Social policy Flashcards
Explain the 1944 education act.
The 1944 Education Act (sometimes called the Butler Act) marked the beginning of the modern state education system in the UK with the introduction of compulsory state education up to the age of 14.
The policy was part of the establishment of the Welfare State, which was designed to tackle ‘five Giant Evils’, one of these being ignorance. The aim was to create a ‘land fit for heroes’ after the Second World War.
The act established three types of schools (known as the tripartite system): grammar schools, secondary modern schools and technical schools. In fact very few technical schools were ever built so the system was a two-tier one in most parts of the country.
Underpinning this system, at least in theory, was the idea of equality of opportunity.
Explain the tripartite education system.
Sir Cyril Burt, a psychologist, was very influential in the establishment of this system.
Burt believed that educational ability was usually innate, and that this ability could be scientifically measured.
It was therefore decided to test all children in their final year of primary education- the 11+ exam- to determine their suitability for a particular tier of education.
The more able students would attend grammar schools as it was expected that these types of schools would provide a more formal, traditional education, compared to the other two types of schools, technical and secondary modern, which would have varying degrees of vocational work associated with them.
Schools were meant to have similar standards of provision, and to have ‘parity of esteem’- to be considered as equal: there were just different schools suited to children’s different abilities.
What were the problems of the tripartite system?
Very few technical schools were ever built so the system was a two-tier one in most parts of the country.
Grammar schools were seen as the most prestigious type of secondary school, offering the academic subjects that could lead to university and well-paid jobs- there was not parity of esteem.
Some pupils ended up in secondary modern schools regardless of their ‘ability’- the pass mark for girls was set higher as there were fewer places available for them. In some parts of the country, only 12% of pupils could get grammar school places
The social class divide remained intact, with most grammar school places taken by middle-class pupils, with the mainly working-class pupils in secondary moderns effectively labelled ‘failures’. This may have led to a self-fulfilling prophecy- many children left school with no qualifications.
The 11+ test was selected at an arbitrary age- many children developed their abilities much later on, but secondary modern schools were unable to meet their educational needs so these children never fulfilled their potential.
Explain the dissatisfaction with the tripartite system.
Although the system had its supporters- it served many middle-class families very well- dissatisfaction with the Tripartite system grew over the years. Discontent centred on the way in which the system tended to channel students into the different schools based on their social background rather than their ability, effectively reproducing the class system and limiting social mobility.
This situation was seen as unacceptable for two main reasons:
For some at least, it was morally wrong - limiting the life-chances of some members of society, simply because of the social background of their parents. Evidence from sociologists suggested that social mobility had stalled.
It was an inefficient way of organising labour. If the primary “sorting principle” was social background and not ability, then talent was obviously being wasted.
Explain the 1960s move towards comprehensivisation.
The many problems of the tripartite system seemed to stem from its selective nature - and from the unequal quality and status of the three types of school.
The solution therefore seemed simple; abolish selection, and educate all students in the same school, regardless of their class, ethnicity, gender, or ability.
The initial move towards a comprehensive system began at the grassroot. From its very beginnings, some LEAs refused to implement the Tripartite system; instead creating mixed-ability, mixed-background schools. Towards the end of the 1950s and during early 1960s, increasing numbers of LEAs rebelled, and followed this lead - dismantling their Grammar and Secondary Modern schools to create comprehensive systems.
The movement finally gained government backing when, in a White Paper circulated in 1965, the ruling Labour Party “strongly encouraged” LEAs to reorganise their school systems along comprehensive lines.
Explain the political debate over grammar schools.
The Labour Party- with an underlying concern for social justice and equality (a social democratic perspective)- pushed for comprehensivisation.
The Conservative Party were more concerned with providing an “appropriate” education for all - recognising that everybody has different talents and abilities, and providing an education system which allows them to fully develop these aptitudes.
Because of the debate over grammar schools, they survive in some parts of the country- there are 163 grammar schools in England, educating around 176,000 pupils.
The Conservative Party has considered the idea of opening new grammar schools at various times- it is an idea popular with members- but has met resistance.
Explain comprehensive schools between 1965 and 1979.
Comprehensives were organised so that, rather than selecting students on the basis of examination results, each was assigned a catchment area. All children living within this area would then attend the local comprehensive.
The motivation behind the reform was to realise equality of opportunity in its most literal form - every student would receive exactly the same opportunities throughout their educational careers. Furthermore, it was hoped that by ensuring that children of different backgrounds mixed within school, social barriers would be broken down.
The 1960s also saw important reforms of the qualification system. Prior to this period, only the most able students were able to sit nationally accredited examinations- GCE .This provision expanded, however, in 1965 with the introduction of the Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE) alongside the existing GCE.
By 1979 - and after stop-start expansion - over 80% of secondary school pupils were educated in comprehensives. However, it is important to note that the Conservative governments which were in power during this expansion implemented policies which, some argue, resulted in a system which could never be truly comprehensive. In 1970, for instance, a circular was issued which gave permission for LEAs to allow selective Grammar schools to co-exist with their comprehensives.
What are the strengths of comprehensive schools?
Equality of opportunity was undeniably widened by the abolition of selection. The new system did not inherently discriminate against the working class, and did not disadvantage ‘late-bloomers’.
The introduction of the CSE also ensured that almost every student had the opportunity to leave school with a qualification - a considerable improvement on the previous system.
The attempt to break-down social barriers by enabling students of different backgrounds to mix in one school was also a laudable (if optimistic) aim. This could help to produce greater social solidarity, and also might encourage working class children to consider higher education, for example.
What are the weaknesses of comprehensive schools?
Supporters of the tripartite system (generally conservatives) argued that attempting to educate students of all abilities in one school helped nobody.
Some complained that comprehensivisation never really attained its main aims, and simply “recreated the tripartite system under one roof”.
The idea that comprehensives would bring together people of different social backgrounds was somewhat idealistic- catchment areas weren’t necessarily socially mixed. The competition to get into the catchment of “good” comprehensives distorted the housing market in the surrounding areas; affectively pricing less affluent families out. This is known as “selection by mortgage”.
The weighting of social backgrounds within comprehensives had a knock-on effect on their reputations. Schools with predominately middle-class demographics were perceived to be the “best” schools - and they consequently attracted better teachers, and thus higher standards of teaching.
The comprehensive ideal was undermined by the continued existence of both private and grammar schools (which were allowed to coexist by the Conservatives)
Explain the change of political power from 1979 to 1997.
Thatcher’s Conservative government took power in 1979- the beginning of a period of policy influenced by New Right ideas, and considerable social and economic change in Britain.
New Right policies favour the use of market forces as a method for distributing resources: education was a consumer good or resource, where producers (schools) compete to produce the best product for consumers (parents/ pupils), and in this way educational standards improve.
The government’s first actions, however, involved trying to tackle the growing problem of youth unemployment.
Explain the new vocationalism.
The Conservatives felt that youth unemployment was the result of schools’ failure to teach appropriate work skills. This ‘skills crisis’ was to blame for Britain’s economic decline
A number of schemes were developed that aimed to reduce youth unemployment, increase young people’s skill levels, and make them more aware of the world of work.
For example, Apprenticeships combined ‘on the job’ training alongside part-time study with the aim of achieving National Vocational Qualifications.
This became known as the ‘new vocationalism’.
Explain the criticisms of the new vocationalism.
Vocational education and training have had many criticisms, particularly from neo-Marxist writers, who have treated these schemes with suspicion.
Finn argued that there was a hidden political agenda to vocational training in this period: it provided cheap labour for employers; it undermined the bargaining power of the unions as trainees couldn’t be members; it reduced politically embarrassing unemployment statistics; and may have been intended to reduce crime by removing young people from the streets.
Cohen argued that the real purpose of vocational training was to create ‘good’ attitudes and work discipline rather than actual work skills- i.e. to create a submissive and conformist workforce who will accept poorly paid, low-skilled work. Those unemployed young people who viewed the schemes as cheap labour and refused to join them were characterised as irresponsible and idle.
Cohen argued that there wasn’t evidence that young people lacked job skills: youth unemployment was not the result of a shortage of skills but a shortage of jobs.
In practise, it was (and remains) ‘lower-ability’ young people who are funnelled into vocational training- often working-class young people.
Training schemes were also criticised for failing to break down traditional patterns of sex stereotyping found in employment and education.
What were the key components and themes of the 1988 education reform act?
The 1988 Education Reform Act (ERA) was the most influential piece of educational legislation since the 1944 Education Act.
Key Components: National Curriculum SATs Marketisation League tables Grant Maintained Schools City Technology Colleges
Key themes: Central control and marketisation
Explain the national curriculum and SATs as part of the 1988 education reform act.
Prior to 1988, the decision as to what to teach within schools (the curriculum) was largely down to LEAs – with the only compulsory subject being Religious Instruction.
With the 1988 act, however, the government began to tell teachers and schools what to teach in the form of the National Curriculum.
This consisted of the core subjects of English, Maths and Science together with technology, a modern foreign language in secondary schools, PE and (up to the age of 14) history, geography, art, music.
In order to monitor schools, and provide parents with data to inform their choice of school, students were to be tested on the core subjects at ages 7, 11 and 14 using the Standard Attainment Tests (SATs).
Explain marketisation and league tables as part of the 1988 education reform act.
The 1988 Reform Act was introduced under a Conservative government with a commitment to an “education market place” which was driven by competition, diversity and choice. The same forces that allow businesses to either succeed or fail – consumer choice – would, therefore, drive education.
In the case of a business, failure or success is down to the service it provides to its consumers. It has been argued that this arrangement effectively mean that better businesses – which offer a higher quality service – succeed, whilst those that offer poor service fail. This idea of “survival of the fittest” results in the surviving businesses being those that offer the best service-at least according to people who believe in capitalism.
The Conservatives thought that the same process could be adapted to the schooling system – and that it would similarly offer better schools with better value for money.
The “consumers” of this new system were to be the parents of students, and consequently, parental choice was an important element of the act. Where possible, parents were to be allowed to choose the school they prefer for their children. Schools, for their part, were required to produce information to help with the choice: each year, schools must publish a prospectus which includes their exam results and National Curriculum test results.
League tables rank schools, aiding parents to choose a school for their child: the idea assumes that parents will act as rational consumers, wanting to choose the best performing school.
Parental choice was to have a direct impact on schools, with every extra pupil bringing extra funds to the school’s budget.
