Faith schools: the evidence
Over a third of schools in Britain are faith schools, yet their place within public education systems remains deeply contested.
Proponents of faith schools claim that they improve parental choice, achieve superior educational outcomes, and are better at promoting moral values. The evidence from the research strongly contests these claims.
Such research is often piecemeal and difficult to access, making it hard to gain a comprehensive view of the debate. This research bank is intended as a valuable resource for policymakers, politicians, academics and anyone else interested in the ongoing debate around faith schools in Britain.
Each entry provides an at-a-glance overview of the key evidence and central arguments made in a different study. The research bank is arranged chronologically within a number of key sections: social cohesion; performance; school choice; values; and public opinion.
Together, the evidence provides a compelling and comprehensive case against state-funded faith schools.
Choice and admissions
One of the main arguments made in favour of faith schools is that they increase diversity and choice by enabling parents to have their children educated according to their own faith tradition. This section points to evidence of the opposite effect. Faith schools restrict school choice for parents who do not share the religion of their local school. Some parents are left with little option but a faith school, while others face restricted access to local schools through the use of unfair admissions procedures. Some critics have also seriously questioned the consumerist framing of school issues around choice.
Briefing>>> | Download the research bank as a PDF >>> | Share on Twitter>>>
School Admissions: Fair Choice for Parents and Pupils
S. Tough and R. Brooks (June 2007), Institute for Public Policy Research.
This report argues that the current admissions system for school places is a cause of segregation by social class and ability and is likely to lead to systematic unfairness. This is especially the case for schools that are their own admissions authorities (such as faith schools), which are found to be more unrepresentative of their local areas than schools with admissions that are controlled by the local authority. The authors claim that a system of fair choice would take into account the need to achieve a balanced intake in every school, and call for a system of area-wide banding for all local authorities in order to ensure that schools admit pupils of all abilities. The report argues that this should apply equally to faith schools, meaning that 'religious faith would no longer take strict precedence over all other factors in allocating places'. They argue that this approach would also 'be compatible with schools maintaining their own distinct ethos, religious or otherwise'.
A PDF copy of this report is available to download.
School choice in London, England: Characteristics of students in different types of secondary schools
A. West and A. Hind (2007), Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2-3): 498–529.
This article compared a range of school types to analyse variation in school composition. Using a database of secondary schools in London produced by the Department for Education, the study found statistically significant links between the ability of a school to determine its own admissions policy and the admission of children with higher levels of academic attainment and lower levels of poverty and disadvantage. The study also found evidence of ethnic selection. Voluntary aided schools (most of which were religious) were shown to admit fewer Bangladeshi and Pakistani students, who were more likely to be Muslim, and to have a higher proportion of black students, who were more likely to be Christian.
Ballots in School Admissions
The Sutton Trust (May 2007).
This report by the Sutton Trust examines attitudes about school admissions processes. It finds that, when presented with the scenario of an oversubscribed faith school, more people (36%) believed that a random ballot was the fairest way of allocating places than a system based on determining which families were most committed to the Christian faith (preferred by just 20%). The report also found that selecting children by religion or faith was most often described as unfair. This view was held by 40% of respondents, with just 8% claiming that this method was fair. The report added that: 'allocation by proximity to the school or by faith' had been shown by other research 'to be highly socially selective'.
A PDF copy of this report is available to download.
Non-believers
J. Crace (5 December 2006), The Guardian.
A Headspace survey of primary and secondary head teachers, carried out by Education Guardian and EdComs (and administered by ICM) found that many head teachers had serious concerns about the effects of faith schools. Almost half (47%) felt there should be either fewer or no faith schools, a third (32%) felt there should be no change and only 9% believed that the number of faith schools should be increased. Only 25% believed that faith schools created more religious tolerance in society, 18% felt they made no difference and 45% thought that they promoted less tolerance.
The article notes that:
Many headteachers have misgivings about the practicalities of admissions policies. Faith schools often achieve better results and, while the effects of discipline and ethos on pupil performance cannot be ignored, these schools rarely reflect the social composition of the communities in which they are located ... faith schools seem to get a disproportionately high percentage of their intake from the educated middle-classes in comparison to non-denominational community schools.
