Schools on education secretary's fast track take 40% fewer pupils from deprived families
The government's education plans have been criticised after it emerged that hundreds of schools being offered a fast-track to academy status are the most socially exclusive.
An analysis by the Observer found that secondary schools judged as "outstanding" by Ofsted are taking 40% fewer poor pupils than the national average. Michael Gove, the secretary of state for education, has written to all schools inviting them to apply to become academies, a move that will free them from local authority control.
However, he is particularly urging "outstanding" schools to join the scheme and has approved them all in advance. "We specifically want to provide opportunities for outstanding schools to open as academies as early as September 2010," he wrote to headteachers.
Campaigners are warning that the policy risks creating a two-tier system in which resources and attention are focused on the most middle-class schools.
"The figures do suggest that the new cadre of academies will be more socially exclusive than schools as a whole," said Dr Lee Elliot Major, director of research and policy at the Sutton Trust, a group that works to improve the educational opportunities for young people from non-privileged backgrounds.
Major argued that the "admissions code", which is supposed to stop schools from selecting middle-class children in an attempt to improve behaviour and results, needs to be strengthened.
"The freeing-up of state schools makes it even more important that strong checks and balances and incentives are in place so that school intakes reflect the social mix of the communities they serve – and that any education reforms benefit all children, not just the most privileged," he said.
Today's analysis looks at the number of pupils eligible for free school meals, which is seen as an indicator of deprivation. It found an average of 9.4% in outstanding schools officially listed as "secondaries", compared with 15.4% across Britain. In a school of average size that translates to 92 pupils from low-income families instead of 150.
Some claim that Gove's plans turned Labour's academy programme on its head. Fiona Millar, the education campaigner who writes the blog The Truth About Our Schools, said: "I have always been opposed to independent state schools, but I could see the arguments for New Labour academies – which were tackling areas of high deprivation and low achievement. This is an entirely different proposition and people should be very wary."
Millar said some schools in the most deprived communities had 50% of pupils eligible for free meals. If those below the national average dropped out of the system that would amplify the success of some at the expense of others, she said, arguing that it would be very hard for the government to enforce the admissions code without local authority checks.
"And it is very significant that until now academies had to be all-ability, but the bill changes so grammar schools can become academies," she said. "They have very low free school meal levels, often 1%-2%. The whole principle of a New Labour academy was that it was a comprehensive school, and that has been breached too."
Others were more supportive. Mike Welsh, president of the National Association of Headteachers, pointed out that any school could apply for academy status. He said it was "difficult but possible" to run a successful school in a disadvantaged community, pointing to his own school which has 38% of pupils eligible for free meals and is rated outstanding.
Welsh praised other parts of Gove's education package, including the "pupil premium" that aims to distribute additional money to the poorest pupils. That could be used for "vital" schemes such as one-on-one reading, he said.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Education said: "Our plans for greater freedoms for headteachers and teachers are available to all schools, and outstanding schools which take up this offer will be expected to partner with weaker schools."