Religious schools in London: school admissions, religious composition and selectivity

Abstract

This paper is concerned with segregation and school selectivity in secondary schools with a religious character in London, England. Analyses of the characteristics of pupils at religious and non‐religious schools reveal that the former tend to cater predominantly for pupils from particular religions and/or denominations and ethnic groups, so fostering segregation. In addition, they educate, in the main, pupils who are from more affluent backgrounds and with higher levels of prior attainment than pupils in non‐religious schools. Moreover, the evidence suggests that some ‘élite’ secondary schools are ‘selecting in’ and ‘selecting out’ particular pupils. A range of different admissions criteria and practices are identified which appear to foster school selectivity. It is argued that there may have been a distortion of mission for at least some religious schools given that they were originally set up to educate the poor. Implications for policy are discussed.

Acknowledgements

Rebecca Allen wishes to thank the ESRC for financial support and the DCSF for providing the data; Anne West wishes to thank Audrey Hind for assistance with data analysis, and Jane Lewis and Philip Noden for helpful comments and advice.

Notes

1. In January 2006, there were 28 Jewish primary and eight secondary schools; four Muslim primary and two secondary schools; one Sikh primary and one secondary school; and one primary and one secondary school classified as being ‘other’ (DfES, 2006).

2. Local authorities usually pay the transport costs to the nearest school of appropriate religious character, provided it is over three miles from the child’s home.

3. Selective and potentially selective criteria included: selecting a proportion of pupils on the basis of ability/aptitude; interviews with pupils/parents; priority to the child of an employee/governor/former student; pupil with a family connection with the school; pastoral benefit to the pupil of attending the school; the pupil’s primary school report/recommendation of the primary school headteacher; the academic record of the pupil’s sibling(s); compassionate/exceptional factors; organisations associated with school; community involvement by parents/children.

4. This research was carried out prior to the implementation of the 2007 School Admissions Code (DfES, 2007). The earlier codes of practice provided non‐statutory guidance to which admission authorities were required to ‘have regard’ (DfEE, 1999; DfES, 2003).

5. According to section 76 of the 1944 Education Act, local education authorities were to have regard to ‘the general principle that, so far as is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure, pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents’.

6. This is a continuous variable where marks in each subject are re‐calibrated as fractional equivalents of levels. The variable is the average score across English, science and mathematics.

7. For an exploration of the accuracy of these grid references, see Harland and Stillwell (2007).

8. City Technology Colleges and Academies are officially classified as independent; the former are not bound by the National Curriculum, and the latter are not bound by the full National Curriculum. Like voluntary‐aided and foundation schools, both are responsible for their own admissions. Academy sponsors generally contribute a small proportion towards the capital costs, with revenue funding being provided by the government.

9. This analysis takes account of whether schools are single‐sex.

10. Our database relates to admissions for 2001/2002 (see West et al., 2004).