A level education educational policies

Conservative educational policies 2015-24

Significant changes to education system:

• further promoting academisation

• increasing vocational education

• raising standards

• social mobility

Conservative government continued with expansion of academies the 2010 and multi- academy trusts following the 2010’s academies act (Coalition), the drive to convert schools to academies continued

Conservative government encouraged schools to join multi-academy trusts to share expertise and resources

^ marginalized local authority maintained schools providing them with fewer resources and autonomy

• pupil premium: schools given extra funding for students from disadvantaged backgrounds to close the attainment gap, schools required to record how this funding was spent and impact on students progress: progress 8, attainment 8

• EBacc became a performance measure- required students to take core set of academic subjects- aim was for students particularly in disadvantaged areas to have access to a broad and rigorous education

• exams reformed to make them more challenging- shift from coursework to linear exams, intro 2017 a levels, and 2019 GCSES

• performance levels GCSE, numerical up to 9 instead of letters to better differentiate pupils

IMPACTS:

• By 2023, over 80 percent of secondary schools were academes or part of MATs

• The EBacc and reformed exams raised academic standards in some areas, but critics argued that these policies narrowed the curriculum

• Despite the funding for pupil premium some schools struggle to show immeasurable improvements in outcomes for disadvantaged students, critics argued that this policy alone could not address deep-rooted inequalities, some schools did use pupil premium funding effectively though

Sociological research into the impacts of conservative policies over the period

Ball and Youdell 2016: academies and free schools created a fragmented system- examined ongoing marketisation of education

• Lack of accountability in multi-academy trusts and the risk of prioritising financial efficiency over educational outcomes

Gillborn 2018: prevent reinforced racial and cultural stereotypes

Francis et al 2017: EBacc improved access to academic subjects but also narrowed the curriculum- particularly for students in lower performing schools

• argued that this shift undervalued non-academic subjects and widened the attainment gap

Gorard 2019: Pupil premium had inconsistent results

• Schools in wealthier areas often better equipped to use the funding effectively

• Schools in disadvantaged areas face structural barriers that limited its impact

Thompson and Russell 2020: limited effectiveness of T levels- challenges such as inadequate employer partnerships limited the effectiveness of these reforms

Feminists:

• gendered gap: leaves working class girls worse off, whilst boys do plumbing or other manual jobs, girls are directed to lower paid jobs such as nursing or hairdressing

Summary conservative education policies

Conservative education policies post-2015 have focused on raising standards, expanding academies, and increasing parental choice

Deepened inequalities and created a fragmented system

1988 Education reform act

introduced under conservative government, Margaret Thatcher

Core aim was to improve educational standards by introducing competition among schools and increasing accountability

• national curriculum: introduced for all students aged 5-16 in England and Wales

• Standardised testing introduced ages 7, 11 and 14 (called SATS) to measure students progress in the National Curriculum subjects- used to rank schools, published in league tables

• introduction of Grant-Maintained schools- opt out of local authority control and receive funding directly from central government- gave schools more financial and administrative autonomy

  ^competition: schools manage resources more effectively

• parental choice- select schools based on performance rather than proximity

• Increased accountability- accountable for their performance through inspections by Ofted

• formula funding

Impacts of education reform act 1988

Marketisation of education

criticism: schools that were underperforming more likely to be in underprivileged areas, faced reduced funding if they didn’t perform well on league tables, struggle with resources- marginalized

• schools do not immediately close this leads to a lot of sink schools if standards are not raised through competition between schools

Focus on standards

criticism: argue that this created a narrow focus on exam results at the expense of creativity and broader learning

Social inequalities

also created inequalities with middle class parents armed with more cultural/economic capital, better able too navigate the system and secure places for their children in high performing schools

Teaching to the test

schools focus of teaching to the test, potentially undermined important aims of education

Disadvantaged the w/c

Gertwitz: studied 14 London secondary schools and found this has only benefitted the middle class as there is a myth of parentocracy

• cream skimming

Education reform act 1988- sociological research

Ball, Bowe, and Gewirtz 1994

• explored how marketisation influenced parental choice and social inequalities

  ^ m/c parents privileged choosers using their resources to secure places in desirable schools, w/c parents disconnected choosers limited by financial constraints and lack of knowledge about the system

Gillborn and Youdell 2000

• found evidence of educational triage, where schools prioritised students on the C/D grade borderline to improve their league table rankings

  ^ neglected high achievers and those deemed unlikely to pass, disproportionally affecting working class and ethnic minority students

Tomlinson 2005

• critiqued the ERA’s focus on competition, arguing that it created a two-tier education system, schools in affluent areas thrived where those in deprived areas struggle due to underfunding and declining enrolment

2010 academies act

• Introduced under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition

• Built on Labour’s earlier Academies Programme

• Aimed to improve school standards, foster innovation, and increase parental choice

Though also sparked widespread sociological debate about its implications for inequality, accountability and the role of state in education

Key changes introduced by Act:

• academy status was now available to any school- previously limited to struggling schools in deprived areas, now available to any school

• Schools rated outstanding by Ofted were encouraged to convert

• Academies received funding directly from the central government bypassing local Authority oversight, gave them control over their budgets, staffing and curriculum within constraints of national curriculum themself

• set up by groups eg teachers, charities, parents, or faith organisations

• Facilitated the formation of MATs , where multiple academies were governed under a single trust

Impacts of 2010 academies Act

• By 2020, over 50 percent of state-funded schools in England had become academies, just 230 before act

  ^high performing schools tended to convert first often leaving struggling schools under local authority control

• Academies gained flexibility over curriculum design, term lengths, and teacher pay, schools could adapt curriculum/teaching to students needs, however led to inconsistencies in educational quality across the system

• Academies often received higher levels of funding than local authority-maintained schools, due to government grants and the ability to attract additional sponsorship from private businesses, two tier education system critics suggest

Impacts of 2010 academies Act 2

• Free schools introduced more diversity into the education system- some achieving strong outcomes, inefficiencies such as high costs and issues with oversight or responsibility of the free school

• The removal of local authority oversight raised concerns about accountability- parents and communities struggling to influence decisions made by academy trusts and free schools who were not directly elected or answerable to local stakeholders

• Parent and communities often found it harder to influence decisions made by academy trusts

Sociological research 2010 academies Act

Ball 2013- academies part of a broader neoliberal agenda that commodified education

^ competition and market principles increased inequality by privileging schools that could attract sponsorship and middleclass students

Francis and Hutchings 2013- many free schools were located in areas with little need for additional school places

^leading to inefficiencies in resource allocation

Gorard 2014- academies tended to admit fewer disadvantaged students

^selective intake, inequalities

Eyles and Machin (2015)- academy conversion had a positive impact on school performance, particularly for schools in disadvantaged areas- conducted quantitative research, noted that these improvements due to increased funding and leadership changes rather than inherent benefits of academy status

West and Bailey 2013- growth of academies undermined the principle of comprehensive education by creating a fragmented system-competition reduced collaboration and support for struggling schools, which had previously been facilitated by local authorities

1945 Tripartite system

How it improved the performance of the working-class

• Raised school leaving age to 15, giving working class children a secondary education for the first time

How it has disadvantaged the working-class

• made the majority of pupils feel like failures 80-85 percent of students failed

• no mobility between schools

• These were socially divisive as grammar schools were full of middle-class children

• The tripartite system was established by the 1944 Education Act which created three types of state-funded secondary school. The results of 11+ test would determine which school the pupil attended. Academic pupils would attend grammar schools, technical pupils would attend technical schools and practical pupils would attend secondary modern schools. In reality very few technical schools were built and in most areas of the country there was really a two-tier system.

Criticisms:

• Unfair for late developers

• Gender bias in 11 plus and subject choice- girls required higher scores in 11 plus than boys to get into grammar schools

• Secondary moderns were inferior

Comprehensive schools

How it has improved the performance of the working class

• Social mix of children in school due to catchment areas rather than an entrance exam

• No need for economic or cultural capital to help get your child into a school, non-selective education

• equality of opportunity

How it has disadvantaged the working class

• Most comprehensive schools have very skewed catchment areas- very m-c or very w-c

• Disadvantages those in w/c areas as they don’t have the money to prop up schools

• Social classes do not mix together in schools- evidenced by anti-school subcultures that are typically made up of w-c boys

more criticisms

• Banding and streaming produced class inequalities

• Parents had too little choice

New Labour

Policies:

• Academies

• Sure Start

• Literacy and numeracy hour- one hour per day of reading and maths

• educational maintenance allowance

• higher education tuition fees

  Compensatory education:

• Education Action Zones –  Extra money for schools in deprived areas

• Sure Start  – 12 hours a week free nursery provision for children aged 2-4

• Education Maintenance Allowance  – £30 per week to encourage students from low income households to stay on in 16-18 education

Criticisms:

• Sharon Gewirtz (2001) goes as far as to say that Compensatory Education is really an attempt to eradicate working class culture by transforming working class parents into (better) middle class parents.

• class sizes reduced to 30

• City Academies – 10% funded by the private or voluntary sector – extra money should help improve standards

• New Labour have established a ‘Learning Society’ - learning is more highly valued and created opportunities in which adults are able to relearn new skills in order to adapt to an ever changing economy, through early years focus and investment into schools, support for vocational education apprenticeships and diplomas(life long learning)

criticisms:

• The gap between middle classes and working classes achievement continues to grow due to selection by mortgage, cream skimming etc

• new labour have not improved equality of education opportunity

• Later academies not any better than LEA schools

• Tuition fees put working classes off university

Coalition 2010

Policies:

• Forced academisation

• Free Schools

• Increasing university tuition fees

Some policies were nominally aimed at promoting equality of educational opportunity, namely:

• The pupil premium

• Introducing bursary schemes for some further and higher education students.

  • Compensatory education:

Increased nursery places for underprivileged 2yr olds

• Children from extremely poor backgrounds statistically will be a year behind at age 3, nursery will allow them to catch up with their peers and develop skills such as behavioural/social/language skills, potty training etc, closes cultural learning Gap

• Criticism: some mothers may not want to take their children to nursery as they fear judgement from workers or other mums

Pupil premium

• Gives 1000 pounds to every child on FSM scheme to compensate for poverty, schools provide: booster groups, equipment and resources to get children up to speed

• criticisms: no monitoring of where this money is spent, cannot be sure if it reaches the right children

Forced academisation:

• New Labour opened academies in deprived areas to improve equality, while the Coalition allowed all schools to convert, aiming to make academy status the norm.

• The growth of academies under the coalition was extremely rapid; by 2013, there were almost 15 times as many academies in England, in May 2010, when there were 203 academies.

• As the academisation process evolved, schools which received an OFSTED grading of satisfactory or below were forced to convert to academies even when the majority of parents (90% in some cases) did not want the school to convert to an academy.

Evaluations: