Enrolling in the Closest School or Not? Implications of School Choice Decisions for Active Transport to School

Abstract

Absence of requirements to attend a local school combined with social factors driving school choice make distance to school less important in school choice decisions. However, school choice decisions have implications not only for education but also for public health, transport and environmental sustainability. This study examined correlates of adolescents’ enrolment in the closest school in the absence of school zoning policies and its implications for active transport to school. Adolescents (n=797; age: 15.2±1.4 years; 51.4% boys) from six non-integrated public secondary schools without school zoning in Dunedin, New Zealand, completed an online survey including items on school choice. Distance to school was calculated using Geographic Information Systems network analysis. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests, Chi-square tests and mixed effects binary logistic regression analysis. Half of adolescents (51.3%) enrolled in the closest school (range across schools: 28.3% to 81.6%). These adolescents had three times higher rates of walking to school (52.3% vs. 14.4%), five times higher rates active transport to school (46.5% vs. 8.8%) and >40% lower rates of using only motorized transport to school (40.3% vs. 68.8%) compared to those who did not enrol in the closest school (all p<0.05). Among adolescents who enrolled in the closest school, a greater proportion reported choosing their school because of its proximity to home (enrolled versus did not enrol in the closest school: 67.5% vs. 14.2%) and existing social connections at school (siblings attended/enrolled: 35.6% vs. 26.5%; parents/family members attended in the past: 28.4% vs. 19.6%; friends enrolled: 55.5% vs. 51.5%) compared to their counterparts (all p<0.05). In a multivariate analysis, positive correlates of enrolment in the closest school were attending a co-educational school [4.55 (2.82-7.32)] and choosing school because of its proximity to home [2.29 (1.97-2.66)] whereas negative correlates were distance to school [OR (95%CI): 0.87 (0.83-0.91)] and negative comments from students from the closest school [0.68 (0.47-0.98]. In the absence of school zoning, shorter distance to school, choosing school because of its proximity to home, co-educational school status, and absence of negative peer feedback were associated with adolescents’ enrolment in the closest secondary school. Policies that incentivise enrolment in the closest school could increase the rates of active transport and may contribute to addressing physical inactivity among adolescents, traffic congestion and sustainability concerns. Other consequences of such policies including implications for house pricing and reinforcing class/wealth structures also need to be considered.