School Marketing, Admissions, And Accessibility: A Mixed-Methods Study of High Schools of Choice in Washington, DC and London, UK

Abstract

Near the turn of the century, policymakers in both the United States and the United Kingdom created opportunities for educators and organizations to establish new public schools that would be accountable to the state for student outcomes and non-selective, but privately sponsored and operated and have no geographical zones. The intention was to encourage educational innovation and increase school options for families, especially in areas with lower-performing traditional public schools. However, early studies of these reforms suggest that non-selective schools sometimes market to a demographic of students that will help the school survive its competitive market and meet accountability targets. To contribute to this literature, my thesis investigates to what extent non-selective, state-funded schools selectively market their schools, and how these practices relate to principals’ perceptions of market competition and accountability pressure. Understanding how accountability systems shape marketing practices required a cross-national comparison, as such systems are generally uniform within each country. For this reason, I chose to contrast the charter school system in Washington, D.C. and the academy and free school system in London, UK. I utilized both content analysis and qualitative interviews with principals to address these questions. I first analyzed the market characteristics and accountability systems in both cities, and suggested how they might incentivize or prevent selective marketing. I then analyzed the marketing strategies of a random sample of charter high school websites and secondary academy websites. Finally, I interviewed principals and headteachers from 11 secondary schools, and analyzed their perceptions of accountability pressure and the marketing strategies they used. I found that both London and D.C. schools emphasized their organizational outputs, such as academic success, moral values, extracurricular participation, and test scores. I found that schools were more likely to market “emotional selling points” – subjective items such as ethos, school values, and student satisfaction. Schools were less likely to market items that clearly demonstrate the schools value-added, such as student feedback, students’ long-term progress, test scores, and special education support. Furthermore, D.C. schools were less consistent than London schools in providing clear explanations of how to enroll. In contrast to prior research, I find no instances of explicit selective outreach strategies or admissions policies, but do find some outreach strategies that have the potential to affect access. Notably, admissions policies, which allow schools to establish admissions preferences based on geography and sibling status, may play a more central role in decreasing access for disadvantaged populations. I conclude by considering the implications of my findings for policymakers, school leaders, and researchers, and discuss practices and admissions policies that may help ensure that all students have equitable access to these schools.