Educational policy and equality

Educational policy in britain before 1988

Before industrial revolution in late 18th and early 19th century, no state schools, education available to rich minority. State made schooling compulsory from ages 5-13 in 1880, and schooling was based on class and what job they would go into.

The tripartite system

1944 Education Act - influenced by meritocracy, children allocated to 3 types of schools according to ability. Grammar schools - academic curriculum offering access to non manual jobs and higher education, for students who passed 11+ and were middle class. Secondary modern school - ‘practical’ curriculum, working class students who failed 11+. Reproduced class inequality. Third type technical schools only existed in a few areas only so was a bipartite system.

The comprehensive school system

1965 onwards, aimed to overcome class divide of tripartite system, 11+ was to be abolished along with grammars and secondary moderns, to be replaced by comprehensive schools that all pupils could attend. But was up to local education authority to go ‘comprehensive’ and not all did.

Functionalist view of comprehensive system

Promotes social integration by bringing children of diff social classes together. More meritocratic, as it gave children a long time to develop rather than 11+

Marxist view of comprehensive system

Reproduces class inequality through continuation of streaming and labelling, and makes unachievement seem fair and just as it looks like the fault of individual over the system.

Marketisation

The process of introducing market forces of consumer choice and competition between suppliers into areas run by the state, such as education. ‘education market’ due to reducing state control over education, increasing comp between schools and parental choice over schools. 1988 education reform act, onwards, especiallly in 2010 by creating academies and free schools. 

Marketisation - parentocracy (david)

Publication of league tables and ofted inspection reports, specialist schools, schools being able to opt out of local authority control, schools having to compete to attract pupils, shifts the power to the parents, allowing them to choose what school they send their kids to, creating diversity and raising standards.

H:Ball + Whitty - produces inequalities as schools become inequal, meaning some are worse than others

Marketisation - league tables + cream-skimming (Bartlett)

Exam league tables encourage schools to do this as parents are attracted to good league table rankings. Cream-skimming - ‘Good’ schools can be more selective, choose their own customers meaning they choose high achieving, middle-class pupils, and they gain an advantage. Silt shifting- ‘Good’ schools can avoid taking less able students who are likely to get poor results and damage schools league table position.

Marketisation - The funding formula

Schools are allocated funds based on how many pupils they attract, so popular schools get more funing and can afford better quality teachers and better facilities, and unpopular schools lose this so produces class inequality. Public policy Research institute - competition based education systems such as britains produce more segregation between children of diff social backgrounds.

Marketisation - Parental choice(Gewirtz)

14 London secondary schools, differences in parents economical and cultural capital lead to class differences in how far they can choose a school. Priviliged skilled choosers - Professional M/c parents who used capital to gain educational capital for their children. Able to take advantage of choices open to them, knowing how school admission systems work e.g putting particular schoola s first choice, and had time to visit schools, nd could pay extra travel costs for children.

Disconnected local choosers - W/c parents whose choices restricted by lack of economic and cultural capital, found it difficult to understand admission systems, and less able to take advantage, nearest school usually the only option due to less money.

Semi skilled choosers - mainly w/c byt ambitious for their children, less cultural capital so had to rely on peoples opinions about schools, so may or may not get into good school.

Marketisation - The myth of parentocracy (Ball)

Parents having choice over school is a ‘myth’ as it makes it appear that all parents have the same freedom to choose which school to send their children to, but middle class parents have better choice.

Marketisation - New labour and inequality

New labour governments 1997-2010 introduced policies reducing inequality, Designating deprived areas as education action zones providing them with additional resources, Education Maintenence allowance, payments to students from low income backgrounds to encourage them to stay on after 16

Conservative government policies from 2010

Conservative-led coalition government moving away from comprehensive schools led by local authorities. Academies - All schools encouraged to leave loal authority control, funding given directly too academies, and academies given control over curriculum. Removed focus from reducing inequality as all schools can be academies now.

Free schools - Run by parents, teachers or businesses, give them opportunity to create school if unhappy with state schools in local area. But take fewer disadvantaged students, Green et al 2015 found in year 1 12% of pupils were entitled to free school meals as against 24% in surrounding neighbourhood.

Conservative government policies from 2010 - policies to reduce inequality

Free school meals for all children in reception, year 1 or 2, pupil premium - money that a school recives for student from disadvantaged background, which can be spent on them.

The privatisation of education

The transfer of public assets such as schools to private companies, being a source of profit for capitalists. Private companies involved in building schools, providing supply teachers, ofsted inspection services, and even running local authorities. Ball - companies involved in such work expect to make up to ten times as much profit as they do on other contracts. And local authorities often obliged to enter these agreements as lack of funding from government.

The privatisation of education - The blurring of public/private boundary

Senior officials in public sectors such as directors, head teachers now leave to work for private sector education businesses, then bidding for contracts to provide services to schools or local authorities.

The privatisation of education - Privatisation and globalisation of educational policy

Many businesses in private sector owned by foreign companies, edexcel owned by US educational publishing and testing giant Pearson, and some Pearson GCSE exam answers marked in Sydney and Iowa.

The privatisation of education - The cola-isation of schools

Private sector entering education indirectly, e.g through vending machines and development of brand loyalty through display logos and sponsorships. Molnar - ‘Schools by their nature carry enormous goodwill and can offer legitimacy on anything associated with them’, so they are a product endorsement.