Education policies and their impact on achievement Flashcards
The 1940s:
1944 Education Act (the tripartite system)
> Following the end of WW2, the government were determined to create an education system that would help to rebuild Britain. Each and every child was to benefit from free, state-funded education.
At 11+ years of age (end of primary school), each child would sit an intelligence test which would identify which of three types of school would best meet their secondary education needs.
-Grammar Schools- for those who scored the highest marks in the 11+
-Technical schools- for those who are particularly gifted in practical work.
-Secondary-modern school- for everybody else.
The government were keen to promote the idea that each of the above schools would be equal in every way (parity of esteem).
EVALUATION:
> Feminist groups claimed that girls were often artificially failed, in order to prevent too many from going to grammar schools.
> This system legitimated inequality by claiming that it was pupils IQ that determined what school they went to. However, Marxists sociologists claimed that social class background was the main reason.
> Many saw the 11+ as a pass/fail exam. Many people who were made to attend secondary modern schools developed low self esteem. In feeling like a failure, self-fulfilling prophecies of underachievement were common, as were the development of anti-school subcultures.
1960’s
Comprehensive education policy
> The comprehensive system was brought in from 1965 onwards partly to reduce inequality by abolishing the 11+ and replacing grammar schools and secondary moderns with comprehensive schools (all-inclusive schools) that all pupils in the area would attend.
Schools would continue to cater for people’s different abilities through the use of settings and streaming.
Pupils from a range of social backgrounds (class, ethnicity and gender) would be able to mix together. This is something functionalists welcomed since the social mixing of children from a range of backgrounds resembles a wider society.
EVALUATION:
> Setting and streaming were used to be based on academic ability. However, research quickly highlighted that negative teacher labelling also influenced decisions.
> Working-class pupils were more likely to be put into lower sets and streams, even when there was limited evidence of their academic ability.
1980s
Conservative education policy
New right influences/ The marketisation of education
Aim 1
Aim 1:
Ensuring the education meets the needs of the industry
> The first main aim of the conservative education policy was to develop an education system which met the needs of industry. One way of this was to introduce and promote vocational courses which would ensure that pupils had the necessary skills that they needed for work.
Youth Training Schemes were introduced, which offered school leavers an opportunity to study for vocational qualifications while working at the same time. The very latest vocational style qualifications that are set to take place in 2020 are T-Levels (Technical Levels).
EVALUATION:
> Some critics claimed that the conservative government had missed the point in introducing vocational qualifications to provide pupils with the necessary skills for work.
>Some sociologists claim that the quality of learning that those people taking vocational qualifications gained was inadequate.
1980s
Conservative education policy
New right influences/ The marketisation of education
Aim 2 Chubb and Moe
Aim 2:
The marketisation of education
Chubb and Moe:
> Chubb and Moe are new right thinkers who were keen for the education system to be opened up by market forces. By modelling schools on the standards that highly successful business use, in order to increase standards from which each student will benefit.
Succesful businesses:
>Employ well-trained staff
>Offer a product that people want
>Promote themselves well
>Grow and open new chains
>Make profit
successful schools:
> Employ well-qualified staff
>Offer a range of qualifications
>Open evenings to attract pupils
>Produce excellent exam results
Promoting parentocracy:
> Chubb and Moe proposed education reforms that would dissolve catchment areas. These, after all, enable schools to feel secure in knowing that they are guaranteed pupils through their doors i September, there is little choice for parents.
> Dissolving catchment areas would provide parents with greater choice over where to send their child.
Chubb and Moe believe all schools will improve and all pupils will benefit from an excellent education. In contrast, schools which fail to raise their standards have a risk of closure.
The marketisation of education also saw the introduction of:
League tables?
> These would be published to give parents the information they need when choosing a school.
League tables would list schools gcse and a level results, Schools would increasingly compete with one another in attempt to rise to the top position, resulting in an improvement in standards of schools.
The marketisation of education also saw the introduction of:
OFSTED inspections?
> These are regular inspections of a school, allowing providence to parents with a detailed insight into how a school is performing, and the quality of education their child is receiving.
In order to receive a great standard, it’s is hoped schools will work hard to raise standards.
The marketisation of education also saw the introduction of:
The National Curriculum?
> This was introduced as part of the education Reform Act (1988) and required all state schools to teach a common curriculum to pupils from all social backgrounds.
This also made it much easier for exam results to be compared and how teaching and learning is taking place.
The marketisation of education also saw the introduction of:
Formula Funding?
> Schools would receive a sum of money per students who attend. The more students a school attracts, the more money it recieves.
This should act as a motivator to encourage schools to raise standards and be popular. More funding for successful schools will allow them to grow and expand, offering more pupils an excellent place for education.
The marketisation of educations also saw the introduction of:
Open Enrolment?
> Catchment areas no longer fix who can and cannot attend a particular school. This provides parents with much greater choice about which school they would like their child to attend.
Popular schools will expand, whilst unpopular schools will decline and possibly close.
Evaluation about the marketisation of education.
Ball and Whitty (1998)
> Ball and whitty argue that marketisation reproduces class inequality e.g. through the publicity of league tables.
The use of funding can afford better staff and facilities, attracting more able students who gain better results. Working class children will therefore lose out.
> Ball argues that marketisation also legitimates inequality by suggesting that all parents are equally free to choose which school they want their child to go to. However, middle class parents have more economic and cultural capital and they Can afford to move into a catchment area with better schools.
Working class parents would miss out, who lack cultural capital and economic capital. It would seem therefore, there is a myth of parentocracy.
> League tables can be misleading. There is evidence to suggest that some of the best schools achieve poorly in the league table. These schools are often in run down areas but achieve high grades.
New labour policies 1990s
Modernisation of comprehensive schools/academies
New labour ploughed a lot of money into run-down schools that they called their ‘building schools for the future programme
> It was hoped that if poorer students were taught in 21st-century schools, they would feel more positive about their education.
EVALUATION:
> The financial crash that occurred in 2008 was blamed on the new labour for spending much more than they needed too.
Academies:
The new labour government also introduced academies, which saw failing schools being taken over by the government in partnership with businesses, churches or voluntary organisations.
EVALUATION:
> There is no evidence that the new labour academy programme achieved the desired results.
New Labours’ introduction of Education Action Zones (EAZs)
1990
> Poor deprived areas received funding to help raise standards for pupils’ achievement.
> Each zone was given 1 million to spend. Teachers were taught to be flexible and innovative- for example, by running Saturday morning classes.
EVALUATION:
>This was a very costly programme and the money was being spent in a variety of ways.
> Just because schools were open on the weekend, many students didn’t attend.
The aim higher programme
1990
> Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds would be encouraged to visit universities to help them get inspired towards success.
> Poorer students were particularly targeted due to their families previously not studying at universities.
Educational Maintenance Allowances
1990
> Resulted in poorer students receiving funding of around £30 per week to help them stay in school till the age of 16.
Hoped to tackle working-class underachievement.
The New Deal scheme
1990
This offered education and training to young people between the ages of 18-24 who had been out of work for more than 6 months.
> Working class gained advice on the available options suitable for them through work, academical courses and vocational courses.
