What happens to pupils who ‘disappear’ from school rolls? Not those who are permanently expelled, but pupils who, before they sit their GCSEs in year 11, somehow, become ‘lost’ to the school system?

The issue of missing pupils was raised, last week, by the independent research think tank Education Datalab which revealed the high number, about 20,000 pupils, who ‘disappear’ from mainstream secondary school rolls before they sit their GCSE exams. As the researchers point out, the educational outcomes for these pupils are very poor, with only 6 per cent achieving five good GCSEs.

Having revealed the large numbers of pupils who go ‘off roll’ in some schools, the researchers issue a stark warning: “Our research leads us to conclude that, in some cases, pupils are being ‘managed out’ of mainstream schools before this point with the effect of boosting the league table performance of the school which the pupil leaves.”

There can be no doubt that there could be an incentive for some schools to rid themselves of pupils they regard as troublesome. There are, Education Datalab reveals, schools gaining up to 17 percentage points in their GCSE pass rates, according to the data for four cohorts - or 16 percentage points for the most recent cohort in the research, who took GCSEs in 2015 - if they ‘lose’ those pupils who are unlikely to do well.

School league tables could, argue Education Datalab, be calculated differently and more fairly, according to the length of time pupils actually spend in a school. So, if, out of the 15 terms a pupil spends in secondary education, six terms were spent in one school then that school would be accountable for 40 per cent of that pupil’s GCSE results.

London schools would be particularly affected if their results were recalibrated in this way. Some 49 out of the 100 schools whose results would shift dramatically down the league tables, are located in the capital.

Slipping through the ever-widening data net

But one academy chain - Harris - would see its position in the league tables decline most dramatically. One Harris academy has, in the last four years, ‘lost’ 66 of its pupils before the October of their final year. Harris academies would have nine of the bottom 100 schools whose results would see the sharpest fall if they were accountable, in the way Education Datalab suggests, for the percentage of time those pupils spent in those schools.

The educational consequences for all children who leave school before they take GCSEs are significant. These children are disproportionately more likely to be poor and/or to have special needs. They are likely to be amongst the most vulnerable pupils and less likely to have strong social connections, and parents, who have the social capital, and the confidence, to argue their case, or to contact the authorities to protest about their child’s informal exclusion from school. For many of these pupils, even though their behaviour may be very challenging at times, school is a safe place, perhaps the only place, they feel secure in what may be very fractured and disrupted lives.

So, I ask a question: how is it in an education system dominated by data, have these children, apparently, been allowed to slip through the ever-widening data net? No government agency appears to be investigating the case of these disappearing children. Ofsted routinely awards Harris academies ‘outstanding’ inspection judgements. 

Nor has there been, as far as I am aware any official intervention by regional schools’ commissioners into those schools whose year 11 cohorts show significant pupil shrinkage.

A Harris spokesperson explained declining pupil numbers as an accident of geography: “London - which is where all of our schools are located”, said the spokesperson, “has high pupil mobility. It is no surprise that this would be even higher in recently failing schools with very large catchment areas and in areas of disadvantage.”

This may, indeed, be the explanation for the declining roles at Harris academies. But questions remain because Education Datalab is not the first to raise the issue of Harris academies shrinking pupil roles as the pupils approach their GCSE exams in year 11.

In February 2014 Sylvia McNamara, the director for learning, school improvement and inclusion for Croydon Council, wrote to Peter Lauener, the chief executive of the Education Funding Agency, expressing her concern that while the majority of the schools in Croydon showed little or no change in cohort size, the Harris academies in Croydon were losing large numbers of pupils.

Harris has repeatedly made it clear that any pupils who leave its Croydon schools are reported to Croydon’s behaviour welfare service.

But the question of how all our schools protect and educate our most vulnerable pupils must be answered. These pupils cannot be treated as ‘damaged goods’. They must not be allowed to fall through the cracks created by England’s fragmented and increasingly marketised and inadequately regulated education system. Education Datalab have devised a new way of holding a school accountable in proportion to the time pupils are taught there. This is an idea which is worthy of very serious consideration.

Dr Mary Bousted is general secretary of the ATL union. She tweets as @MaryBoustedATL

For more columns by Mary, visit her back-catalogue.  

Want to keep up with the latest education news and opinion? Follow TES on Twitter and like TES on Facebook