Free schools in England: choice, admissions and social segregation

273 Pages·2016·2.81 MB·English

by  Rebecca Morris

FREE SCHOOLS IN ENGLAND: CHOICE,
ADMISSIONS AND SOCIAL
SEGREGATION

By

REBECCA MORRIS

A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
School of Education
University of Birmingham
February 2016
University of Birmingham Research Archive

e-theses repository

This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third
parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect
of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or
as modified by any successor legislation.

Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in
accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further
distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission
of the copyright holder.
ABSTRACT

This study examines the operation of school choice in the context of Free Schools in England. It
focuses on three different aspects, each related to exploring the Free Schools policy from a social
justice and equity perspective. The first of these looks at the admissions arrangements of
secondary Free Schools, and considers the extent to which they have the potential to impact local
patterns of social segregation between schools. Second, the reasons and strategies that parents
reported when choosing a Free School are explored. Finally, the study explores the outcomes in
relation to student composition. The study as a whole takes a multi-method approach, using
Annual School Census data, parent questionnaires and interviews and a documentary analysis of
admissions policies.

The findings show a complex picture, reflecting the heterogeneous and diverse nature of Free
Schools. Disadvantaged pupils are under-represented in a majority of Free Schools, but not in all.
The admissions policies also suggest that the majority of Free Schools are using similar methods
for allocating places as those used by other schools in their area. A small number, however, are
seeking to use more equitable methods such as banding or random assignment. Parents that had
chosen the Free Schools tended to report looking for similar features but had taken different
routes and encountered varying circumstances during the decision-making process. Many were
attracted to the Free School by its promise of quality and used a range of proxy features to
determine this, including factors relating to the social composition of the Free School,
comparisons with other school types and a focus on a traditional approach to schooling.
Recommendations for how the Free Schools policy could be used to encourage equity of access
and opportunity are included at the end of the study. These include potential changes to school
admissions procedures and continuing to encourage wider access to information about schools. In
a number of instances though it is suggested that rather than simply focusing on particular types of
school, policymakers should seek to implement these suggestions on a national scale if they are
interested in making the ‘choice’ process fairer for all.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research would not have been possible without the three-year studentship that I received
from the School of Education at the University of Birmingham. I will always be very grateful
for this support.

I would also like to warmly thank both of my supervisors: Professor Peter Davies at the
University of Birmingham and Professor Stephen Gorard at Durham University. It has been a
real privilege to work with such enthusiastic, experienced and committed researchers and I am
grateful for the support, motivation and valuable critique that has helped me to complete this
project.

A number of schools kindly agreed to participate in this study; I appreciate their willingness
to be involved and thank the staff who supported my data collection and the many parents that
kindly volunteered to participate.

I would like to thank Dr Kay Fuller (now at the University of Nottingham) for first
encouraging me to consider applying for a PhD. I am also grateful to friends and colleagues
within the School of Education and within the local schools where I have worked who have
provided support and encouragement at numerous points throughout this study.

I have been lucky enough to share my time at the University of Birmingham with a number of
other postgraduate researchers. Many have become good friends and I am grateful for their
interest in my work and their comments and suggestions on how to improve it. Special thanks
here go to Tom Perry who has been an excellent PhD companion, always willing to discuss
and debate ideas, and always a source of humour and reassurance when it was most needed.

Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support. And to Matt, for always
making things seem possible.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1 Page
Introduction 1
1.1 Statement of purpose
1.2 Significance of the study
1.3 Research questions
1.4 Overview of design and methods
1.5 Theoretical framework
1.6 Scope of the study and limitations
1.7 Structure of the thesis

Chapter 2
Policy Context 11
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Conservative government schooling reforms (1979-1997)
2.3 The New Labour Years (1997-2010)
2.3.1 Changes and continuation of Conservative policy
2.3.2 Admissions and allocation procedures
2.3.3 The Learning and Skills Act 2000: introduction of the first
academies
2.4 The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition and the expansion of the
academies programme (2010-present)
2.4.1 Introduction of converter academies
2.4.2 Free Schools

Chapter 3
Free Schools: a theoretical framework 23
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Monopoly public schooling
3.3 The market model and ‘quasi-markets’
3.4 Choice and diversity for its own sake
3.5 Competition, standards and freedom of entry and exit
3.6 School autonomy, choice and responsiveness
3.7 Quasi-market reforms, choice and equity
3.7.1 Improving equity through choice and diversity
3.7.2 Choice, inequity and stratification
3.8 Conclusion

Chapter 4
Social composition, parental choice and admissions: 41
the research literature
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The social composition of schools
4.2.1 Student composition and school type in England
4.2.2 School composition and international policy contexts
4.2.3 Segregation
4.3 School choice and the role of the parent
4.3.1 Who chooses schools?
4.3.2 When does the choice process begin?
4.3.3 Identifying performance: formal information
4.3.4 Informal information about schools
4.3.5 Different ‘types’ of chooser
4.3.6 What are parents looking for in schools?
4.3.7 Does social background influence school choice?
4.3.8 Gaining places
4.4 Choice and the role of the admissions process
4.4.1 Changes to admissions policy and legislation: 1998-2014
4.4.2 How do schools allocate their places?
4.4.3 Admissions, allocation procedures and equity
4.4.4 Autonomous schools and admissions
4.4.5 The impact of recent changes to policy and legislation
4.5 Conclusion

Chapter 5
Research Design and Methods 80
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Research questions and strategy
5.3 Research design
5.3.1 Intervention and sequence of data collection
5.3.2 Identification of cases and allocation to groups
5.4 Methods
5.4.1 Combined methods research in this project
5.4.2 Secondary data
5.4.3 Documentary data
5.4.4 Parent survey
5.4.5 The interviews
5.5 Ethical considerations

Chapter 6
Prioritising places: the admissions criteria of secondary 108
Free Schools
6.1 Use of oversubscription criteria in admissions policies
6.1.1 Number of criteria used
6.1.2 Frequency of criteria use
6.1.3 Ranking of oversubscription criteria
6.2 Allocation methods and oversubscription criteria
6.2.1 Priority for SEN and Looked After children
6.2.2 Criteria relating to ability or aptitude
6.2.3 Criteria relating to medical and/or social needs
6.2.4 Criteria relating to children of founders or current staff
6.2.5 Faith criteria
6.2.6 Geographical criteria
6.2.7 Feeder schools
6.2.8 Pupil Premium
6.2.9 Random assignment
6.3 Discussion
6.4 Conclusion

Chapter 7
Choosing a Free School: reasons, strategies and the role 135
of parents
7.1 What were Free School parents looking for?
7.1.1 Academic quality and performance
7.1.2 Academic quality and social distinction
7.1.3 Personalisation and holistic education
7.1.4 Convenience
7.2 Information and choice strategies
7.2.1 Information used during the choice process
7.2.2 Experience of the choice process
7.2.3 Three ‘types’ of chooser
7.3 Discussion
7.3.1 Parent choice and the aims of the Free Schools policy
7.3.2 Free School choice: more of the same?
7.4 Conclusion

Chapter 8
Free Schools and disadvantaged intakes 181
8.1 Free Schools and disadvantaged intakes in 2015
8.2 Free School intakes over time
8.2.1 Wave 1 Free Schools
8.2.2 Wave 2 Free Schools
8.2.3 Wave 3 Free Schools
8.3 Case study schools
8.3.1 Schools that are under-representing FSM children
8.3.2 Schools that are moderately representing FSM children
8.3.3 Schools that are over-representing FSM children
8.4 Discussion
8.5 Conclusion

Chapter 9
Conclusions and implications of the findings 214
9.1 Summary of main findings: a response to the research questions
9.1.1 Research Question 1: What allocation methods are Free Schools
choosing to use in order to prioritise their available places?
9.1.2 Research Question 2: Why (and how) do parents choose a newly-
opened Free Schools for their child?
9.1.3 Research Question 3: Are Free Schools taking an ‘equal share’ of
socially disadvantaged pupils?
9.2 Limitations of the study
9.3 Implications for policy
9.4 Implications for research
9.4.1 A holistic approach to policy evaluation
9.4.2 A new context for school choice research
9.4.3 Gaining wider access to the views of parents
9.4.4 Parents as ‘providers’ and ‘consumers’
9.5 Final thoughts

References

Appendices
LIST OF TABLES

Table Number
Table 1.1 Research questions and data collection methods
Table 2.1 Number of sponsored and converter academies open in England
Table 2.2 Number of Free Schools opened each year
Table 4.1 Mainstream state-funded schools in England by status and religious character,
September 2015
Table 4.2 The number and proportion of schools and pupils by religious character (in
England)
Table 6.1 Number of oversubscription criteria used by Free Schools and LAs
Table 6.2 Oversubscription criteria used by secondary Free Schools
Table 7.1 Percentage of parents reporting each factor as ‘very important’
Table 7.2 Percentage of parents who reported convenience factors as ‘important’ or ‘very
important’
Table 7.3 Percentage of parents reporting sources of information as ‘important’ or ‘very
important’
Table 7.4 Parents’ views of the application process
Table 8.1 Range of Free School FSM percentages for each wave
Table 8.2 Representation of FSM children in mainstream Free Schools by school phase
(age)
Table 8.3 Percentage of FSM-eligible pupils at each Wave 1 Free School in 2011
compared with local and LA averages
Table 8.4 Frequency and percentage of FSM-eligible children in Wave 2 Free Schools.
2012-2014.
Table 8.5 Frequencies of Free Schools in different SR ranges: 2012-2014
Table 8.6 Frequency and percentage of Wave 3 schools FSM proportions
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Number
Figure 5.1 Overview of research questions and data collection methods
Figure 6.1 Percentage of Free Schools and Local Authorities using different criteria
Figure 6.2 Percentage of Free Schools and their ranking of each oversubscription criteria
Figure 6.3 Percentage of LAs and their ranking of each oversubscription criteria
Figure 8.1 Free School FSM proportions compared with corresponding LA (2014-2015)
Figure 8.2 Frequency of segregation ratios (SRs) of all mainstream Free Schools (2014-
2015)
Figure 8.3 Percentage of primary, secondary and all-through Free Schools over or under-
representing FSM children.
Figure 8.4 Percentage of Free Schools from each wave and their representation of FSM
eligible children in 2014-2015
Figure 8.5 Percentage of FSM children in each wave since opening
Figure 8.6 Differences between FSM proportions of Wave 1 Free Schools and LAs (2012
and 2013 intakes)
Figure 8.7 Segregation Ratios of Wave 1 Free Schools (2012 and 2013 intakes)
Figure 8.8 Percentage point difference between Free School and LA FSM proportions:
2012 and 2014 intakes
Figure 8.9 Number of Wave 2 Free Schools under or over representing FSM children.
Figure 8.10 Number of Wave 3 Free Schools under or over-representing FSM children.