Because the Sutton Trust has fixated on independent schools, grammar schools and Oxbridge, it has missed the more prevalent form of inequality – the socially selective comprehensives (Some comprehensive schools ‘more socially selective than grammars’, 11 January).
Well-off parents don’t have to pay for extra tutoring for entrance exams or school fees, they simply move closer to their preferred institution.
House prices are often pushed up where the local school has an outstanding or even good Ofsted grade. So when children have completed their qualifications the parental property can be sold – possibly at a profit.
But what can be done to ensure a fairer mix in each school? No one can influence the housing market. And if local authorities decide to allocate places according to quotas rather than proximity, transport costs would increase to bus children across areas.
The Sutton Trust has done some good work, but it has tended to concentrate on the small elite and the type of institution. It has not looked at even greater unfairness such as funding inequality for different areas, nor has it considered that one of the key reasons for the much-trumpeted success of the London Challenge was that it had the resources needed to ensure higher attainment in the capital.
Perhaps, as Geoff Barton, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, points out, the best way to address social inequality is to direct more resources to those whose need is greatest.
Yvonne Williams
Ryde, Isle of Wight
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
