Who is really ‘gaming’ the school admissions system?
Chris Hook
Experienced commercial lawyer specialising in the charity, education and sport sectors
24 September 2018
A recent article in The Guardian reported that some wealthy parents were increasingly opting to spend money and time – even at the cost of their honesty – to secure a school place for their child.
Background
It is now thirty years since the Education Reform Act 1988 upturned the post-war school system and enshrined the principle of ‘parental choice’ (or rather the expression of parental preference) in the school admissions system.
Under the current system mainstream state schools in England are required each year to set their admission arrangements so that prospective parents can apply for their child to be admitted. Generally the school's admission authority must then admit the child if there are sufficient places.
As part of their admission arrangements schools must set oversubscription criteria to be applied if there are more applications than available school places.
The School Admissions Code 2014 sets out various prohibitions and restrictions on what type of oversubscription criteria can be used. This is intended to ensure that all schools use criteria which are fair, reasonable and transparent (albeit within the context of an education landscape which encourages and accommodates diversity of provision).
The Guardian article and YouGov poll of parents
But a recent article in The Guardian reported that, according to a YouGov poll, wealthy parents are renting and even buying second homes in the catchment areas of highly sought-after schools to circumvent admissions criteria and secure a place for their child. A number of high-earning parents are also paying for private tuition to pass school entrance exams.
In addition, to get into popular faith schools, parents are commonly developing a new-found faith and attending religious services in order to satisfy a school’s faith-based oversubscription criterion.
A copy of the Sutton Trust’s full report analysing the poll can be found here.
Options for parents
Moving house to get into a school's catchment area for an oversubscribed school is an expensive strategy. Living within a school’s catchment area is, of itself, no guarantee of getting a place; and, of course, local authorities and schools may change their admission policies, for example, (a) to alter the boundaries of the catchment areas, (b) to remove any reference to catchment areas from the oversubscription criteria, and/or (c) to add other oversubscription criteria.
Renting somewhere, or using a relative's home, to falsely put down as a child's residence on the application form is also a high-risk strategy. If the local authority or school were to find out that a parent has provided false or misleading information in an application, it could in principle opt to rescind its offer of a school place, even after the child has started at the school. This Schools Week article from 2015 reported on local authorities’ increasing use of fraud investigators to verify parents’ home addresses.
Nearly all faith schools will give some priority in their oversubscription criteria to children of that faith (although some voluntary controlled Church of England schools do not, for example). But some faith schools may additionally require a certain level of attendance so that only the true faithful (or the most committed faux-believers) are given priority. But faith schools must nonetheless be careful that any such criteria do not stray beyond what is recommended by the relevant religious authority for that faith school or what is permitted under the Code. See here and here for examples of when the boundary can become contentious.
The North East does not, as far as I am aware, have any (state) grammar schools. But there are some schools in the region whose admission policies reserve up to 10% of places for children with aptitude in a named specialist subject such as performing arts, music, sport and modern languages, a legacy from the 1990s. Doubtless, children from well-off families are, on average, more likely to do better in those aptitude tests if their parents were willing and able to invest additional time and money in paying for private tuition, transport costs, and any relevant clothes or equipment. Incidentally, the Chief Schools Adjudicator has also previously questioned the value to schools of expending what can be significant sums to administer independent aptitude assessments. That is something for parents and school governors to think about in these times of significant budgetary pressures.
Gaming the system is not a new phenomenon, particularly in the context of a school system predicated on models of accountability through competition and parental choice. It is also hardly new that parents with greater finances and social capital are better equipped to identify and maximise opportunities – whether legitimately or not – to secure a school place for their child; or, if they do not, to then appeal and advocate for that place. But the implication in the article is that gaming is on the rise.
Conclusion
Either way, I ask myself: is part of the problem the fact that, increasingly, it is individual schools which set their own admission policies whereas in years gone by the local authority (or, in older terminology, the local education authority) could coordinate most schools' admission policies with the whole area in mind? Is the notion of parental choice being subverted such that more schools, increasingly, have greater capacity, indirectly at least, to choose their pupils?
Also, local authorities used to have the general power to open new schools if there was sufficient need in an area (or they can expand the diminishing number of maintained schools under their control). But for several years now the Department for Education’s guidance has talked of a presumption that all new schools will be "free schools" outside local authority control. It is hard to square this presumption with the local authority's statutory duty to secure sufficient school places within its area.
Therefore, is it time to revisit the framework for school places and school admissions, and the wider national education policy that underpins it?
Chris Hook is an in-house solicitor at Northumbria University in Newcastle upon Tyne and spent the previous ten years working in private practice. He also volunteers at North East Law Centre. Chris provides specialist legal advice on a wide range of commercial, charity and education law matters. All views expressed are his own.
Disclaimer: This article contains information which is necessarily general. It does not constitute legal advice. It is essential that, before proceeding with a particular course of action, you take specialist legal advice on any relevant considerations which may apply in your specific circumstances so that you can properly assess your options and any associated risks and benefits.
Charity and social enterprise
Financial resilience – reassessing reserves (5 Jun 2017)
Where next for volunteerism? (4 May 2017)
How will charities fare under the Government’s new vision of a ‘Shared Society’? (16 Feb 2017)
Charity fundraising (II) – so what’s new? (9 Nov 2016)
Charity investments: is it time to divest from fossil fuels? (17 Oct 2016)
Charity fundraising: so what’s new? (14 Oct 2016)
Charity VAT: Court of Appeal restricts zero rating on constructions costs (6 Oct 2016)
Charity Commission sets out expectations on reporting safeguarding concerns (5 Oct 2016)
Charity Commission to “further consider” draft guidance on new power to issue warnings (30 Sep 2016)
Will independent schools have to do more to keep their charitable status? (29 Sep 2016)
Education and childcare
Preparing for the GDPR: what nurseries and childcare providers can start doing now (22 Aug 2017)
High Court quashes Ofsted inspection report (12 Aug 2017)
30 hours’ free childcare – DfE updates guidance on early education and childcare (12 Mar 2017)
School admissions: do you need to update your admission policy? (3 Oct 2016)
Will independent schools have to do more to keep their charitable status? (29 Sep 2016)
DfE publishes updated safeguarding guidance for schools (28 Sep 2016)