Distance, education and inequality

Hamnett, Chris; Butler, Tim

doi:10.1080/03050068.2013.807165

Cited by 41 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Well‐educated employed parents on higher incomes have greater resources to gain advantage in the housing market when pursuing particular schools (Francis & Hutchings, ). School catchments can be a codified exclusionary practice that contributes to housing prices in desirable schools' enrolment area (Hamnett & Butler, , ). And where formal catchments do not exist, proximity to desirable schools is still highlighted in real estate marketing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Smith

Parr

Muhidin

2018

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article identifies spatial dimensions of educational outcomes using maps of the 2016 Grade 5 reading results for Australia's National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy for all Australian schools. A geographical information system (GIS) was used to overlay schools' results onto suburbs' advantage or disadvantage to visualise spatial patterns. We then examined the extent to which school results “cluster” in socio‐economically advantaged and disadvantaged suburbs and considered the consistency of spatial patterns for results across major cities. That work illustrates both how GIS can foreground educational inequality and how “the spatial” is more than corollary for student socio‐economic status. Results show substantial differences between urban and remote areas and towns of different size. Maps of cities visualise spatial “clustering” patterns of school results, with most schools in advantaged suburbs having high results and almost no schools in disadvantaged suburbs having high results. Educational outcomes strongly align to local socio‐demographic characteristics, and parallel host communities’ levels of advantage or disadvantage. Differences between public and private schools are less significant than within‐sector differences for schools in advantaged or disadvantaged locales. Patterns in all cities are consistent—schools in advantaged suburbs predominantly have high results, whereas non‐government schools generally perform better than government schools in disadvantaged suburbs. Most concerning is the persistent and increasing trajectory of results in advantaged, and more so in disadvantaged suburbs, of all cities since the first National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy in 2008. Ameliorating spatial inequality between primary schools is one of the greatest challenges for Australians.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Smith

Parr

Muhidin

2018

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the Law of Compulsory Education enacted in 1986 and revised in 2006 in P. R. China, the governments at all levels should ensure the right of 'attending nearby schools' for national school-age children. However, with the current hukou system (the registered residence system) fixing public welfare with registered residence locations, such a term is said to be defective in that a child may have no access if he or she is not available for attending a public primary school near the registered home, as is seen in the cases of migrant children (Yang, 2006).The other way is to allow or support school choice in education policy which turns attending nearby schools into an option for parents, just partly considering the distance between school and home, as in the case of England and Wales (Hamnett and Butler, 2013). In other developed countries such as the US, despite having a typical structure of school districts, it is also experiencing an overall trend to develop diverse alternatives for school choice (Ingram and Kenyon, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Attending Nearby Schools” in Central Beijing: Influencing Factors and the Policy Distortion

Zhang

2016

IRSPSD International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Whether the principle of 'attending nearby schools' is an obligation or an option makes a big difference in promoting education equity. This paper explores how the setting up of a de jure catchment area together with other complex socio-economic factors in China's context distorted the initiative intention of 'attending nearby schools', via a case study of Xicheng District in central Beijing where quality public schools are concentrated and their catchment areas were accurately divided. With the unbalanced distribution of basic education resources formed by history, the remaining controversial hukou system, and the rapid urban and social transformations increasing parental choice, a contradiction exists within the Chinese public school enrolment system where the admission right is directly bound up with residential registration (hukou): an emphasis of equal access to basic education, but an opposite outcome. In order to reveal the causes and effects of the 'attending nearby schools' policy in practice, the paper illustrates the spatial pattern of de jure school catchment areas by GIS-based mapping, explores the relationship in demographics classified by hukou status between the schools and catchments and collected representative opinions among residents on the policy implementation through semi-structured in-depth interviews. By explaining the disparity between school composition and the residential pattern of typical catchments with the choice behaviours of nonnative/native groups, the paper discusses the legitimacy underlying the current enrolment system and makes suggestions for future reform.

show abstract

“…However, also the opposite occurs. As has been discussed in various contexts (Boterman, 2013;Hamnett & Butler, 2013;Rangvid, 2007;Raveaud & Van Zanten, 2007) middle class parents may also try to avoid the diversity of the neighbourhood and send their children to specific schools, within but also typically out of the area. Middle classes in diverse contexts play 'games of proximity and distance' (Andreotti et al, 2013) in which exposure to diversity is carefully managed in everyday practices, participating in some aspects of neighbourhood diversity, but opting out of other domains.…”

Section: Gentrification and School Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

School choice and school segregation in the context of gentrifying Amsterdam

Boterman

2020

Housing Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in the school-aged population due to gentrification can have paradoxical effects on school, choice dynamics and segregation. This article seeks to understand the changing school choice dynamics in gentrifying Amsterdam. Drawing on individual-level geocoded data, this article reveals the school choice of different groups of parents and how they are contingent on social class composition of their residential neighbourhood. It finds that different groups of parents enrol their children in different types of schools even if they live in the same neighbourhoods. This is in large part due to processes of disaffiliation and selective belonging from the part of ''white' middle classes who choose specific schools within and outside of their neighbourhood. Yet, other groups of parents also have their children in schools outside of the neighbourhood thereby contributing to high levels of segregation too. Nonetheless, the article concludes that gentrification paradoxically leads to both greater concentration of highly educated and more mix in other schools.

show abstract

Distance, education and inequality

Cited by 41 publications

References 25 publications

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

Mapping schools' NAPLAN results: a spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia

“Attending Nearby Schools” in Central Beijing: Influencing Factors and the Policy Distortion

School choice and school segregation in the context of gentrifying Amsterdam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About