Social Policy

Introduction to Educational Policy

usually related to: equal opportunities selection & choice control of education marketisation & privatisation

education before industrial revolutiononly available to minorityprovided by charities or fee payersindustrialisation increased the need for an educated workforce M/C: academic curriculumW/C: basic literacy & numeracy skillsTripartite System (1944)- influenced by meritocracyselection through 11+ exam 

Educational Policy before 1988

Grammar Schools - academic curriculum- M/C dominatedSecondary Moderns- practical curriculum- W/C dominatedTechnical SchoolsEvaluationBipartite System because very few technical schools were built.Reproduced Inequality:MARX: channelled social classes into different schools that offered unequal opportunitiesFEM: girls had to achieve a higher 11+mark to get into grammar schools than boys

Comprehensive School System (1965)

Aimed to overcome the class divide the Tripartite System created & make education more meritocratic.Role of ComprehensivesFUNC: promotes social integration by mixing social classes. Also more meritocratic because pupils are given a longer period of time to show & develop their skills.but...Ford (1969): streaming prevented social mixingMARX: reproduce class inequality through labelling & streaming. The Myth of Meritocracy legitimates class inequality.

Conservative Government (1979-1997)

Views: education failing to provide a skilled workforce blamed schools for Britain's lack of industrial competitiveness need to raise the standard of education because schools are failing pupils

Aims of Policies: create an 'education market' (marketization): raise standards by making schools compete with one another increase parental choice establish greater government control over what was being taught in schools reduce the influence of the Local Education Authorities (LEAs) introduce more vocational education

Conservative Government (1979-1997)

Theory: neoliberal New Right Problem:  "state control produced lower standards and inefficiency" Solution: introduce market forces into state education- schools operate like businesses (focus on customers [parents & pupils] and compete to increase standards) Parentocracy: parent power in state education

Policies under the Conservative Govt.

1988 Education Reform Act National Curriculum in England & Wales system of national assessment (SATs) schools can opt out of their LEA and become Grant Maintained Schools give parents the right to choose which school their children attened with open enrolement the funding a school received was based on the number of pupils it attracted (formula funding)

Other policies: Further Education Colleges made independent of LEA control established School Curriculum and Assessment Authority to oversee examination system government can take over the running of failing schools schools required by law to publish exam results + truancy rates OFSTED regularly inspect + publish results schools allowed to specialise in technology, science, etc. more vocational education business sponsorship of schools

Key policies:Formula Funding: the government funds schools based on number of pupils. More successful schools get more pupils therefore more money, thus attract more pupils etc.- good incentive for schools to work hard to get good results.Parental Choice: parents can apply to different schools, so local schools do not have a steady supply of local pupils which means they have to work hard to attract them. League Tables: parents have information that helps them choose a school for their children because schools publish exam results & truancy rates. Helped by National Curriculum + national system of regular testing.

Marketisation (Conservative Govt.)

increased inequality: middle-class parents use their cultural capital to take advantaged of parental choice league tables are misleading + open to manipulation: they merely reflect the social intake of the school increased social segregation (IPPR research 2012) high achieving schools 'cream-skim': they are over subscribed so can be selective and take the 'best'/most able pupils Formula Funding created sink schools: have to take more less able pupils just so they can survive financially Parentocracy is a myth: high achieving schools are increasingly able to manipualte their admission policies to control who they admit which reduces genuine 'parent power'. But m/c parents can afford to move nearer to successful schools and use their cultural capital to 'work the system' by 1996 90% of secondary schools were still run by local education authorities

Impact of Marketisation Policies

education is key to economic success: individuals need to continually develop + change their skills to fit the modern global market marketisation was needed to promote diversity & choice marketisation identified the need for all pupils to have good basic skills in numeracy + literacy some groups were failing in education- negatively affected society, communities, and individuals kept some major elements of Conservative policies: - encouraged parental choice & competition between schools emphasised reducing inequality

Labour Government (1997-2010)

Policies under Labour Govt.

Unchanged Conservative Policies: League tables School inspections Vocational education Powers to take over failing schools National Curriculum Testing Local Management of Schools Formula Funding Student loans (rather than grants)

New Policies Reducing primary class sizes to <30 Literacy + Numeracy hours in all primary schools After-School Homework Clubs Easter Revision Schools Education Action Zones + Aimhigher projects w/ additional resources Educational Maintenance Allowances encourage students to stay on post 16yrs Parents in areas w/ grammar schools could vote to turn them into a comprehensive school Specialist School Status to promote diversity City Academies: fresh start for inner-city schools

policies are paradoxical (Benn): some promote inequality through the education market, but others try to reduce it eg w/ EMA's for school pupils but tuition fees for university students.  policies not very different to conservative ones (Marxists): labour perpetuated class inequalities in education by retaining the education market & through polices eg student fees. failed to remove the charitable status of private schools or abolish grammar schools still a strong focus on standards, testing, and controlling what is learned in schools rather than developing individual abilities. positive: substantially increased education spending.

Evaluation of Labour Policies

Neoliberalism critical of the role of the state in providing services of virtually all kinds the state is more bureaucratic, inefficient, and ineffective than privately run services competition creates excellence, so the only only way to raise education standards is through direct competition this informed the development of an education market before 2010 after 2010 the move was towards the privatisation of education

Conservative Government (2010-2015)

Coalition Government w/ Conservatives + Liberal Democratspromise: "to life the 'dead hand of the state' from education"policies went beyond marketisation introduced in the 1980s & maintained w/ some changes by New Labour up to 2010initiated privatisation of many aspects of state education, especially post 11yrs schooling

Are they different or is one an extension of the other? both are a form of market but major difference: passing state owned assets (eg schools) to private hands

Marketisation vs Privatisation

Marketisation:up to 2010 the focus of policy had been on creating an 'internal education market'- state schools competed w/ each other for business (pupils). But schools stayed under local council controlPrivatisation:the state no longer provides the actual education because it gives this role to private companies/charities. Schools, advisory services, assessment etc are contracted out. The state then monitors + regulates how these contracts work in practice, which opens up an 'external education market'

Policies under Conservative Govt.

Free Schools inspired by Charter Schools (USA) & Free Schools (Sweden). Free schools can be set up by parents, faith groups, charities, or businesses can set up a free school (new, using state funding). By 2014 there were 331 Free Schools. +they raise standards    -'inadequate', closed, or placed in special measures after Ofsted inspections.Allen (2010): primarily benefit m/c parents who use state funding to set them up. Evidence of fewer pupils w/ FSM.Changes to what schools teach: standards slipped so made exams more difficult (reducing/removing modular)Public Spending Cuts: part of austerity campaign: education spending fallen for most schools. Eg EMAs abolished + uni fees of £9000 introduced. Globalisation of UK state education: some services provided by global corporations. In return, UK education companies operate in the global education market.

Academies: labour: City Academies replaced failing inner-city schools.  Academisation: full-scale process of encouraging schools to leave local council control & be funded directly from central government. 2015: about 70% of secondary schools had become academies, many operated by 'academy chains' (groups of schools run by a central, private organisation). Some chains criticised for using public funds to pay highly paid management or for forcing schools to purchase their educational services/materials.Pupil Premium: extra money directed at pupils from disadvantaged families. But Labour govt funded AimHigher programme ended by Tories. The money can be spent by the schools on anything, and its not kept for specific pupils.  Out-sourcing education services: school buildings largely govt-private capital funded programme. Outsourced prison, education, supply teachers, libraries, teachers pensions, Ofsted inspections (provided by private companies). Blurred line between private//public sectors in education services.

Marketisation (book notes)

introducing market forces of consumer choice & competition between suppliers into areas run by the state, eg education.Marketisation has created an Education Market by:1. reducing direct state control over education2. increasing competition between schools3. increasing parental choicePolicies promoting Marketisation ranking through OFSTED & League Tables open enrolment specialist schools introduction of tuition fees for higher education

David (1993): 'Parentocracy'shifting power away from producers (schools) to consumers (parents)Bartlett (1993): 'Cream Skimming & Silt Shifting'good schools can be more selective and recruit higher achieving pupils, and can avoid taking less able pupils who would damage league table position ∴League Tables produce unequal schools, which produce class inequalities. Schools that attract more pupils are allocated more funding:more funding = better teachers & facilities = more selectiveless funding = fewer teachers & facilities = fail to attract pupils

David (1993): 'Parentocracy'shifting power away from producers (schools) to consumers (parents)Bartlett (1993): 'Cream Skimming & Silt Shifting'good schools can be more selective and recruit higher achieving pupils, and can avoid taking less able pupils who would damage league table position ∴League Tables produce unequal schools, which produce class inequalities. Schools that attract more pupils are allocated more funding:more funding = better teachers & facilities = more selectiveless funding = fewer teachers & facilities = fail to attract pupils 

Parentocracy (Marketisation cont.)

Gerwirtz (1995): 'Parental Choice'marketisation advantages M/C parents whose economic & cultural capital allow them to better choose 'good' schools for their children Privileged Skilled Choosers: professional, M/C, cultural capital (time & ability to research schools), economic capital (pay extra costs eg travel for their children) Disconnected Local Choosers: W/C w/ limited cultural/economic capital who are less aware of the system and have limited funds Semi-Skilled Choosers: mainly W/C but ambitious, lack cultural capital, frustrated at their inability to access top schools. 

Parentocracy (Marketisation cont.)

The Myth of ParentocracyMarketisation gives the APPEARANCE of choice.- not all parents have the same freedom to choose which school they send their children toBall et althe Myth of Parentocracy disguises class inequalities, making inequalities seem fair and inevitable.

New Labour & Inequalityintroduced policies aimed at reducing inequality Aim Higher Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) creation of City Academies increased funding of state education

Coalition Govt Policies (2010)

Academiesfunding taken from local authorities and given directly to academiesthey have control over their own curriculumremoved the focus of reducing inequalities by allowing any school to become an academyFree Schoolsstate funded but run by teachers, parents, faith organisations, or businessesimproving educational standards by taking away state control and giving the power to the parentsAllen (2010)- only benefit children from highly educated families- divisive - create lower standards- take fewer disadvantaged pupils than nearby schools

Ball (2011): 'Fragmented Centralisation'fragmentation: the comprehensive system is being replaced by a patchwork of diverse provision, which leads to greater inequalities of opportunitycentralisation of control: central govt alone has the power to create academies & free schools, which reduces the role of elected local authorities in educationCoalition Policies & Inequality:FSM for all children aged 4-7pupil premium: giving schools money for each disadvantaged pupilBUT:closed Sure Start centrestripled university fees to £9000+abolished EMARESULT: reduced opportunities for W/C pupils & discouraged them from entering higher education.

Privatisation of Education

Privatisation: transferring public assets (eg schools) to private companies. There is now a blurred line between the public & private. Many private companies in the education industry are foreign owned, policy making is done globally and is often privatised. The Private Sector indirectly penetrates schools, eg by sponsorship, logos, vending machines.Monlar (2005): schools are a product endorsement for brands. BUT schools don't receive much back from these agreements. 

Education as a Commodity Ball (2007)Privatisation is becoming the key factor in shaping educational policy (this is a fundamental shift). Policy is increasingly focussed on moving services to the private sector. Education is becoming a legitimate object of private profit making (its becoming a commodity). Hall (2011)