A new paper published by the Higher Education Policy Institute
(HEPI) looks at the impact of selective schools in ensuring
progress to higher education.
The Impact of Selective Secondary Education on
Progression to Higher Education, HEPI Occasional
Paper 19, by Iain Mansfield shows grammar schools increase the
likelihood of progression for pupils from the bottom two
quintiles of social disadvantage and for Black and Minority
Ethnic (BME) pupils. The analysis takes into account both the
chances of children from different groups getting into a grammar
school and how those children who do get in perform. The report
is published in HEPI’s series of polemical papers, which are
designed to challenge as well as to inform.
The report shows 45% of pupils at grammar schools come from
households with below median income and that:
- 39% of pupils in selective school areas progress from state
schools to highly-selective universities, compared to just 23% in
comprehensive areas;
- a state school pupil from the most disadvantaged quintile is
more than twice as likely to progress to Oxbridge if they live in
a selective area than a non-selective area; and
- a state school pupil with a BME background is more than five
times as likely to progress to Oxbridge if they live in a
selective area rather than a non-selective area.
The paper describes how most previous research has focused
narrowly on eligibility for Free School Meals as a measure of
disadvantage, which obscures large differences within the
remaining 85% of the population.
The report also examines the performance of the new specialist
Maths schools and considers public attitudes towards grammar
schools, including exploring why the public are more supportive
of grammar schools than educational experts.
The paper ends with seven recommendations for universities,
regulators and policymakers for further enhancing social
mobility. These include:
- extending
the Selective School Expansion Fund to allow grammar school
branch sites in disadvantaged areas, where this is supported by
the relevant local authority;
- increasing
the number of specialist Mathematics schools from two to ten by
2022; and
-
commissioning detailed research on the impact of selective
schooling on the social mobility of children from households
below the median income.
Iain Mansfield, a former senior civil servant and the author of
the report, said:
‘Opponents of grammar schools portray them as just for the rich,
but 45% of their pupils come from below median income households.
So the claim they’re for the rich simply isn’t true. A narrow
focus on eligibility for Free School Meals has ignored many other
measures of disadvantage, including ethnicity, parental education
and broader income disparities.
‘My report shows that, for many disadvantaged children, selective
education makes a vital contribution to social mobility.
Astonishingly, England’s 163 grammar schools send more BME
students to Cambridge than all 1,849 non-selective schools
combined. Even after considering that children from some groups
are more likely than others to get into a grammar school, the
presence of grammar schools benefits pupils in every quintile of
disadvantage.
‘Public opinion has long favoured grammar school expansion. The
Government should now accelerate its expansion plans, including
establishing branch sites in the most disadvantaged areas, where
this is supported by the relevant local authority.’
, HEPI Director, said:
‘The debate on grammar schools has become very one sided.
Researchers line up to condemn them for inhibiting social
mobility, and the schools do not perform well on every single
measure. But the full evidence is more nuanced and shows some
pupils benefit a great deal.
‘Compared to other countries, we have a hyper-selective
university system. Given so many people benefit from attending a
grammar school, it seems what works for universities may also
sometimes work for schools.’
