Memorandum submitted by John Fitz, Chris
Taylor and Stephen Gorard,
Cardiff University School of Social
Sciences
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1) Admission policies can be characterised as a mosaic
of practices. They represent local attempts to balance the sovereignty
of parental rights to choose with the statutory duty of LEAs to
provide places for all secondary students in their boundaries.
2) While the 1944 Education Act established the principle
of parental choice, the 1988 Education Reform Act and the subsequent
Greenwich judgement effectively meant that parents can express
a preference for any secondary school, regardless of LEA
boundaries.
3) The creation of self-governing schools (GM schools,
CTCs), alongside existing voluntary schools, all with control
over their own admission policies, expanded choice and diversity
but also made school choice more complex and more risky for parents.
Some parents found they could no longer obtain places in their
local secondary schools.
4) The School Standards and Framework Act 1998 attempted
to ease the complex administration of admission polices and address
parental concerns about access to local schools, but has not entirely
succeeded in doing so. Indeed, some LEAs report it has made their
task more difficult.
5) LEA guidance to parents on local admissions policies
'frame' and can also constrain parental choice in a variety of
ways. The high proportion of parents (about 90%) reportedly achieving
their first preference may therefore be misleading.
6) Appeals have risen dramatically. In the period
1993-99 the number of appeals more than doubled, from 24,581 to
60,454. The largest number of appeals occurred in the London area.
6) The prevalence of admissions via catchment areas
suggest they are attractive because they appear to be fair and
are relative easy to administer. The also lead to and consolidate
'selection by mortgage' and thus they can sustain and reproduce
the social stratification of secondary schools.
7) Extending diversity, via specialist schools, city
academies and language colleges, also expands the number of schools
with control over their own admissions polices. However, schools
that control their own intakes tend to segregate away from adjacent
maintained schools by recruiting more advanced intakes.
8) Banding, where schools are allocated roughly equal
shares of high , middle and low performing students, is an effective
strategy for the reduction of the social stratification of schools.
In LEAs where this occurs, levels of segregation or about half
of what would otherwise be expected.
9) Alternatives to current prevalent admissions polices
include:
a) Employing a single application form, and handling
all responses on the same day nationally would help prevent multiple
place allocation and wasted spaces, and it would reduce bureaucracy.
b) Given the limitation of residential segregation,
and its interaction with school segregation, incentives, such
as council-tax exemption, could be provided for high-attaining
primary pupils to attend designated secondary schools in poorer
areas (Schoon, 2001).
c) Schools in difficult areas could receive higher
levels of preferential funding.
d) Authorities might be encouraged to fund surplus
places, allowing popular schools to grow past their planned admissions
numbers, rather than an increasing number of appeals, and rationalise
their school provision through closures where necessary, rather
than having a larger number of schools tied to rigidly defined
residential areas.
e)The arrangements for free travel should be the
same across Local Education Authorities and between different
school types.
f) A return to all-school banding by ability in urban
areas, whereby children are tested before entry to secondary school
and each school is then constrained to admit students proportionately
across the ability range, would help to further decrease socio-economic
segregation.
1. Introduction
1.1 The current system for secondary school admissions
is the product of nearly a century of schooling - from the original
conception of mass schooling to the comprehensive era and now
to the current 'quasi-market' and the emphasis on 'diversity'
in education provision. Each phase of major reform to school provision
and organisation in the UK has brought about associated changes
in the dominant form of school admissions. However, there has
never been a single system of school admissions that has operated
in every school, or even across an individual region or Local
education authority) LEA. Instead, the history of school admissions
in England and Wales can be characterised as a complex mosaic
of practice and local interpretation. For example, while the comprehensive
era is associated with the use catchment areas in the allocation
of pupils to schools according to Dore and Flowerdew (1978) 27%
of LEAs during the 1970s operated a system of 'parental choice'.
By the early 1990s, the era of supposed 'parental choice', approximately
58% of English LEAs surveyed still allocated school places by
catchment area (Morris 1993). Furthermore, throughout both periods
of reform many schools and LEAs operated a 'feeder school' system
whereby the allocation of places to secondary schools was determined
by the primary school a child attended. Schools with powers to
recruit their own intakes further frustrate the idea of parents
freely choosing schools. The remaining 160 or so grammar schools
have retained the ability to select their intake on academic aptitude
since the origins of the tripartite education system, while more
recently, CTCs, technology and language schools and specialist
academies are also able to select a proportion of their students.
1.2 LEAs are pivotal in these discussions because
they remain the arena within which the majority of parents choose
maintained secondary schools for their children because they also
frame the kind of choices that parents can make via organisation
of secondary schools in their boundaries and because they have
a statutory obligation to provide sufficient places for secondary
pupils in their area. It is for that reason that we begin our
discussion with an overview of LEAs and their responsibilities
under successive pieces of legislation and how this relates to
the development of admission policies. Drawing on our research
which has looked at the impact of school choice policies over
a 14 year period (1989-2003 we will then discuss the implications
of some of the admissions policies found in operation (Fitz, Taylor
and Gorard 2002; Fitz, Gorard and Taylor, 2002; Taylor and Gorard
2002).
1.3 There is insufficient space here to describe
the methods used in this study of the impact of choice in England
and Wales. It commenced with analysis of the annual school census
returns for all secondary schools from 1989 to 2001 (supplemented
with figures from PISA). From these, around 80 Local Education
Authorities were selected for further consideration of their published
and reported admissions policies. From these, 23 LEAs were selected
in three contiguous areas for further intensive study, including
interviews with LEA officials, and then schools within these.
Representatives of all these bodies took part in taped interviews.
The datasets were analysed using spatial models, and a segregation
index, based on family poverty, ethnicity, first language, and
special educational needs (Gorard, Taylor and Fitz, 2003).
2. School admissions policies and the LEAs
2.1 Since the 1944 Education Act parents have been
able to express a preference for the school(s) they wish their
child(ren) to attend. That legislative right has been balanced
by the LEAs' statutory responsibility to provide places for all
children of compulsory school age, and to manage their resources
efficiently. Parents, historically, have been able to choose between
state and private education, between LEA and church schools, between
single sex and co-educational schools, and, in some areas, between
selective and non-selective schools, and between LEA comprehensive
and 'specialist schools', though not all parents have had the
same degree of choice. Nevertheless, some form of allocation of
children to school places has operated in LEAs in order for them
to fulfil their statutory obligations. The allocation procedures
have always varied across LEAs and they have shifted modes over
time. For example, from 1944 until the late 1960s tests at 11
plus distributed secondary school children between schools on
the basis of ability. With the development of all-ability comprehensive
schools, which about 92% of all state secondary students in England
and approximately 99% in Scotland and 98% Wales presently attend
(Benn and Chitty, 1996), allocation has featured geographical
proximity through school transport policies that generally encourage
families to use the nearest schools. While these allocative procedures
are very different in their educational values and in their consequences
for families and for students they can both be interpreted as
ways of balancing choice and the LEAs planning responsibilities.
The balance between these modes has been shaped to a considerable
degree by the political affiliation of the elected members making
up city, borough and county councils, with Conservatives most
closely associated with the retention of selective education.
Open enrolment
2.2 The 1988 Education Reform Act introduced the
principle of more open enrolment which required schools to admit
students up to their Planned Admission Number, which in effect
meant up to their physical capacity. LEAs were also required to
inform parents that that they could express a preference for a
school and confirmed their right to appeal against LEA allocation
decisions, a right first established in the 1980 Education Act.
In addition, the legislation enabled schools to opt out of LEA
control and become grant-maintained (GM) schools. These initiatives
were designed to increase parental choice between diverse kinds
of schools. Moreover, this legislation linked admissions to resources
via an age weighted per capita funding formula that determined
school budgets. GM schools controlled their own admissions and
could, and did, ignore existing LEA admissions principles and
procedures in pursuit of recruits (Fitz, Halpin and Power, 1993).
2.3 In some of our study areas, such as Brent, Gloucestershire,
Essex and Hillingdon where the majority, if not all, the secondary
schools 'opted out', LEAs were in effect left "minding the
store" through the task of monitoring, as they were still
required to do, whether new intakes of children had acquired secondary
school places. As one official told us, because of the large number
of GM and voluntary schools in the area, his LEA was composed
of 192 admissions authorities. Not only did multiple admissions
authorities diminish LEA capacity to match students to places,
the 1989 Greenwich judgement enabled parents to express a preference
for schools outside their own LEA and thereby made admissions
policy more complex to administer. Key beneficiaries of the judgement
were the GM and voluntary aided schools, who were given an unrestricted
capacity to expand their catchments.
2.4 While most LEAs persisted with catchment areas
as a primary means of allocation, there were visible hot spots,
notably in Bexley, Bromley, Barnet, and Hammersmith and Fulham
(among others) where local children were not obtaining entry into
local schools as places were now going to out-of-borough families.
These cases occurred most frequently in the London area where
the LEA size and population density meant that boundary-crossing
was relatively straightforward and cost effective. They also occurred
in areas which still have selective schools and in areas where
GM schools operated rigorous selection procedures, or both. Our
evidence suggests that the Funding Agency for School (FAS) did
not concern itself with admissions but only with the planning
and provision of places.
School Standards and Framework Act 1998
2.5 This admission loophole was addressed in the
School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (Sections 84 and 85) where
an incoming Labour government determined that the problem was
of such a scale that it was prepared to devote a part of its flagship
legislation in order to curtail GM schools autonomy in the recruitment
of students. We have discussed the Act in detail elsewhere (White
et al 1999) but primarily it placed a duty on the Secretary of
State to issue a Code of Practice on School Admissions. The subsequent
Codes published in England and Wales contained measures to design
to ease the admissions confusion. We deal with these briefly here
as these have been discussed more fully in previous research reports
(White et al 1999, White et al 2001).
2.6 The guidance contained in the Code sets out the
duties and responsibilities of LEAs, the governing bodies of grant-maintained
schools and appeals panels. It made similar prescriptions for
admissions authorities (whether individual schools or LEAs) who
must now publish their admissions arrangements for the benefit
of parents. In addition to the Code, the legislation introduced
three new elements into the schools admissions framework. Appeals
Panels replaced appeals committees, LEAs were required to
establish Admissions Forums to oversee and advise on local
admission arrangements and the legislation also introduced ministerially-appointed
Adjudicators with powers to consider and resolve admissions
disputes between parents and admission authorities.
2.7 In general, the legislation confirms the duty
of the LEA and other admissions authorities (foundation schools
and church bodies) to publish details about the characteristics
of their school(s) and their admissions procedures. It also requires
all admissions authorities within an LEA, and, in cases where
students cross borough boundaries, adjacent admission authorities,
to consult with each other about their admissions procedures.
2.8 In other papers we reported that legislation
is ambiguous in a number of key areas (White et al 1999, White
et al 2001). First, we noted that there still remains in place
the 1944 delicate balance between the sovereignty of admissions
authorities and the right for parents to express a preference,
laid down in the 1944 Act (White et al 1999). It remains the case
that admission authorities can exercise a good deal of control
over their admissions criteria, always provided these are published
and available to parents and that they do not overtly infringe
equal opportunities legislation. Second, measures to end the remaining
fully selective systems of education are very muted. While parents
may ballot for end to grammar schools, the Code at the same time
promotes admissions criteria which include partial selection,
based on specific aptitudes or abilities. This is in line with
Labour's agenda of modernising the comprehensive ideal but may
well also go against the grain of other desirable outcomes such
as balanced intakes. And on this last point, there is no overall
steer in that direction in the legislation or Code. Admissions
authorities are permitted to work directly against that principle
in their admissions arrangements and in the 'over-subscription'
criteria.
Admission policies
2.9 One crucial aspect of admissions authorities
- LEAs and individual schools - is the published guidance they
offer to parents about their admissions arrangements and about
their over-subscription criteria because this relates directly
questions about the proportion of parents who secure their first
choice school. While it may be the case that about 90% of parents
nationally (but just over 70% in London) are said to achieve their
first preference, this has to be placed in the context where admissions
authorities lay down a variety of markers that indicate to parent
where they are most likely to be successful in gaining entry to
a school. 'First preference' , we argue may well not reflect parents
'ideal choice' because first preference is mediated by their assessment
of the chances of getting into their version of a 'good school',
based on factors such as the LEAs admissions policy.
2.10 For example, it is not unusual for LEAs to indicate
both the size of secondary school in their areas, which were oversubscribed
and the extent to which over subscription occurred. It is left
to parent to assess the risk. LEAs also use the proximity criteria
to signal which school catchment area applied to what household
and then require parent to make a case in writing for an alternative
to be considered. Some parents are more able to do this than others,
and there are special difficulties here for those families whose
first language is not English. It would be fair to conclude that
many authorities published their intended allocation of schools
and waited for objections, with a null response treated as approval.
In the case of over-subscription in any school, a variety of discriminatory
criteria were used (including medical and social reasons).
2.11 LEAs have adopted a variety of application procedures
for children transferring to secondary school. Some use single
form applications, others multiple form applications where parents
are required to make a separate application to each school they
wish to be considered for. Some LEAs require parents to state
only one preferred school while others allow parents to nominate
several school and state their order of preference. The overriding
consideration here is that parents who state any kind of preference
will be give priority over those parents who may accept the 'default'
school but who do not state their preference. LEAs also set out
their over subscription criteria. The same criteria are broadly
used by all LEAs (parent/sibling connection, proximity, catchment
area/feeder primary school, first choice, age, single sex or ethos,
medical, social or special educational need). The order in which
these are applied, however, varies and has important effects.
Parental/sibling connection, for example, constrains choice and
can also ensure that high and low performing schools retain their
previous characters.
Can gauge levels of parental satisfaction with these
general arrangements by reference to the numbers of those who
appeal against the decision to allocate their child to a particular
school?
Appeals
2.12 Parents frustrated at not achieving entry to
their preferred secondary can lodge an appeal to the appeals panel
associated with an admissions authority. Appeals over school places
have risen dramatically since they were first introduced. In the
6 years between 1993 and 1999 the number of appeals lodged by
parents for secondary school places has more than doubled, from
24,581 (4.2% of all admissions) to 60,454 (9.6 of all admissions).
The numbers of successful appeals expressed again as a percentage
of all admissions has risen in the same period from 1.36% to 2.08%.
Not surprisingly, the number of appeals varies by LEA and by region,
with London recording the largest number of appeals. It also provides
an interesting illustration of our point about geographical variation.
2.13 Within London there would appear to be two particular
'hot-spots' for appeals and parental dissatisfaction: Enfield
and Westminster. In the case of Enfield over half of all admissions
end up in appeal. The most notable features of this authority
are the presence of grammar and Foundation schools. Westminster,
on the other hand, contains a large number of Voluntary-Aided
schools. It has been shown elsewhere that the number of appeals
is related to the combined effect of a large proportion of parents
choosing an alternative to their nearest school and the number
of schools that have autonomy in the organisation and design of
their admission arrangements (Taylor et al. 2002). Even
though the number of appeals lodged have generally increased over
this period several LEAs in London have actually seen a fall.
In particular, the number of appeals lodged has declined considerably
in Newham and Islington. Inversely the number of appeals lodged
has increased in Hillingdon, Kensington and Chelsea, Camden, Barking
and Dagenham, and Redbridge.
2.14 It would also appear that parents in London
are the least likely to get the decision overturned. In particular,
parents in Inner London are very unlikely to be successful in
their appeal. Whether this is a failing of the appeals process,
a failure of the school admissions system or actually an indication
that the original decision was the 'correct' one is unclear (see
Taylor et al. 2002.). However, if the number of appeals
upheld in the parents' favour is considered against the total
number of admissions then London would be similar to the rest
of the country.
2.15 While the rate of appeals can be interpreted
as an indicator of market awareness - i.e the growing propensity
of parents to act as consumers and thus attempt to 'exit' the
system via the appeals process - they more likely reflect other
underlying characteristics of the local educational system, namely
urbanisation, travel networks, population density and the presence
or absence of surplus places. In urban and metropolitan areas
for example a larger numbers of schools, close together and with
good transport networks mean that parents can realistically think
about alternative schools to those allocated by the LEA. It is
not surprising, therefore, that the rate of appeals is greater
in these areas than in rural ones. There are other factors that
contribute to the rates of appeals. Those LEAs which operate a
'first preference' system appear to have higher rates than those
which privilege catchment area allocation. The larger function
of appeals though is that they confirm and secure the parents'
rights to express preferences in a system which can be interpreted
as heavily bureaucratised.
An overview
2.16 Many of these earlier concerns that led to the
introduction of the 1998 School Standards and Framework Act and
the Code of Practice for School Admissions were isolated to London,
providing some evidence that the situation in London may have
been unique. Indeed, many rural local authorities outside London
believed that these legislative changes only applied to a number
of London Boroughs. One LEA officer explained "It does seem
a lot of it is aimed at solving problems in London that don't
exist in other parts of Britain" (Rural LEA Officer). Another
noted, "Just because there is a problem with four London
boroughs with different types of schools… why impose nationally
a system to deal with that, and it has been a total and utter
waste of money" (Rural LEA Officer)
2.17 However, reports of similar frustrations grew
across many parts of England and Wales throughout the 1990s, particularly
in urban areas. It is also worth noting that the introduction
of these new measures coincided with the phasing in of new unitary
(urban) authorities. Many such new local authorities took this
opportunity to alter their admission arrangements from their County
counterparts with great momentum (e.g. West Berkshire and City
of Bristol LEAs). Even a number of long-established LEAs were
quick to take the opportunity to address issues of inequality
and injustice in admissions with the Admissions Adjudicator (e.g.
Hertfordshire).
2.18 While the introduction of the 1998 Act and subsequent
Code may have been an attempt to address the frustrations and
organisational difficulties in London they have certainly been
of some benefit in other areas of England and Wales. However,
four years after the Government's attempt to intervene many fears
and concerns still remain, particularly in London. Some Local
authorities still have great difficulties in ensuring that they
find a school place for their children. One interviewee noted,
"People who are living 0.6 or 0.7 [miles], above half way
[of a mile], aren't getting in […] and consequently have
to travel 2 or 3 miles across the Borough to another school."
(Inner London LEA Admissions Officer). In another LEA' "there
are cases now you know where [school name] is full up in that
year and we are phoning around other authorities and trying to
get them in elsewhere." (Inner London Admissions Officer).
2.19 There is some indication that the interventions
of the Labour Government have only added to the problems that
local authorities have in the admissions process, even in London.
For example, when discussing the introduction of admission forums,
meant to alleviate tensions between the admission policies of
local authorities and schools, a typical response was "oh
that, the bureaucracy of it all?" (Inner London LEA Admissions
Officer). Many LEAs felt that they have always had good relationships
with schools with autonomy in their admissions, and had regularly
met informally with neighbouring LEAs. The new legislation simply
increased the administrative workload of LEAs without easing any
of the limitations and problems of the open enrolment system.
3. Admission policies: problems and prospects
3.1 In this section review briefly the admissions
policies and examine their effects. We also suggest alternatives
that might be considered. In devising admission policies LEAs,
under a statutory duty to be efficient, have to address on number
of value, demographic and school organisational issues in order
to decide what is appropriate in their situation. In our experience
these include:
a) achieving efficiency via reviews of the oversupply
of school places and related issues such as the consideration
of closure or amalgamation of schools and, matching the distribution
of secondary school to the geographical distribution of the secondary
school population
b) consideration of selective or non-selective
education
c) achieving balanced intakes thereby evening
out the social composition of schools and consequently school
performance across the borough
d) responding to demographic changes via the
mix of religiously affiliated schools and in Wales determining
the balance between English and Welsh language schools
e) reviewing arrangements such as all-through
11-18 schools or 11-16 plus 6th form colleges, encouraging
specialist schools and the maintenance of single sex schools.
f) Accommodating the existence of foundation
schools in the area
Against this background some of the policies LEAs
can adopt include:
Catchment areas
3.2 Deciding allocation by the proximity of family
residence to schools, so that each school has a designated catchment
area, is attractive because it is a transparent policy, seeming
equitable, offers the possibility of 'local school for local children'
and relatively straightforward to administer. These factors probably
account for its prevalence. However, this approach is not unproblematic.
For example, catchment areas, the most used form of allocating
places in comprehensive schools during the 1970s can lead to a
reinforcement of residential segregation and differentiation.
One effect , for example, are cases where there is the strong
social segregation of schools on peripheral housing estates from
other schools in the same LEA . It also leads to what is known
as 'selection by mortgage', the use of catchment areas in the
allocation of school places into popular schools has led to inflated
house prices since demand for housing in these areas increased.
In a recent study in Coventry it was estimated that the 'premium'
for house prices in the catchment areas of popular and high-performing
schools ranged between 15% and 19% (Leech and Campos 2000). This
is still relevant to the current admissions system since Coventry,
for example, continues to use designated areas in the allocation
of oversubscribed schools (see Taylor and Gorard 2001 for further
discussion on this). Where the housing market and the educational
is mutually reinforcing, LEAs wishing to move, say, to balanced
intakes in their schools will find it difficult to achieve. Pre-conditions
would include political will and changes to, or investment in,
low cost transport policies that would enable students to travel
more freely across the borough.
3.3 Catchment areas work in a number of ways, via
nominated feeder primary school, where attendance is automatically
linked to priority access to a designated secondary school, but
now more frequently via measured distances from the family home
to the nearest secondary schools. One overall effect however,
is that LEAs that employed catchment areas have levels of school
segregation (that is concentrations of socio-economically disadvantaged
students in particular schools) 20% higher than would be expected.
Guided parental preference
3.3 Hertfordshire typified admissions policies based
on the invitation to parents to nominate their preferred schools
but at the same time offers strong guidance on where they are
likely to be successful. In the case of community schools, families
in Hertfordshire are required to complete the Secondary Transfer
Form (STF) and name three preferred schools. Published admissions
criteria for all schools give parents a clear indication of which
schools they are most likely to gain admission. The LEA admission
brochure (Hertfordshire, 2000) provides parents with considerable
information about the number of applicants to all secondary schools,
postcode data of successful applicants to schools, vignettes of
families choosing schools, and fairly straight forward advice
on maximizing chances of obtaining a place at a preferred school.
It explicitly advises them to list their local school amongst
their preferences.
3.4 The current admissions rules, which apply to
oversubscribed LEA community and voluntary schools, prioritise
children with statements of special educational needs, children
with medical or social reasons for attending a particular school,
siblings in the school at the time of application, and geographical
proximity, determined by the shortest designated a route. In the
case of single sex schools, priority for secondary schools is
determined by postcode and by what is called the 'traditional
area', identified by proportions of families who have in the past
selected that school as their first choice.
3.5 Hertfordshire is distinctive in its proactive
employment of the School Standards and Framework Act. This arose
from the legacy of the former grant maintained schools and voluntary
schools creating their own admissions policies, and recruiting
out-of-county students. The result of this was that local families
were unable to obtain secondary school places in local schools.
Ofsted noted in its inspection report, for example, that in 1998
nearly 1000 children had not secured a place by February for the
coming academic year. As a result of its new co-ordinated admissions
arrangements this figure had fallen to just over 100 in the following
year, and most of these were in the south (Ofsted, 2000). Under
the new arrangements, foundation schools feed back to the LEA
which applicants they have admitted to their schools and this
then allows the LEA to inform parents of unsuccessful applicants
of alternative places. Hertfordshire has also vigorously challenged
foundation and voluntary schools admissions' policies before the
Schools Adjudicator. It has applied to the Adjudicator on 26 occasions
to seek changes to the admissions policies of foundation schools.
It succeeded in forcing them to add geographical proximity to
their admissions criteria, and, in some selective schools, force
those schools to admit fewer children by academic selection than
had previously been the case.
Diversity and selection
3.6 Although diversity has been achieved via policies
that have promoted different kinds of state secondary schools
since 1988 (inter alia, GM schools, CTCs, technology and language
schools, specialist colleges and city academies and through area
based interventions such as Education Action Zones), in policy
terms it is a viable option for LEAs to consider. It may be answer,
for example, to the seemingly intractable social stratification
of school within LEAs operating catchment areas. Our research
however suggests that this would displace the problem rather than
solve it. The evidence is that where individual schools have autonomy
over their own admissions policies - and this includes religiously
affiliated foundation, former GM foundation and specialist schools
- the trend is to segregate away from, or, take fewer socio-economically
disadvantaged students than adjacent schools. In 2000, for example,
16.5% of the total school intake was eligible for frees school
meals (FSM). For specialist schools the figure was 14.4%, though
specialist language schools it was 10.2%, and for selective schools
it was 2.1%. Segregation is high and is increasing however in
the great majority of LEAs that have persisted with selective
education.
3.7 The implications of this for the current expansion
of specialist and faith-based schools should be immediately apparent.
Whatever merits these schemes have (and the evidence for these
merits is far from conclusive), they also present a real danger
of creating greater socio-economic division in the education system.
However, the same argument applies to areas with relatively high
proportions of Foundation (opted out) schools (and to Welsh-medium
schools in Wales), even where these schools are not specialist,
faith-based or selective. What all of these minority school types
have in common is the ability to act as their own admission authorities,
and perhaps it is this, rather than their marketing identities,
that is the chief determinant of increased segregation in their
local areas. The presence of fee-paying schools is also related
to increasingly segregated Local Education Authorities. This may
be related to their admission arrangements, such as the use of
selection and the ability of some parents to express their commitment
to a particular religion. Diversity drives segregation by giving
people a reason other than perceived quality, rightly or wrongly,
to use a school other than their nearest. That is, diversification
of schooling can override fairness in the distribution of school
places.
3.8 If a policy of increased diversity is deemed
desirable in the U.K., and that is present government policy (Smithers
2001), then our analysis argues that it should be organized fairly.
If advocates of diversity and specialization are convinced that
this is best route to raising standards then in all fairness,
to test whether their policy options are the right ones, specialist
and the faith-based schools should not receive preferential funding.
Nor should they be allowed to select, or to use a different admissions
process to the schools with which they are in competition. Then
we will be able to see the strength of their advocates' arguments.
Two Local Education Authorities in our sub-sample have specialist
schools that are based on catchment areas just like the remaining
schools in the Local Education Authority (Gorard and Taylor 2001).
These specialist schools take approximately their fair share of
disadvantaged students, and they do not have superior public examination
results.
Banding
3.9 Banding involves the allocation of students so
that secondary schools each have a fair share able and less able
students as measured by primary school assessments. In the former
ILEA, for example, a large LEA that adopted this policy over a
considerable period of time, students were placed in three ability
bands, and theoretically, each secondary school admitted approximately
equal number of students in each band. We have no evidence of
the extent to which an equal spread of abilities was actually
achieved in that authority. However, the policy has the merit
of explicitly aiming at balanced intakes and thus aiming fro some
evenness in school performance. Our research suggests that LEAs
which operate some form of banding (e.g. Greenwich, Hackney, Lewisham
and Tower Hamlets) have levels of segregation running at half
of that which would be predicted. On this evidence banding would
appear to overcome the stratification of the schooling system
driven by residential segregation and catchment area policy.
4. Alternative Futures
4.1 Given that the genie is out of the bottle, it
is very likely that some measure of parental choice of school
will remain part of any future policy. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile
giving consideration to alternative to the admission policies
prevalent in the system. These include:
a) Employing a single application form, and handling
all responses on the same day nationally would help prevent multiple
place allocation and wasted spaces, and it would reduce bureaucracy.
b) Given the limitation of residential segregation,
and its interaction with school segregation, incentives, such
as council-tax exemption, could be provided for high-attaining
primary pupils to attend designated secondary schools in poorer
areas (Schoon, 2001).
c) Alternatively, schools in difficult areas could
receive higher levels of preferential funding. d)Authorities might
be encouraged to fund surplus places, allowing popular schools
to grow past their planned admissions numbers, rather than an
increasing number of appeals, and rationalise their school provision
through closures where necessary, rather than having a larger
number of schools tied to rigidly defined residential areas.
e)The arrangements for free travel should be the
same across Local Education Authorities and between different
school types.
f) A return to all-school banding by ability in urban
areas, whereby children are tested before entry to secondary school
and each school is then constrained to admit students proportionately
across the ability range, would help to further decrease socio-economic
segregation.
References
Benn, C. and Chitty, C. (1996) Thirty Years On,
London, David Fulton,)
Dore, C. and Flowerdew, R. (1981) Allocation procedures
and the social composition of secondary schools, Manchester
Geographer, New Series 2, 1, 47-55
Fitz, J. Halpin, D. and Power, S. (1993) Grant
Maintained Schools: Education in the marketplace (Kogan Page:
London)
Fitz, J., Gorard, S. and Taylor, C. (2001) School
admissions after the School Standards and Framework Act: bringing
the LEAs back in? Oxford Review of Education, 28, 2-3,
373-393
Fitz, J., Taylor, C. and Gorard, S. (2002) Local
education authorities and the regulation of educational markets:
four case studies, Research Papers in Education, 17, 2,
125-46
Gorard, S. and Taylor, C. (2001) Specialist schools
in England: track record and future prospect, School Leadership
and Management, 21, 4, 365-381
Gorard, S., Taylor, C. and Fitz, J. (2003) Schools,
Markets and Choice Policies, London, RoutledgeFalmer,.
Leech, D. and Campos, E. (2000) Is comprehensive
education really free? A study of the effects of secondary school
admissions policies on house prices, University of Warwick
Economic Research Paper 581
Morris, R. (1993) Choice of School: A survey 1992-93
London, Association of Metropolitan Authorities
Schoon, N. (2001) Making the best of the worst, Times
Educational Supplement, 5/10/01, p.15
Smithers, R. (2001) Church plan for 20 new schools,
Guardian, 15/6/01
Taylor, C., Gorard, S. and Fitz, J. (2000) A re-examination
of segregation indices in terms of compositional invariance, Social
Research Update, 30, 1-4
Taylor, C. and Gorard, S. (2001) The role of residence
in school segregation: placing the impact of parental choice in
perspective, Environment and Planning A, 33, 1829-1852
Taylor, C., Gorard, S. and Fitz, J. (2002) Market
frustration? Admission appeals in the UK education market, Educational
Management and Administration, 30, 3, 243-260
Taylor, C., Gorard, S. and Fitz, J. (2003) The modifiable
areal unit problem: Segregation between schools and levels of
analysis, International Journal of Social Research Methodology,
16, 1
White, P., Gorard, S., Fitz, J. and Taylor, C. (2001)
Regional and local differences in admission arrangements for schools,
Oxford Review of Education, 27, 3, 317-337
10 September 2003
|
