Search

There is a longstanding literature on the unequal geographical distribution of welfare. In this paper we argue that increasingly geography is becoming the basis for rationing access to some forms of welfare. Focusing on access to secondary schools in East London, England, where the demand for places at the more popular schools generally far exceeds the number of places available, we show how distance from school has now become the primary means of allocating places. Rather than educational resources attempting to compensate for geographical disadvantage, geography (in the form of distance from school) has become the rationale by which those living in advantaged areas continue to have privileged access to educational resources. Whereas previously the role of the state was to compensate for the unfairness of such geographical inequalities, geography (via distance to school) is now used to justify the unequal allocation of scarce school places. The paper demonstrates that not only does the near universal adoption of distance-based allocation policies in East London lead to the reproduction of social advantage and disadvantage, but also it is creating new hierarchies of school popularity and more important unpopularity which are not always clearly related to issues of school attainment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the effect of social background and ethnicity on educational performance in an area with traditionally poor levels of attainment. It begins by examining the variation in school performance for London and specifically east London. It shows how the disadvantaged nature of the area, as measured by such variables as Mosaic group and ethnic heritage, helps to explain the poor results at GCSE. The paper then changes the focus to schools within a seven-borough area of east London. Using the Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC) linked to the geodemographic Mosaic codes based on pupils' home postcode, the authors demonstrate that, although ethnicity accounts for some of the variation in performance, this is considerably less than that accounted for by pupil social background. In addition, they show that it is not simply the social background of the individual pupil that affects school performance at GCSE. The proportion of pupils from a given social background plays some role in boosting or diminishing the overall school performance and will influence the performance of individual pupils whatever their background. It is argued that these social background effects together with the school composition effects have a considerable impact on school performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]