High-achieving pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds more likely to be criminalised, UCL finds
The most socioeconomically disadvantaged group also reported higher absence rates throughout secondary school and were more likely to be temporarily excluded
Academically high-achieving teenagers from the most deprived backgrounds in England are five times more likely to be arrested and cautioned or sentenced than their peers from the wealthiest backgrounds, new research by a UCL academic has found.
Professor John Jerrim studied the social outcomes of state school pupils in the lowest and highest socioeconomic groups, who scored in the top 25% in Key Stage 2 tests, which are taken at the end of primary school.
Using pre-pandemic data following three school cohorts (children born in 1990/91,1994/95 and 2000/01), he found that those in the lowest group were consistently more likely to be cautioned or sentenced by police, with the gap peaking at the age of 16, with a rate of 2.5% for the most disadvantaged group versus 0.5% for the highest socio-economic group.
The report, published by the UCL Social Research Institute and funded by the Nuffield Foundation, is the largest study of high-achieving children’s attendance, exclusion and criminal outcomes to date.
It has significant policy implications for targeted interventions in early secondary school to further boost social mobility opportunities, ensure high achievers from all backgrounds can reach their full potential and address later social problems.
The most socioeconomically disadvantaged group also reported higher absence rates throughout secondary school and were more likely to be temporarily excluded. The absence rate for advantaged students during this pre-pandemic period was stable throughout secondary school, rising from 3.5% in Year 7 to 4% in Year 10.
The rate for the disadvantaged group increased from 5.5% in Year 7 to around 7% by Year 10, the first year of GCSEs. In Year 10, disadvantaged students were over four times more likely to be temporarily excluded from school than their advantaged peers, at 5.4% versus 1.2%.
Jerrim said: “High-achieving children from disadvantaged backgrounds are a really important group for promoting social mobility. If they can’t go on to succeed in life, then who from a disadvantaged background can? Unfortunately, our research highlights how too many are struggling to fulfil their potential. Worse still, an important minority get into trouble with the law.”
Jerrim added that more research is needed to establish early policies in schools to maintain engagement for disadvantaged high achievers, with specific actions required to address the needs of different demographic groups.
Paul Whiteman, general secretary at school leaders’ union NAHT, said: “Schools work hard to support pupils, providing an inclusive and safe environment for them to thrive and make progress in their education. But ultimately disruptive behaviour and poor attendance are often symptoms of deeply-ingrained issues which may lie beyond the school gates.
“It’s vital that families and schools can access timely expert support from services like social care and mental health which were under-funded for many years under the previous government. No child should see their life chances harmed by their background.”