History of Educational Policy

• Prior to the start of the 19th century, there were no state schools in the UK.
• Before 1833 the state and government spent nothing on education.
• The industrial Revolution created a demand for an educated workforce, and by the end of the 19th century the state began to play an active role in education.
• By 1880, schooling was compulsory for all children ages five to thirteen.
• In 1880, the type of education you received depended on your social status and economic background, and schooling/education did very little to change an individuals' ascribed status.
• Middle-class pupils, who attended fee-paying schools, were given an academic curriculum which prepared them for middle-class professions, or other work which required a good standard of education i.e. administrative work.
• By 1944, education came to be influenced by the idea of 'meritocracy'
• Meritocracy = " a social system whereby people have equal opportunity to succeed based on their individual abilities and merits rather than their ascribed status"
• Working class pupils were educated with the basic literacy and numeracy skills required for them to engage in routine factory work and industry; they were also socialised in to having an obedient attitude towards their middle class superiors.
• The Education Act (1944)- "The Tripartite system"

  • Children, at aged eleven, would take a test to demonstrate their academic abilities (the 11+ exam).
  • The results of the 11+ exam would determine which of three schooling routes the pupil would take:
  • Grammar schools
  • Secondary modern schools
  • Technical schools
• • Grammar schools- the top 20% in the 11+ would be sent to grammar schools, where they were given a higher level of education, an academic curriculum and access to non-manual jobs.
• • Secondary modern schools- the remaining 80% of pupils who sit the 11+ are given a non-academic 'practical' curriculum and are offered access to manual labour jobs is given. Most students at secondary modern schools were working class.
• • Technical schools- focused on technical skills which allowed individuals to work in trades. There were significantly fewer technical schools than the other two types.
• 'The Tripartite System' Evaluation

  • Rather than promote meritocracy, the tripartite system further created inequalities.
  • By channelling two social classes in to different types of school which promoted unequal opportunities.
  • It also reproduced gender inequalities by requiring girls to achieve a higher pass grade than boys would need to obtain a place in a grammar school.
  • It creates and perpetuates the notion of intelligence and ability being innate, rather than acquired, and can be measured early in life.
• The Comprehensive system (1965)

  • Introduced with the aim to overcome the tripartite system's class division and introduce a more meritocratic education system.
  • The 11+ was abolished.
  • Grammar schools and secondary moderns were abolished from 1965 onwards and replaced with comprehensive schools.
  • Comprehensive schools selected their students not based on ability, but by catchment area.
  • It was up to the local education authorities to decide whether or not to switch to comprehensive schooling, and not all of them did, which explains why some grammar schools still exist.
• Functionalist Perspective on the Comprehensive System (1965)

  • It promotes social integration between classes and allows the identification of skills for the meritocratic selection of future work roles.
  • Comprehensive schools allow a longer period of time for pupils skills to be identified, making it more meritocratic than the Tripartite System where skills were identified at age eleven.
• Marxist Perspective on the Comprehensive System(1965)

  • Comprehensive schooling is not meritocratic; they reproduce class inequalities through of streaming and labelling theory.
  • Streaming
  • 'Mixed-ability teaching' is the opposite of 'streaming'.
  • Comprehensive schooling continually deny working class pupils equality of opportunities.
  • 'The Myth of Meritocracy'
  • Schools appear meritocratic but in fact they justify and legitimise inequalities by making differences in attainment appear fair, just and a result of individual performance or success rather than due to lack of opportunities.
• Streaming=" splitting pupils in to groups based on ability and then teaching them separately from each other across all subject areas."
• Gillborn and Youdell(2000) identified four dimensions of equality of educational opportunity:

  1. Access= Everyone should be able to go to school.
  2. Participation= Equal rights to participate in school processes i.e. school trips.
  3. Circumstance= Everyone should have the same socioeconomic background to start at the same point.
  4. Outcome= Equal chance to succeed after school i.e. securing employment or further education.
• Marketisation= "the process of introducing market forces, such as consumer choice and competition between suppliers, in to areas which are run by government and the state, such as education."
• Marketisation was first introduced in to UK educational policy in the Education Reform Act (1988), introduced by the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher.
• Since marketisation first appeared in education, it has been a continuing theme in education.

  • 1997 labour government had policies which emphasised diversity and choice.
  • 2010 Coalition government took marketisation one step further with the creation of academics and free schools.
• Marketisation policies are favoured because:

  • Schools are responsible for attracting their 'customers'
  • schools must compete with each other in the market, raising overall standards.
  • Schools which thrive and succeed will continue, whereas schools which don't will go 'out of business.'
  • They create diversity among schools.
  • They give parents increased choice.
• Parentocracy

  • "Power is moved away from the schools and teachers and moved towards the parents" (David 1993).
  • "rule by parents"-literally.
• The Education Reform Act (1988)

  • Introduced marketisation and parentocracy to education.
  • Introduced the National Curriculum.
  • Open enrolment.
  • OFSTED and league tables.
• The Education Reform Act(1988)

  Formula Funding

  • Schools are allocated funding based on the number of pupils they have; more-popular schools get more funding than the less-popular schools.
  • This allows them to spend greater amounts of money on resources, such as facilities, educational materials and better-qualified teachers.
  • Their popularity allows them to be more selective in the pupil they recruit, in the same way league tables do.
• The Education Reform Act (1988)

  Formula Funding

  • less-popular schools receive less funding, and therefore lose income and are unable to match the facilities, educational materials and quality of teaching in more-popular schools.
  • This decline in quality means the less-popular schools attracts fewer pupils, or cannot afford to be as selective in the type of pupil it recruits, leading to a further reduction in funding.
• The Success of the Education Reform Act (1988)

  • No government since has made overwhelming changes to the education system or the way it works, suggesting the Act is effective and achieving its aims.
  • The principle of league tables and competitions is used internationally; PISA- Programme for International Student Assessment.
  • GCSE results have improved almost every year since the introduction of marketisation policies; standards measurably improved.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  The Reproduction of Inequality

  • Bartlett (1993) 'Cream-skimming'- the 'good schools' at the top of league tables can afford to be more selective in the pupils they recruit, often choosing the high-achieving middle class pupils.
  • 'Silt-shifting'- the 'good schools' at the top of league tables can therefore avoid recruiting less-able pupils with lower levels of academic achievement, which could damage the school's position in the league tables.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  The Reproduction of Inequality

  • For schools at the bottom of the league table the reverse is true- they are in no position to be selective and must recruit the students who are less-able, and mainly working-class.
  • This gives them poorer results compared with other schools, and they remain at the bottom of the league table and unattractive to middle-class parents.
  • League tables create and reproduce inequalities based on social class as a result of this.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  Middle class parents have an advantage.

  Gewirtz (1995)

  • Economic capital:
  • Transport costs- more likely to own two cars and be able to travel further distances to better schools.
  • Selection by mortgage- as schools improve, the house prices within the catchment area increase, which prices working class families out of the market; middle class families occupy all the catchment areas for the best schools.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  Middle class parents have an advantage.

  Gewirtz (1995)

  • Cultural capital:
  • "the knowledge, skills, values, attitudes, language, abilities and tastes which are transmitted by middle class parents to their children."
  • Middle class parents have more experience of schooling and are more comfortable dealing with education, interacting with teaching staff and generally have a more informed decision about school selection due to their level of education.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  The Myth of Parentocracy

  • Ball and Whitty (1998) argue parentocracy is nothing more than the illusion of choice; it appears that all parents have the same freedoms to choose which school their children attend, but they do not.
  • League tables and formula funding reproduce and justify inequalities.
  • Gewirtz (1995)- economic and cultural capital.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act(1988)

  • Standardized testing leads to negative labelling and self-fulfilling prophecy for those who fail exams; schools also tend to emphasise top-set classes to improve overall grades and league table position.
  • Impression management.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  • League tables encourage 'teaching to the test'
  • League tables mean schools must undertake impression management and ensure as many students pass exams as possible.
  • Teaching is therefore aimed at encouraging pupils to pass a standardised test, which may stifle creativity, and critical and lateral thinking.
• Problems with the Education Reform Act (1988)

  • Correlation is NOT causation.
  • GCSE results may have improved over the last thirty years without marketisation; there may be another factor which may cause these trends.
  • Focussing on exam results and performance in league tables creates unnecessary stress on pupils as the expectation to perform well rises.
  • A student conducted by the National Education Union in 2018 showed 88% of primary school teachers believe SATs do not benefit learning, and 90% said they believe they are detrimental to the well-being of children.