Education policy in Britain before 1988

1944 Education Act & 1965 Comprehensive Education Act

What were the aims of the 1944 Education Act?

• introduce meritocracy to education

• allow status to be achieved through effort and ability

• abolish inequalities in state education

What was the main legislation of the 1944 Education Act?

• the tripartite system

• children were allocated to one of three different types of secondary school according to their abilities

• children's abilities were identified by an IQ test called the 11+ exam (children who passed the 11+ attended grammar school)

• introduced compulsory state education up to age 14
  

What were the three types of secondary school involved in the tripartite system?

• grammar schools

• secondary modern schools

• technical schools

What were the strengths and weaknesses of the 1944 Education Act?

Strengths	Weaknesses
ensured education for all children, regardless of class or gender	reproduced class inequalities
prevented less intellectual students from “holding back” more intelligent students	class segregation
	girls required higher marks than boys to pass the 11+

What were the aims of the 1965 Comprehensive Education Act?

• to overcome the class divide of the tripartite system

• to truly make education meritocratic

What was the main legislation of the 1965 Comprehensive Education Act?

• abolished the 11+ exam

• abolished school selection at age 11

• introduced comprehensive schools

• grammar schools and secondary modern schools were abolished and replaced with comprehensive schools

• local education authorities could decide whether to “go comprehensive”

• more mixed ability teaching

• ensure every local community has a good school

• aimed to educate all children in the same type of secondary school

What were the strengths and weaknesses of the 1965 Comprehensive Education Act?

Strengths	Weaknesses
ended the class divide of the tripartite system	the grammar-secondary modern divide still exists in many areas
brought young people of different class backgrounds together	middle class students still performed better as schools in wealthier areas performed better