Some local authorities make frequent use of non-mainstream education including special schools, pupil referral units and alternative provision for children in care but other areas rarely place looked-after children in these types of settings. Researchers from the Rees Centre at the University of Oxford wanted to explore the impact of non-mainstream schools on the educational outcomes of this vulnerable group.
Method
The researchers analysed data from the National Pupil Database for England for 642,805 state-educated children eligible to take GCSE exams in 2013 aged 16, including 4,849 children who had been in care for at least a year.
The team looked at the type of education setting children were attending and their educational attainment, focusing on GSCE results. They used the data to explore variations in the use of non-mainstream schools between local authorities.
Key findings
The analysis shows 37.8% of the looked-after children were in non-mainstream school settings at the age of 16 compared with just 4.4% of other young people.
The average attainment of children in any form of non-mainstream education was generally much lower than that of children in mainstream education.
Children in care who were in mainstream education did less well on average than children who were not in care but achieved much better GCSE results than looked-after children attending non-mainstream schools.
The average score out of 464 for children’s eight best GCSE subjects was 335.85. This dropped to 274.56 on average for looked-after children in mainstream education and was 83.97 on average for those in non-mainstream schools, putting them in the lowest one per cent of all GCSE scores for that year group. The attainment gap between children in care and their peers would be almost halved if looked-after children attending non-mainstream settings were left out of the equation.
The 151 local authorities in the study varied greatly in size and there were big differences in numbers of children in care. The proportion of children in care attending non-mainstream schools at Key Stage 4 ranged from none to 100%. The academic attainment of children in care was lower on average in authorities making high use of non-mainstream education.
Further analysis by the researchers found variation in use of non-mainstream settings and attainment could not be put down to differences in the characteristics of children, such as gender, ethnicity, prior attainment, eligibility for free school meals, special educational needs, length of time in care, placement stability and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores.
Implications for practice
The study indicates some local authorities make disproportionate use of non-mainstream schools for children in care who then do less well in their GCSEs. While non-mainstream settings may be the best option for some, the researchers suggest supportive, inclusive mainstream education could be a better way to help most realise their academic potential.
They highlight the need for individualised teaching, which could be delivered in mainstream schools as part of a flexible timetable, via special units within those schools or – if necessary – a short-term placement in a non-mainstream setting to enable them to catch up and then rejoin mainstream education.
-
Authors Ian Sinclair and Nikki Luke, University of Oxford
-
Published by British Journal of Social Work, May 2024
Further reading
-
Alternative Provision in Local Areas in England: A Thematic Review, Ofsted and Care Quality Commission, February 2024
-
“Closing the gap”: The Conditions Under Which Children in Care are Most Likely to Catch Up in Mainstream Schools, Ian Sinclair and others, Oxford Review of Education, September 2021
