Disadvantaged children in England are suffering ‘geographic exclusion’ from the best state schools because their families cannot afford to live near schools with the strongest exam results, according to new research from the University of Bristol.
The study found that very few state secondary schools give priority to pupils who qualify for free school meals, despite changes to the admissions code more than eight years ago that allowed them to do so. Only 42 of more than 3,000 comprehensive schools and academies have adopted such criteria, while over 80% of secondary schools use catchment areas or proximity to the school gates as the main way of allocating places when oversubscribed.
Ellen Greaves, one of the authors, said that top-performing schools effectively select pupils from affluent households in their vicinity, 'freezing out' less fortunate children and hindering social mobility. The researchers noted that disadvantaged and advantaged families tend to be concentrated geographically, so catchment areas inevitably favour wealthier areas.
More than 800,000 families across England will on Wednesday learn whether their child has been offered a place at their first-preference school. For those denied, the most common reason is proximity, meaning children who live closer have also applied. The study's lead author, Simon Burgess, said he was surprised so few schools had taken advantage of the 2014 rule change, given the financial incentives schools receive for enrolling pupils eligible for free school meals.
Ruth Maisey of the Nuffield Foundation, which funded the research, said prioritising local pupils reinforces geographic inequalities, while Paul Whiteman of the National Association of Head Teachers urged the government to treat school admissions as a priority for improving social mobility. The academics acknowledged a trade-off between fostering communities and promoting social mobility, but argued that current admissions practices are heavily weighted against poorer families.
