when applying for their secondary school place.
“Prioritising local pupils reinforces geographic inequalities by excluding those who can’t afford to live close to the top-performing schools.
“We hope this research encourages more schools to think creatively about using their admissions criteria to promote opportunity and fairer access.”
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Schools, trusts and local authorities already follow the Department for Education’s School Admissions Code when applying selection criteria.
“The problem with the current admissions system is that those who can afford higher property prices are more likely to be able to access oversubscribed schools – typically located in affluent areas and with Ofsted ratings of either good or outstanding.”