Sutton Trust and the London effect

Posted on May 22, 2025 by John Howson

The recent publication of an Opportunity Index Interactive Map – The Sutton Trust by the Sutton Trust raises some interesting questions about both methodology and the funding of schools.

I am in the process of completing an article discussing changes in pupil teacher ratios in England over the past 50 years between period of local government re-organisation. What struck me in doing that research was how often London boroughs had the most favourable PTRs, both in the late 1970s, and fifty years later in the 2020s.

Now, the Sutton Trust uses constituencies not borough in their mapping, but there is the same result: London parliamentary constituencies in the 2024 general election fill the top 20 places in a number of the Sutton Trust rankings, including the attainment 8 score for pupils with Free School Meals – not sure whether that is entitlement or take up, as they can be different in the secondary sector.

The Sutton Trust map illustrates the high rankings for much of London and parts of the Home Counties to the north and west of London. I am sure that the f40 Group of Local authorities will find this a useful tool to show how badly rural areas are funded, with many rural constituencies falling into the lowest toe categories of ‘very low’ and ‘low’.

Someone might also want to look at rural areas where there are selective secondary schools. I was struck by the fact that Weald of Kent constituency, where I stood in the 2024 general election for the Liberal Democrats, ranked 526^thout of 533 constituencies in the Opportunity Index listing. Pupils in the constituency are in the Kent selective school system, and most don’t qualify for free transport to a selective school, even if they pass the entry test. Does that make a difference?

Looking at pupils that grew up in Oxfordshire, there are large differences. in the rankings in the Opportunity Index, with Bicester & Woodstock constituency ranked 68^th in the opportunity rankings, and Oxford East some 398 places lower, with a ranking of 466 out of the 533 constituencies.

Constituency	Rank out of 533	Top 50% earners by age 28	Top 20% of earners by 28	Attainment 8 for Free School Meals Pupils
Banbury	410	37	7	29
Bicester & Woodstock	68	43	12	36
Didcot & Wantage	260	36	12	31
Henley & Thame	211	46	16	32
Oxford East	466	35	10	29
Oxford West & Abingdon	259	40	12	35
Witney	324	43	10	27

This disparity helps to make the point I have made before, that the present funding formula for schools doesn’t work for pockets of deprivation in relatively affluent upper tier authorities. This has been the message of the f40 Group for some considerable time, and is supported by my study of PTRs across the past 50 years.

The last paragraph is not to deny the fact that urban constituencies in the metropolitan areas take up many of the lowest ranking positions, but it is worth looking at those constituencies that are near the bottom of the rankings, such as Clacton and Weald of Kent, and that don’t fit the normal perception of areas where opportunities are mor limited than in other constituencies.

Tis it once again time to discuss again how we fund our schools, and what society wants its schooling system to try to achieve.

Charity Walk

Posted on July 14, 2021 by John Howson

Just a reminder as to why there are fewer posts than in the past on this blog

Chair dons his walking boots to trek from Oxford to Banbury for charity on Thursday and Friday

Any sponsorship of the 26 mile walk would be very much appreciated. All donations will be split equally between the five charities listed below and can be made via bank transfer to:

O C C CHAIRPERSONS EVENTS DCI

Sort Code: 30-80-12

Account Number: 20391068

Reference: Charity Walk

Walking in midsummer is a pastime many enjoy and the Chair of Oxfordshire County Council will be putting his walking boots on for the charities he supports in mid-July.

Councillor John Howson will walk the 26 miles from Oxford to Banbury along the canal towpath during Thursday, July 15 and Friday, July 16.

He said: “This seemed like something I could do regardless of present COVID restrictions provided I did it myself. Getting out for a walk became people’s big event of the day during the lockdown periods we had and there is little doubt that walking and being outdoors helps people’s physical and mental health.“I am looking forward to doing the walk between Oxfordshire’s largest and second-largest settlements. I hope to be enjoying the scenery of the rolling north Oxfordshire countryside and the tranquility of the villages alongside the canal.“

I have had a special Ordnance Survey map printed for the walk that will be unique and this will certainly be a memorable part of my time as Chair of Oxfordshire County Council.”

Councillor Howson became Chair in May having been Vice-Chair in the two previous years. The Chair is the ceremonial head of the county council and the politically impartial civic leader of Oxfordshire.

The charities he is supporting during 2021/22 are:

• Abingdon Riding for Disabled

• Children Heard and Seen

• Maggie’s (cancer support charity)

• Oxfordshire County Music Service

• Yellow Submarine (learning disability charity)

Time for Jacob’s Law

Posted on January 23, 2021 by John Howson

The naming of a young person in Serious Case Review Report is rare. But this week the Report into the death of Jacob in Oxfordshire contained his name. The family gave permission, and hope it will ensure the report is more widely read and acted upon. If so, it is a brave decision, and one that I applaud.

You can read the Report at https://www.oscb.org.uk/oscb-publishes-a-child-safeguarding-practice-review-concerning-jacob/ Full report link at bottom of the press notice

Three agencies, the Police, Children’s Social Services and Education have learning points to take from the Review. In this blog, I will concentrate on the education aspects, as they contain a message heard before on this blog.

Jacob was born in Oxfordshire, later moved to Northumbria, where I suspect he was educated in a First School, and then a Middle School, before being moved in Year 6 to an ‘alternative education provision’ – presumably a PRU?

In July 2017, note the date, the family returned to Oxfordshire. The Report concludes that:

5.1 He was not on roll at any education provision and was a child missing education for 22 months

Jacob’s mandatory need for education was not provided by Oxfordshire County Council when he lived at home and when he was in the care of the local authority both in and when out of county for 5 months. Four educational settings were asked to take Jacob on roll, however largely due to his perceived behaviours and risks to other students he remained off roll for almost 2 years. Jacob’s family were offered the right of appeal when places were refused. His situation was considered by education panels such as the In Year Fair Access Panel and Children Missing Education to little effect and his needs were overseen and monitored by various professionals, including the Virtual School and the Independent Reviewing Officer Service whilst in local authority care. There were no formal dispute resolutions raised14 by Children’s Social Care and his situation was not escalated to the Education Skills and Funding Agency (ESFA) as it should have been.

Had this been an isolated case then this would be understandable, but a month before Jacob arrived back in Oxfordshire I had had an exchange in public with the Cabinet Member for Education at the June 2017 Cabinet meeting of the County Council. Not all questions are for political gain, and this was one where I genuinely thought that there was an issue to be addressed. The question asked:

Oxfordshire county council CABINET – 20 JUNE 2017 ITEM 4 – QUESTIONS FROM COUNTY COUNCILLORS

Question from Councillor Howson to Councillors Harrod and Hibbert-Biles “How many children taken into care over the past three school years and placed ‘out county’ have had to wait for more than two weeks to be taken onto the roll of a school in the area where they have been moved to and what is the longest period of time a child has waited for a place at a school in the area where they have been re-located to during this period?”

As you will see, I asked both the Education Cabinet Member and Cllr Harrod for Children’s Social Services and received this answer:

Answer Over the past three years it has been exceptional for a Looked After Child to be taken onto the roll of an out of county school in under two weeks. Indeed, of the nine cases of primary age pupils we’ve looked at, the quickest a pupil was placed was 12 days (there were two) and the slowest was 77 days. For the 22 secondary age pupils the picture is even worse, with 3 weeks the quickest placement and a couple taking fully 6 months to get some of our most vulnerable young people into a stable school setting.

The main reason for this completely unacceptable state of affairs is that the Council has no power to direct an academy to admit a Looked After Child. The only way we can force an academy’s hand is to get a direction from the Educations & Skills Funding Agency and this, as you can see from the foregoing times, can be a very long winded bureaucratic process.

The fact that it takes so long for academies to admit our Looked After Children shows how doggedly our officers pursue the matter; I suspect that many other local authorities simply give up when they meet an intransigent academy that doesn’t want to take responsibility for educating their vulnerable young people.

The minutes of the meeting note my supplementary question and the response as:

Supplementary: In response to an invitation from Councillor Howson for the Cabinet Member to work with Councillor Howson and the labour opposition to see what could be done Councillor Hibbert-Biles recognised that it was a national situation, and she would be asking for a meeting with local MPs and relevant minister.

How distressing to read the national recommendation in the Serious Case Review that:

Recommendation 2: This Review asks the Department for Education to acknowledge the education key learning and findings from Jacob’s Review and provide feedback as to the effectiveness of the Education and Skills Funding Agency process in resolving issues in a timely manner. The Review asks the Department of Education to provide statute and guidance to local areas and their communities on how to manage the Governance arrangements with academy run schools and local education departments who currently cannot be mandated to accept children on roll.

And in the local recommendations that:

Action Plan 2: The Education System

The key learning set out below is fully addressed in this action plan for children in the education system in Oxfordshire, overseen by the Chair of the OSCB Safeguarding in Education Sub-Group Key Learning:

An education system that ensures:

1. The paramount importance of the role of schools in keeping children safe

2. An education package is put in place in a timely manner for those children who may show challenging behaviours

3. Those children missing education are known and action is swift

This Action Plan should pay particular attention to ensuring: – Restorative work to resolve the fragmented arrangements between academy schools, alternative provisions and the local authority to ensure collective ownership – Policy and procedures to track when children are not on roll – The function of Education Panels in Oxfordshire (In Year Fair Access and Children Missing Education) – The local application of the Education Skills Funding Agency intervention – Education packages for children who may be at risk of exploitation and also present a risk to others.

For those that read the whole Report, there is further evidence on page 31 and footnote 56 of other issues about school admissions around the same time.

Here’s what I wrote on this blog on the 23^rd June 2017:

In my post on 11^th June, after the outcome of the general election was known, I suggested some issues that could still be addressed by a government without an overall majority. First among these was the issue of school places for young people taken into care and placed outside of the local authority. They have no guarantee of access to a new school within any given time frame at present. It seemed to me daft that a parent could be fined for taking a child out of school for two weeks to go on holiday but a local authority could wait six months for a school place to be provided for a young person taken into care.

The Cabinet Question reproduced above then appears followed by:

I found the answer deeply depressing. However, the good news is that MPs from the three political parties representing Oxfordshire constituencies have agreed to work together to take the matter forward. Thank you to MPs, Victoria Prentice, Layla Moran and Anneliese Dodds, for agreeing to seek action to remedy this state of affairs.

If readers have data about the issue elsewhere in England, I would be delighted to hear from you, so pressure can be put on officials nationally to ensure a rapid change in the rules.

I had forgotten that unique letter signed by every Oxfordshire MP after I had made my suggestion.

Nothing happened. Jacob died. We cannot wait any longer.

The DfE must act now to ensure all children have a school place within a specified time frame, whether they move to a new area or are excluded by a school. There must be a register of unplaced children of school age that is regularly reviewed by a senior officer and a politician in each local authority, and Ofsted should update the Secretary of State each year about the national picture.

It is time for a Jacob’s Law. His death will not then have been for nothing.

Read more on this BBC Report into the case https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-55841644

Education counts, but so does the family

Posted on September 15, 2020 by John Howson

The report on social mobility issued today https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/917278/The_long_shadow_of_deprivation_-_differences_in_opportunities_across_England.pdf raises a number of interesting questions. Most are not new, but they are none the worse for restating.

Life changes, at least as far as incomes are concerned, seem to be a combination of education, local labour markets, soft skills and parental ability to offer support for life chances.

Education effects are relatively similar, although areas where there are either selective schools or strong local private school clusters seemingly do have an effect on outcomes.

The comments in the report on Oxford, my home area and where I represent a Division on the county council are interesting

Oxford is an example of a place where social mobility is high, with the smallest pay gaps – it is in the top 10 places with the smallest pay gaps outside London, as shown in Table 1.2. Swindon represents a place with average pay gaps and mobility, while on the right, Bolton represents a place with large pay gaps and less mobility. In all three authorities, the proportion of the pay gap explained by education (the orange part of the coin stack) is the same (around 14 percentiles). But because total pay gaps are smaller in Oxford, education explains a larger proportion of the pay gap there compared with Bolton. The main difference between the most and least mobile areas is the black part of the coin stack – the role of family background that persists beyond education into the labour market.

This finding challenges the notion that educational investment alone will remove differences between areas. Education gaps account for most of the pay gaps in all areas, and reducing these is important in and of itself. However, we also need to look at equalising labour market opportunities available for young people with the same education level as those from richer backgrounds if we are to ‘level up’ between places. Beginning to tackle this gap requires us to understand what drives it – only then can we design effective interventions that address the specific roots of intergenerational disadvantage. Pages 40 and 41

Personally, I don’t think we should give up on education investment in order to ensure those currently not benefiting from our education system are able to improve their outcomes. In 2011, Oxford Key Stage 1 results were the worst for any local authority. This was despite the success levels of schools in the North and West of the City. They have improved since then. In my view, the current National Funding Formula does not provide enough incentives to help improve outcomes.

However, I accept that creating new employment opportunities is critical to social mobility. In the 1960s, the Intermediate Areas Report recognised this issue. More recently, government have seemed to accept a policy of building up successful areas such as London and the South East and ignoring other ‘smokestack’ areas. This report recognises the importance of employment opportunities at all levels need to be provided across the country. Without these opportunities, vacancies for those remaining in many areas will be limited and often lower paid jobs.

Of course, the greatest sadness about this study is that it only deals with males due to data issues. Are women more socially mobile and better able to make use of educational outcomes or are they even more fettered by circumstances/

Can a mean be mean?

Posted on June 30, 2020 by John Howson

When I first moved from teaching in a Tottenham secondary school to higher education in Oxford I brought with me an interest in the disparity of funding for schools. Partly this was because working in Haringey, and having been brought up right on the border with the London County Council – by then the Inner London Education Authority – I was aware of the disparity of funding for schools in Haringey compared with those just across the border in Hackney.

One of the early books I read on the subject was by John Pratt and his co-authors and was entitled ‘Depriving the Deprived’. Published in 1979 by what was then, Kogan Page. The book was based upon research that looked at school funding in one London borough over the course of a single year.

I was reminded of this when looking at the latest Free School Meals data for England, published by the DfE last Thursday. As a measure of potential deprivation it as good as it goes. If you consider Oxfordshire, generally rightly regarded as an affluent part of South East England, by the data on Free School Meals taken on census day for the six parliamentary constituencies, you find the following

% of children on Free School Meals on Census day Oxfordshire’s constituencies ranks

Oxford West

& Abingdon 8th lowest out of 534

Henley 28th lowest

Witney 35th lowest

Wantage 55th lowest

Banbury 94th lowest

Oxford East 237th lowest -.i.e. about halfway

Within Oxford East, some wards will be even worse ranked than others. Now this shouldn’t matter with a National Funding Formula for schools. But it does, because not all the funding calculations take into account differences between schools, rather than between local authorities. Indeed, if each district council area was a unitary council with education responsibility their funding might be different. But, none of the districts are large enough to ‘go it alone’ in the present funding regime.

As a result of the general affluence of Oxfordshire, the nine most deprived council wards in the county; five of which are in Oxford East constituency; three in Banbury and the other one in Oxford West and Abingdon constituency, probably lose out on funding compared to if they were part of a urban area. Such funding arrangements do not help close the achievement gap between high performing areas and the lowest performing schools in the county.

Now, of course, if all secondary schools in the county were in a single Multi-Academy Trust, the Trust could move funds around to mean the extra need of schools in deprived area, albeit by reducing the amount some schools received. However, with many different Trusts, and one remaining maintained secondary school, this option isn’t possible.

Another option of creating an ‘Opportunity Area’, used by Conservative governments in some other parts of the country, mostly in the North of England, doesn’t seem to be open to East Oxford, even though it has been suggested as an option.

So, taking the mean as a measure of funding may really mean depriving those living in some areas 40 years after the issue was exposed in one London borough.

Illness still main reason for pupil absences

Posted on October 10, 2019 by John Howson

The DfE has just published the data about absence rates during the autumn term of 2018 and the spring term of 2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/pupil-absence-in-schools-in-england-autumn-2018-and-spring-2019 Some of the figures are slightly better; others slightly worse than the previous year. As ever, illness accounts for the largest single number of absences. Even so, around a million pupils, or some 14% of enrolments seem to have avoided any absences during these two terms.

I guess that to some extent the severity of any flu outbreak will influence annual outcomes. As a result, inoculating all primary school pupils with the flu vaccine should reduce the absence rate this year. But, it measles breaks out again due to mis-placed concerns over vaccination, then that might push up absences in the primary sector.

There has been a continued rise in pupils taking unauthorised holidays in term-time. More than 600,000 pupils took at least one day off for this reason during these two terms, up by around 100,000 in just two years. This is despite the Supreme Court judgement in the Isle of Wight case that took a severe line about children missing school without agreement.

There are still too many medical or dental appointments during the school day, with nearly 2 million pupils losing at least one session for this reason.

The issue of persistent absentees isn’t going away, with more than one in ten pupils classified as a persistent absentee. That’s potentially three pupils in a primary class of 30 pupils. The percentage is higher in secondary schools than in the primary sector, and worst in Years 10 and 11, suggesting some pupils have stopped engaging at that point in their education. There is also a worrying spike in Year 1, where absence rates are the highest in the primary sector. Given that most children start some form of education before year 1 these days, this might be worth looking into as this is a really vital year for establishing basic knowledge foundations.

Pupils eligible for Free School meals and those with SEN are also likely to have higher absence rates. The latter group is understandable, as there are often reasons for the SEN classification that might affect absence.

Generally, absence rates in both the primary and secondary sectors increase in the regions that are further away from London. Both Inner and Outer London have the lowest absence rates and this may partly account for the performance of pupils in the capital’s schools. Both the North East and South West have the highest regional absence rates for these terms.

Perhaps not surprisingly, some of the local authorities with the highest levels of deprivation have some of the highest absence rates in the secondary sector. Why Cornwall has the highest primary rate in 2018-19 might be worth exploring further.

Of concern to me is that Oxfordshire is ranked around the 105^th lowest local authority level for primary sector absences, but is ranked 20^th for local authorities in the secondary sector. This is a big turnaround between children that attend primary schools, but whose attendance seems to fall away in the secondary sector.

Out of the shadows

Posted on July 11, 2019 by John Howson

Last evening I went to a truly wonderful concert at Blenheim Palace in Woodstock. Probably best known as the birthplace of Sir Winston Churchill, the Blenheim estate has developed a range of different activities over the past few years including many musical events. Last night’s concert was not staged by some mega-star, in fact none of the musicians, singers and dancers were professionals at all.

In the splendid setting of the Palace’s library, the Oxfordshire County Music Service performed their Buddies at Blenheim concert. Last night’s concert brought a flavour of their show stopping performance delivered in the Royal Albert Hall last November as part of the Schools Prom season.

What make Buddies unique as a concert is the fact that the Buddies Ensemble and heart of the concert features a collaboration between pupils from the special schools across the county and pupils from a range of other schools.

Performing as one choir, the Buddy Ensemble sang three pieces, including one of their own composition. At the Royal Albert Hall there were nearly 600 young singers from Oxfordshire, last night the library could only accommodate some 50 or so to provide a taste of what the experience in London must have been for those lucky enough to witness it.

At the end of the evening the Buddy Ensemble joined many of the other young players, singers and dancers in a finale entitled ‘Love can build a bridge’. Not only was this sung, but it was also signed by the whole choir, and the chorus by the audience as well. A fitting end to a great evening.

Music has been an important part of the cultural life of our education system since at least the end of the Second World War. There have been times when it has been under threat; the early 1990s and during the recent period of austerity and the transfer of funding to schools from local government are just two such periods when it has faced great challenges. Oxfordshire has found a way to navigate these crises, and still flourish as a service under inspiring leadership, as the collaboration between pupils with SEND and others in the Buddy Ensemble so clearly demonstrated.

Apart from the wonderful and ground breaking work of the Buddy Ensemble, there was an excellent rendition of Corelli’s Concerto Grosso op 6 No 2 in F Major that was exactly suited to the setting of the library, especially for those of us fortunate enough to be placed directly in front of the musicians. The Oxfordshire Youth Flute Choir also provided a superb performance of the Overture to the Barber of Seville by Rossini, played on a range of different flutes. But it is invidious to select these examples from a night of wonderful music and ground-breaking originality that show cased the best of the youth of Britain.

On Friday evening, in another wonderful setting of Dorchester Abbey, there will be an end of term concert. But both before then and for long after the bringing of the pupils in our special schools out of the shadows and into the light must be the abiding memory of what education can achieve.

Bad deal for rural students

Posted on January 24, 2019 by John Howson

The fact that student living in London are provided with free travel to school or college by Transport for London has always been great for them, but I felt unfair on those living in the rest of the country. Free travel is also a great help to the family budget. This benefit to London sort of mirrors the complaints of the f40 group about how schools are funded across England.

The announcement by the Secretary of State for Transport on the 2^nd January 2019 of a new railcard for 16 and 17 year olds just adds insult to injury for many young people living in rural areas. The new railcard isn’t an initiative from the rail industry. The department of Transport press release is very clear that the 26-30 year olds railcard is an industry initiative backed by the government, but that the card for 16 and 17 year olds is a government initiative and, therefore, can be seen as a political move.

Indeed, the press notice points out that the new card for 16 and 17 year olds includes half price for peak and season tickets, something not generally available on other railcards.

To rub salt in the wounds, the press notice goes on to announce that the ‘railcard could cut the cost of travel by hundreds of pounds a year for young people and their parents [sic], making it cheaper to get to school, college and work’. All very well if you live near a railway line.

At Oxfordshire’s Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, I asked a question about how the card would affect those not living near a railway line? For many, once the card comes into operation and the £30 purchase fee has been discounted, rail travel will be half the price of a similar bus journey, even assuming there is a bus after the rounds of cuts to such services.

The withdrawal of the Education Maintenance Allowance for 16-18 year olds in England by the Coalition and the refusal to change the rules on home to school transport after the raising of the learning leaving age, was an unfair allocation of resources that penalised students not able to walk or cycle to school or college.

Doing something for those that have a handy railway, but ignoring everyone else in rural areas, is an own goal for the government that may well feature in campaigning for the district council elections this May in the worst affected areas.

In Oxfordshire the 16-17 year olds in Wantage could well be paying twice the price of their college buddies that live in Didcot in order to attend classes, because the County has never progressed the re-opening of Grove Station that has been an aspiration for more than 20 years.

Similarly, those 16 and 17 year old student living in Charlbury will benefit if travelling to college in Oxford, but those living in Chipping Norton or Burford won’t when travelling to Witney.

Time for a rethink Mr Grayling.

A Tribute to three Liberal Democrats

Posted on December 31, 2018 by John Howson

December has not been a happy month for me as a Liberal Democrat. During the past four weeks I have seen the loss of three important members of the Party. All had an interest in education. This post is by way of thanks for their dedication and service.

Paddy Ashdown was Party Leader when the ‘penny on income tax for education’ policy was promulgated in the 1990s. The policy was to contrast with the then Conservative government’s reduction on spending on education that continued into the first two years of the Labour government under Blair and Brown. Paddy was an inspirational figure and came to help me become elected in 2013 to Oxfordshire County Council.

Honorary Alderman Jean Fooks was a City Councillor in Oxford for a quarter of a century and a County Councillor for sixteen years. A physics graduate from Oxford, when women physicists were even less common than they are today, Jean taught me all I know as a councillor about the concerns over children taken into care and their education. These young people suffer in many different ways, but the lack of concern on the part of some schools and those in national government for their education is a burden they really should not have to bear.

Education, is about learning, butt it must be set in the context of the child. If the Christmas story tells us anything it is not to judge a person by their circumstances. Most children are taken into care because of the failure on the part of others. We must not expect the system to compound that failure, especially when these children are moved into other areas. When, for reasons of economics, these children end up in areas where there are many of them located together in a small area, the State must consider what the implications for their education will be? Removed from their families, they must not be cast out of our education system because they are troublesome. Jean realised this, and through her work on Corporate Parenting and visiting the children’s homes on a regular basis, she set an example of leadership.

Gordon was, until the summer, the treasurer of the local Lib Dems. He was then diagnosed with the condition that sadly ended his life all too soon afterwards. Gordon, was also a volunteer with Children Heard and Seen, a small Oxfordshire charity that works with the children of those in prison. All too often children with a parent, usually a father, in prison have a high risk of a life of offending themselves in later life or even as adolescents, this is especially the case for many boys. CHaS has sought to recognise the needs of these children that often have nobody to turn to that understands their position. They can be bullied at school and have lost a vital role model. Mentors, and those such as Gordon, can show these children that they are worth talking time over and can help them to fulfil their potential.

All of these three have been inspirations to me in the steps that they were prepared to take to help others. As we enter 2019, the memory of all of them will remain with me as I continue to try to do my best for Oxfordshire and its residents.

University is not for you?

Posted on November 19, 2018 by John Howson

Why do more children that have been in care in London go on to higher education compared with those have been taken into care in the shire counties? Last week, the DfE published the latest data about such children and young people, for the year ending March 2018. I assume that this will cover higher education entry in the autumn of 2017. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption-2017-to-2018

Haringey, a London borough recorded 29 young people from care in higher education, whereas for Oxfordshire the number is shown as just three (Table LAT2a). So what might the reasons be? It could just simply be a lack of tracking of care leavers. Haringey had no information on 18 young people at that stage of their lives, whereas the number for Oxfordshire where their outcome was not known was 44, or a third of the group.

Another alternative is that children in Oxfordshire are taken into care at an older age than in Haringey and at a point where their education journey has already started on a downward spiral. The data doesn’t tell us this. No can it be determined the reasons why a child was taken into care.

In a small borough such as Haringey, a child may stay at the same school even if fostered within the borough. In a shire county there is a greater change of children having to change schools. I have written before of the challenges finding school places for children taken into care places on local authority officers. The DfE really ought to do something about putting a time limit in place for a school or college place to be made available after a child is taken into care or moves to a different placement.

Is there any difference in the innate ability levels between the children taken into care in the two authorities? I would be surprised if that was the case.

So, could we ask whether the funding of the Virtual School and indeed of all schools in the authority may partly account for the difference in outcomes in terms of those transferring into higher education? It is true that Oxfordshire is a member of the f40 Group of local authorities and feels especially keenly that its High Needs block is under-funded. Haringey, is a London borough, usually seen as one of the group of Inner London boroughs, although it is a borough of extreme contrast from Highgate and Muswell Hill at one end to South Tottenham and Northumberland Park at the other.

Could funding account for at least a part of the difference in outcomes? Certainly London boroughs are more generally found at the end of the scale with high percentages of care leavers going on the higher education and several shire counties can be found at the other end of the list, so it is at least a plausible argument.

Raising education aspirations and attainments among those taken into care and building their self-confidence remains a key task for our Children’s Services around the country. After all, it was one reason why the two separate services were brought under one roof, so to speak, by the Labour government a decade or so ago.

John Howson

Education and the numbers that affect what happens

Tag Archives: Oxfordshire