Dan is 11. This month he started at secondary school. He lives on the poorer side of town and his carers are sending him to the high school round the corner. It's in special measures and is undersubscribed, with results that are nothing to write home about. But Dan doesn't know that.
Dan has been in local authority care since he was a tot. As a looked-after child, Dan could have gone to any local authority school he chose. Children in care have had the "highest priority" in admissions since 1998. It's an entitlement the government insists it is preserving, but critics warn that it will be undermined by the greater control academies and free schools are being given over pupil entry.
Even as it stands now, "highest priority" hasn't got many of these vulnerable children into outstanding schools. England's 64,500 looked-after children, some of the most fragile in society, are paradoxically still far more likely to go to failing schools than their peers, as revealed by Department for Education figures.
What do you think of the findings? Should more be done to ensure looked-after children get good school places? Do you think the current system of priorities is fair? Tell us what you think, in today's Great Debate discussion...
See moreBack to All News & Celebs articles
