Learning from Open Access

Today’s report by the Sutton Trust on the career and education outcomes of beneficiaries of the Assisted Places Scheme has widely been interpreted as supporting the recreation of the APS.  But, in fact, the Trust does not believe that resurrecting that scheme is desirable; rather we have long argued the case for Open Access – a means of democratising entry to all the places at independent day schools,  not just a handful.  We see real benefits for social mobility of 100% of places at such schools being opened up to bright students, regardless of background.

Of course, we firmly believe that the focus of efforts should be on improving the state sector – that is where the Trust devotes the majority of its resources – but you can walk and chew gum at the same time.  And as long as these schools exist as feeders to leading universities and top professions, surely it is better for them to be open to low and middle income young people too?

From 2000 to 2007, the Trust ran a pilot at the Belvedere School, Liverpool, which showed just what was possible if Open Access were to be rolled out, and the boost it could be for the life chances of academically talented young people from non-privileged homes. Here is perhaps not the place to argue the merits of the case – the debate is complex and is covered in a 2012 report on Open Access – but in light of today’s press coverage, it is worth being reminded of the things we learnt from the Belvedere experience:

• That there are plenty of bright young people out there from low and middle income homes who can compete for places at a highly academic independent day schools; talent is not an issue
• That outreach into local primary schools is key to broadening the social base of these schools – otherwise there is a real danger such initiatives only benefit those with the most savvy and motivated parents
• That tests matter – how you asses pupils’ potential is key to making sure the intake is fairer; achievement tests alone tend to benefit the better off and well-coached
• That opening up independent day schools doesn’t necessary threaten state schools – Belvedere was welcomed by primary schools in the Merseyside area, and the catchment of the school was wide enough to ensure the impact on state secondaries was minimal
• Our experience in Liverpool suggests Open Access would be popular with parents – many of these independent day schools were once mainly state-funded; communities want them to once again serve local people
• ‎That a critical mass of students from different background is important in creating a happy school – at the Belvedere, a third of pupils were on free places, a third of partially free places, and a third paid the whole cost.
• That state funding is key to opening up the sector in a meaningful way – philanthropy can take you so far, but to finally bridge the stat-independent divide requires the investment of the government – and investment that is well worth making
•  That other independent schools‎ would want to join the Open Access scheme – Belvedere wasn’t a one trick pony; we now have 90 schools who say they would join a national Open Access scheme if it were offered.

The debate about Open Access and the role of the independent sector in state education will continue well beyond today’s report. But amid all the heat, it is worth looking at the light: what we have learnt from previous schemes – including the Direct Grant scheme, the Assisted Places Scheme and the Trust’s own experience at the Belvedere School – and to ask probing questions about the alternatives.  Is the status quo acceptable, or do we need to be bolder in how we might re-cast the boundaries between private and state education?   In the meantime, there is every reason to work with comprehensive state schools so that they provide the best possible opportunities for all their students – including those who might, twenty years ago, have been eligible for the Assisted Places Scheme.