By Richard Johnstone | 23 June 2014
The boost in the academic attainment of disadvantaged pupils in London is due to improved performance by primary schools at the turn of the millennium and not reforms to secondary schools as previously thought, research has found.
In an investigation into the so-called London effect, which has seen disadvantaged pupils in the capital attain better qualifications than in other regions in England, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said it was unlikely to have been driven by improvements in secondary schools.
In inner London in 2012, 54% of pupils eligible for free schools meals achieved 5 or more GCSEs at A*-C (including English and Maths), compared with 47% in outer London, 40% in the West Midlands and 30-35% in other regions outside of London. These pupils are also substantially more likely to achieve high results, with 13% of pupils eligible for free school meals achieving 8 or more A*-Bs (including English and Maths) compared with between 3% and 6% in regions outside of London.
According to the IFS, many commentators had argued the root of this was a range of policies and initiatives targeted at London over the past decade. These include the London Challenge, the Teach First programme and the increase in the number of academies.
However, its analysis concluded London’s better and improved performance reflects two key factors: differences in the mix of pupils attending London’s schools, with a greater number of pupils from ethnic minority backgrounds, and improvements in the results achieved in primary school.
Rapid improvements in pupil performance in London’s primary schools in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the basis for the majority of improvement, Luke Sibieta, the programme director at IFS and an author of the report, said.
Although London secondary schools do still perform better than those elsewhere in the country after accounting for prior attainment and pupil demographics, this can be accounted for by pupils entering secondary schools with higher levels of achievement.
‘The higher level and improved performance of disadvantaged pupils in secondary schools in London over the past decade is a remarkable success story,’ Sibieta added.
‘Our work suggests that specific policies focused on London secondary schools, such as the London Challenge, may not be the main reason for this improvement. Instead, it appears to derive largely from improved performance in primary schools. Success at primary schools is clearly crucial.’
The Lessons from London schools for attainment gaps and social mobility was commissioned by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission.
Responding to the findings, commission chair Alan Milburn said: ‘Successive government have focused on secondary schools as the key that unlocks better results among the poorest pupils. This research shows that the key may actually lie in primary schools.
‘Contrary to received wisdom, this research suggests that the London GCSE miracle for disadvantaged children is more likely to have been driven by policies such as the literacy and numeracy strategies than by later initiatives like the London Challenge.
‘The implication is that policy-makers should renew their focus on ensuring younger children excel before they make the transition to secondary education.’
