Some schools select the pupils that they
want to teach
A ban on interviews with parents will not be enough to stop schools
selecting pupils by stealth, according to a report published today. The
report, Natural Admissions - published by the education think-tank, IRIS,
lists all the tricks that primary schools (for pupils aged 5 -11) use to try to
"cherry-pick" the brightest pupils who will ensure they do well in league
tables.
All schools are listed by the results pupils achieve in external
examinations, and these lists are printed in the press. They are known as
League Tables. Many parents choose schools for their children on the
basis of the League Tables.
Schools are already using devious means - such as assessing parents' wealth when they visit
the premises, specifying expensive uniform providers and hinting at hoped-for donations to the
school fund.
The worst offenders, the report says, are voluntary aided church schools
which have more control over their admissions procedures. Local Education
Authority schools have little choice over the children that they must take. This
means that children with learning or behaviour problems are far more likely
to go to ordinary comprehensive schools, whereas other schools only take
clever and well-motivated students.
It comes just after the Education Secretary, Ruth Kelly, offered Labour rebel
MPs the compromise of a ban on school interviews in her forthcoming
Education Bill to soothe their fears over the prospect of selection.
Until the 1980s schools, only private schools run
as businesses and grammar schools in some
parts of the country could choose pupils.
This rule was relaxed by Margaret Thatcher’s
Conservative government so that some state
funded schools were able to choose parents,
and the Labour Party has not changed back.
First of the tricks schools use to choose middle
class parents, according to the report, is the
school visit - particularly in the case of a parent
switching schools mid-year because they have moved home.
The report says that some schools use the visit to select "pupils that
the school feels would benefit the school as well as the child ... by
varying the answer to the question 'do you have a place for my
child?' according to the quality of the child in question".
"If you turn up in a four-wheel drive, there is a vacancy," said Chris
Waterman, executive director of Confed - which represents local
authority heads of children's services, and author of the report. If you turn up with a pram with
three kids in it there's no chance.
"As well as interviews, it should be made clear that school visits can form part of the selection
procedure." Then there is the head who makes it clear that a contribution towards school
funds is expected from parents. Those who cannot afford it will be put off the school as "refusal
demands a certain determination in a parent unable to pay".
The cost of school uniforms can be off-putting - especially as many authorities have
abandoned 100 per cent grants for parents on family income supplement.
"Some schools choose to recommend, say, John Lewis rather than Tesco as the preferred
uniform supplier or choose a school uniform with a distinctive blazer rather than a stock colour
sweatshirt or pullover," it adds.
Charges for extra-curricular activities - such as music, art and craft activities
and cooking - can also persuade the least well-off to seek another school
to avoid embarrassment at not being able to afford them. Even details of
parent/teacher events can make the poorest families feel awkward about
them because they are too lavish.
"Add these elements together ... and it is all too apparent that free
(education) can mean quite expensive at the point of delivery," the report
argues. It says there is real evidence to support the theory that many
primary schools do not take in their fair share of children entitled to free
school meals - ie, from the poorest homes.
Figures for English primary schools show only 13.96 per cent of pupils at church voluntary aided
schools are on free school meals - compared with 18.96 per cent in their catchment areas. In
council-run community schools, the reverse is true with 20.36per cent of pupils on free school
meals - compared with 18.76 per cent in their catchment areas.
The report does not recommend a ban on school visits or charges but says that governors
should draw up a checklist to determine whether their schools use discreet forms of selection.
adapted from a story by Richard Garner, the Independent 13 February 2006
Discussion points: Make notes in your folders on the following questions
AO 1 questions
a. Why do some schools want to choose the children that they are willing to teach?
b. Which types of schools are able to choose students?
c. Which types of schools are not able to choose students?
d. Which types of pupils are rejected by some schools?
e. What tricks can schools use to make sure they only have to take students that they want?
AO 2 questions
a. Should schools be allowed to choose students?
b. Should parents be allowed to choose schools?