Essay: Education Policy and Pupil Achievement

Date Page last edited: 18/03/2010

The first part of this document contains a brief summary of education policies under Conservative Governments [1979-1997 ] and Labour Governments [1997-?] .  Please note that further information on Conservative Education Policies is provided here [my rather long and detailed teaching notes]  and here [Alex Thirkill's clear, concise PowerPoint]  . I hope to provide fuller information also on Labour Education Policies in the future but in the meantime students are advised to consult their text books for fuller information.

In the second part of the document I have written an essay on education policy and pupil achievement which includes  a "summary of a summary" of the main education policies since 1944 followed by a description of different sociological perspectives on relationships between education policies and pupil achievements.

The third part of the document is a concluding assignment.

• Part One : A Brief Summary of Education Policies of Conservative Governments [1979-1997] and Labour Governments [1997-??]

Sociologists would analyse the education policies of Conservative and Labour governments from different sociological perspectives. From Functionalist and New Right and  perspectives Conservative education policies and some Labour education policies would be seen as beneficial to pupils while Labour's policies  would be supported especially by moderate  social democratic theorists although they might also fear that New Labour's education policies have been influenced by New Right ideas in ways which inhibit the likelihood of increased meritocracy and Interactionist theories could be used to suggest that any education policies which promoted negative labelling would also undermine meritocracy. Marxists would be critical of both Conservative and Labour policies as inevitably supportive on an unequal, unjust capitalist system and while Liberal Feminists would recognise the usefulness of some Conservative and Labour policies, Marxist/Socialist and Radical Feminists would be more likely to emphasise the limitations of these policies..

Conservative Governments of 1979-1997 strengthened the private Education sector via the Assisted Places scheme [which provided grants for talented students of limited means to take up places at private schools] , supported the continued existence of  selective state grammar schools and also introduced several new education policies many of which were contained in the 1988 Education Reform Act. They included : the introduction of a National Curriculum; tests for 7, 11 and 14yearolds as well as 16 year olds; increased freedom  of choice for parents/pupils to choose their secondary school rather than being allocated almost automatically to their nearest local secondary school; Local Management of Schools whereby head teachers were given greater control over their school budgets; the increased dependence of school funding on school numbers so that more popular schools would attract larger funds and vice versa..

In addition  so-called league tables were  created on the basis of schools' published examination and truancy rates; there were more frequent school inspections carried out by OFSTED whose reports were  published which  provided some useful comparative information for parents; the GCSE replaced the GCE and CSE examination in 1988.The Conservatives also introduced a limited number of City Technology Colleges and Specialist schools and  a range of policies under the general heading of the New Vocationalism in an attempt to deal with what they saw as the failure of the education system to adequately meet the needs of industry .

During the years of Conservative Government 1979-1997 and Labour Governments 1997- 2010 overall educational achievements as measured by examination results did improve: the percentage of pupils gaining 5 or more GCE ordinary levels and subsequently 5 or more A*-C GCSE grades increased; more pupils passed GCE Advanced Level Examinations ;more pupils enrolled on Higher Education courses and more young people embarked upon various schemes of vocational education and training. However it has been argued also that very substantial  social class inequalities in educational achievement , gender differences in educational achievement and ethnic differences in educational achievement remain despite the range of policies introduced by Conservative and Labour Governments. As we shall now see these educational policies may be analvsed using different sociological perspectives.

Labour governments under the leadership of Tony Blair retained several of the education policies of previous Conservative governments but also introduced a wide range of their own policies which could perhaps be said to be influenced by a combination of mildly social democratic values and political  and electoral pragmatism. Labour has made no attempts to abolish the private education system [and attempts at such abolition may well now be illegal under the terms of the 1998 Human Rights Act ] and Labour will abolish selective grammar schools only if it is demanded by in parental ballots.

Labour governments  have introduced a massive range of education policies designed both to raise average education standards and to improve the educational standards of more disadvantaged students and have  also introduced various initiatives to improve vocational education and training .These policies  have included  increased government spending on education, the ending of the Assisted Places Scheme, the Sure Start programme, the expansion of nursery education, reduced class sizes for 5,6and 7 year olds, home-school agreements, literacy and numeracy hours, increased use of target setting, modification of Advanced level courses, the expansion of Specialist schools, Faith schools and City Academies designed to increase  diversity and choice within the secondary sector and the Education Action Zones and Excellence in Cities programmes , the Extended Schools Programme, the introduction of the Education Maintenance Allowance and  the Aim Higher Programme  designed to target resources on relatively disadvantaged pupils. However Labour have also continued the process begun by the Conservatives whereby loans and fees have increasingly replaced grants  in the financing of Higher Education.

Among the most significant education policies introduced since 1944 have been the introduction of Tripartite Secondary Education in 1944 and its gradual almost total replacement by Comprehensive Secondary Education, the attempts to create a so-called quasi-market in education by the Conservatives 1979-1997 and the continued acceptance of this approach to education policy  by subsequent Labour Governments from 1997onwards , the development of policies by successive Conservative and Labour Governments designed to increase the vocational relevance of education and various programmes such as Sure Start, Education Action Zones, and Excellence in Cities designed to increase educational opportunities for disadvantaged pupils. Furthermore no attempt has been made to abolish Private Schools and any such attempt may in any case now be illegal under the terms of the 1998 Human Rights Act.  I shall concentrate below on differing sociological analyses of these broad policy initiatives.

• Functionalism

It is difficult to find information on Functionalist analyses of specific education policies and so I have attempted here to estimate what Functionalist attitudes to education policies might be  given their overall analyses of formal education systems as a whole and so, students ,there are certainly issues in this section which you might like to discuss further with your teachers

Functionalism is based upon a consensus model of society. In summary Functionalists argue  that industrial capitalist societies are  basically economically efficient, democratic, and meritocratic and  operate in the interests of all of their citizens. Functionalists believe that formal education systems too are meritocratic and that they contribute to social stability and economic efficiency via the transmission of appropriate norms and values and useful knowledge and skills and via the effective performance of a role allocation function  whereby individuals are eventually allocated to differing employment roles in accordance with their differing talents and skills. However it is important also to remember that although Functionalists claim to support equality of opportunity and meritocracy they also believe that social and economic inequality are desirable and inevitable.

Functionalists claimed that the USA education system was essentially meritocratic despite the possible adverse effects of economic inequality on meritocracy, despite the fact that a sizeable minority of USA schools [currently around 10%] are private schools, despite the fact that there are massive differences in educational expenditure per pupil as between wealthy and poor states and districts and despite the fact that although the USA state school system is formally comprehensive children in wealthy districts have access to better resourced state schools.

 Although Functionalists believed even in the 1950s that formal education systems were relatively meritocratic and organised in the interests of individual students and in the interests  of society as a whole we may assume that they would welcome any government education policies which improve the transmission of knowledge, skills and appropriate pro-capitalist norms and values and make the formal education systems  even more meritocratic.

On this basis they would support policies which improve overall school effectiveness and vocational education initiatives which support the basic ethos of capitalism , improve pupils' job prospects and increase the efficiency of the capitalist system as a whole. It seems likely that Functionalists  might support private education and selective secondary education because they believe that this makes for efficient role allocation and , in their view, is not inconsistent with meritocracy and they might support the recent marketisation of education on the grounds that this improves overall school effectiveness and gives disadvantaged pupils a better chance to attend  good schools .  Since Functionalists are supporters of the competitive capitalist system  we may perhaps be justified in assuming that they would support education policies which promote competition between pupils and schools as the best means of promoting efficiency and raising standards within the education system.

Given their positive evaluations of the USA  education system as it existed in the 1950s and 1960s it seems unlikely that Functionalists would accept that  the current existence of private schools and selective secondary education in the UK results in unfair competition which undermines meritocracy nor that  the recent marketisation of education confers unfair advantage on upper and middle class parents and their children  which again actually inhibits meritocracy and thereby undermines the educational prospects of disadvantaged children.

• The New Right

The Ideology of the New Right contains to broad elements, Neo-Conservatism and Neo-Liberalism,  which are to some extent complementary and to some extent contradictory. Essentially Neo-Conservatism involves a commitment to traditional institutions and values while Neo-Liberalism involves a commitment to the market mechanism and the limited state.

Conservatives [and especially perhaps neo-Conservatives] argued that children's education was being blighted as  a result of the relative neglect of the teaching of numeracy and literacy skills necessary for secure future employment and for the efficiency of the economy as a whole while ineffective progressive teaching methods, emphases on pupil autonomy and freedom of expression at the expense of traditional respect for teachers' authority, excessive concerns with issues of class, gender, ethnicity and sexuality all linked with dangers of political indoctrination by left-wing teachers were combining to create a crisis in our schools which in the future could potentially undermine the entire social order. Critics rejected these criticisms arguing that overall standards of literacy and numeracy were improving, that most teachers used a sensible mixture of traditional and progressive methods, that it was important for pupils to discuss important contemporary issues and that the overwhelming majority of teachers wished to encourage  their students to think for themselves  and not to indoctrinate them in any way. This is an issue which you might like to discuss further with your teachers!

Both Neo-Conservatives and Neo-Liberals have tended in practice to support the continued existence of Private Education as is indicated by Conservative Governments' introduction of the Assisted Places Scheme whereby the parents of some talented but socially disadvantaged pupils were to be given state subsidies to contribute to the costs of private education. Conservatives also hoped to increase the scope for selection within the state secondary sector and although it was not politically feasible immediately in the early 1980s  to reverse the trend toward comprehensive secondary education the Conservatives were able to safeguard existing grammar schools  and gradually to increase selectivity within the state sector via the introduction of new kinds of schools such as City Technology Colleges, Grant -Maintained Schools and Specialist Schools.

Furthermore the Conservatives claimed that if parents were given  increased freedom to choose among different types of primary and secondary schools in a so-called quasi-market for education overall education standards would  gradually improve as  the more effective schools expand at the expense of the less effective ones and that educational opportunities for more disadvantaged children will increase as they have a better chance of access to an effective school..

New Right theorists  also supported  the initiatives of the New Vocationalism introduced by the Conservatives and the subsequent similar Labour initiatives  in the hope that a more vocationally relevant education would improve pupils employment prospects and improve the prospects for the UK economy as a whole. In an ideal world these vocationally based courses would enthuse students to adopt more positive attitudes to education in the recognition that what they are learning would help them to improve significantly their future employment prospects.

In summary therefore New Right theorists argued that the continued existence of Private Education and State selective grammar schools, increasing capacities for parental choice of state primary and secondary schools coupled with increased diversity within the state secondary sector and increased emphasis on vocational education would result in higher average educational standards, greater educational opportunities for disadvantaged pupils and improved employment prospects for all.

However all of these conclusions have attracted considerable criticism. It has been argued that private education benefits primarily the children of the rich and comfortably off and inhibits meritocracy; and that it is possible that even if the Assisted Places scheme did increase the chances of upward social mobility of those children who participated in it  few truly disadvantaged pupils participated in the scheme and that opportunities for social mobility might have been improved further by targeted spending in the state sector. It has been argued that it is middle class children who benefit from the existence of Grammar Schools and working class children who are most disadvantaged by the existence of Secondary Modern schools.

Critics denied also that the creation of a quasi market in education mainly via the provisions of the 1988 Education Reform Act will drive up educational standards including the educational standards of the poorest. Thus although in theory Conservative education policies were designed to increase parental choice there could be no overall increase in parental choice in small towns with only one secondary school or in larger towns and cities where the more popular secondary schools were already full and over-subscribed. In these latter cases critics claim the State education policies introduced by Conservative governments have actually benefited middle parents and their children disproportionately since it is these middle class parents who are much more likely to be able to use their cultural, economic and social capital to ensure that the oversubscribed effective state schools themselves would actually choose their children thereby indirectly reducing the educational opportunities of more disadvantaged pupils. 

These issues are described in great detail in a study by S. Gerwitz, S. Ball and R. Bowe entitled Markets, Choice and Equity in Education [1995] and you should consult your textbooks to familiarise yourselves with the details of this  very useful study which is relevant to several aspects of the Sociology of Education. [The Haralambos and Holborn textbook Sociology: Themes and Perspectives provides a fairly full summary and you may also click here for further information provided elsewhere on this site].

There have been several criticisms of the policies of the New Vocationalism introduced by Conservative governments between 1979 and 1997. Thus it was claimed at the time that a significant divide was created between academic and vocational courses as pupils following vocational courses such as the CPVE  would be made to feel like "second-class citizens" in the mainly academically  oriented sixth form and that in any case schools in any case were  not suited or resourced at the time for the teaching of business and technology - related courses although it is clear that increasing numbers of well trained teachers of these subjects have subsequently been employed.

 It is  claimed in relation to training schemes that they aimed to shift the blame for youth unemployment from government economic policy which according to critics was mainly responsible for the growth of mass unemployment in the 1980s onto the teaching profession who were blamed for the failure to teach the skills necessary to secure industrial efficiency. Furthermore it was argued that  training schemes were a means of reducing the official unemployment figures in an attempt to sustain government popularity; that little real training was given; that trainees were often discarded rather than offered permanent jobs once their training period was finished as employers opted for the cheaper option of replacing them with another batch of low paid trainees; that the schemes often reinforced traditional gender roles; that the training was at the expense of a more valuable general education and that the purpose of the schemes was often to encourage passivity and acceptance of low wages among young people.

However, supporters of the schemes have argued correctly that some useful training has been given which increased the employability of the trainees concerned. Nevertheless, more generally, it would perhaps be true to say that all post -war governments and not only the Conservative governments of 1979-1997 have given insufficient attention to the needs for industrial training and that this has been one factor which has restricted the long term rate of growth of the UK economy relative to its competitor economies.

• Social Democratic Perspective

 Social Democracy has provided the main theoretical basis for Labour Party policy. Social democrats have traditionally believed that unregulated capitalism would result in inequality of income, wealth and power and the absence of meritocracy but that higher living standards and greater economic equality  can best be achieved via state reform and regulation of the capitalist system leading to the creation of a mixed economy thus rendering the revolutionary abolition of capitalism unnecessary. However in recent years there has been considerable controversy surrounding the extent to which the ideology of New Labour represents a shift away from the principles of social democracy and toward the ideology of the New Right and this controversy has certainly been  apparent in analyses of New Labour education policies. 

Most  Social Democrats have traditionally argued against  the existence of Private education and State selective education on the grounds that both of these forms of education undermine equality of opportunity . They would admit that top private schools and state grammar schools  may well enable their pupils to reach higher educational standards but point out also that  private school education is available primarily  to the children of rich or comfortably off parents and also that it is middle class children who have benefited most from the existence of state grammar schools. For these reasons Social Democrats have been strong supporters of Comprehensive Secondary Education which in their view would be most likely to increase equality of educational opportunity and to raise average educational standards.

 However in practice Labour Governments have failed to abolish Private Education [and , in any case, attempts to abolish Private Education may now be illegal under the terms of the 1998 Human Rights Act; Labour have also allowed the continued existence of a limited number [currently 164] selective State Grammar Schools ; and  Labour have accepted  much of the Conservatives "choice and diversity agenda based around the introduction of a quasi market in education via increased support for Specialised Schools, Faith, Schools and City Academies. Whereas some Social Democrats have argued that these latter policies are consistent with Social Democracy and amount to a modernisation of the comprehensive system which can further promote meritocracy others argue that they indicate  clearly that Labour has adopted a New Right Education policy agenda which will undermine the prospects for educational meritocracy as upper and middle class parents are able to use their economic, social and cultural capital to secure places at the more successful state schools for their children at the expense of working class children. That is: in the view of critical Social Democrats the criticisms of Conservative New Right education policies apply also  to New Labour education policies  which are seen as equally influenced by the ideology of the New Right.

 Social Democrats have supported the initiatives introduced by Labour  such   increased nursery provision, reduced class sizes  and the Sure Start , Education Action Zones and Excellence in Cities programmes which are clearly designed to target additional resources on poorer children. However many Social Democrats  claim also that these policies are insufficient to reduce the massive social class, ethnic and gender inequalities of educational achievement which continue to exist and that the relative educational opportunities of disadvantaged pupils can be increased only via the abolition of private and state selective grammar schools and additional financial resources for  the Sure Start Programme and for future programmes replacing the  EAZ and EiC programmes and by the rethinking of Labour policies on diversity and choice. Even then broader social and economic and social policies to reduce poverty and inequality will also be necessary because many Social Democrats believe that it may well still be true that as Basil Bernstein stated in the 1970s"Education cannot compensate for society."

Many Social Democrats would support Labour's vocational education initiatives on they grounds that these should increase pupil employability but they might also express critical concerns about these policies. Thus  there are concerns that schools will encourage only "unacademic" students [for whom traditional GCSEs and Advanced Levels are seen as inappropriate ] to take these courses; that the courses will be perceived similarly by the students themselves; and that Universities may not accept these qualifications as equivalent to traditional Advanced Levels. Thus the academic-vocational divide which has bedevilled the UK education system for years may remain for the foreseeable future  . However the increasing popularity of Two-Year Foundation degrees which combine vocational and academic elements does perhaps offer hope for the future.

In summary while some Social Democrats have argued that on balance Labour's education policies should increase pupils' overall educational achievements by improving average standards, increasing, equality of opportunity and vocational relevance  others argue that more fundamental educational reform involving the abolition of Private Education and State Selective Education and increased targeting of resources on disadvantaged pupils at every level of the education system  combined with wider social and economic reforms are all necessary if equality of educational opportunity is to be achieved. It is noteworthy that after 13 successive years of Labour government that even though average educational achievements have improved there are still very significant class, gender and ethnic  inequalities in educational achievement and ongoing concerns that on average the UK labour force is less skilled than the labour forces of our major competitors.

• Interactionist Perspective

Interactionist sociologists have focused especially on  the possible effects of both positive and negative labelling on subsequent pupil achievements. The conclusions of Interactionist studies may be used to suggest that  under the tripartite system of secondary education success or failure in the 11+ examination would be likely to have positive and negative labelling effects respectively but that the existence of streaming/banding/setting within Comprehensive schools or even of unofficial ability groupings within nominally mixed ability classes may well mean that the some forms of labelling continue despite the expansion of comprehensivisation .Some more recent studies do suggest that in general negative labelling is nowadays less likely to occur although this conclusion has itself been denied in other recent interactionist studies. Furthermore Labour education spokespersons currently argue that  streaming/banding/setting arrangements actually provide better learning environments than does  mixed ability teaching.... a view which may interactionists [and others] would not accept.

• Marxist Perspective

Marxists are critical of Conservative and Labour approaches to education policy because both of these approaches are sympathetic to the continuation of the capitalist system which , according to Marxists, inhibits the  possibility that education policy can be used to the real advantage of all members of society. In the Marxist view the continuation of capitalism depends upon the availability of workers with different levels of skill ready to play significantly different roles and to accept significantly different levels of income in the capitalist economy. In addition  capitalism demands that the education system via the Hidden Curriculum[ and in conjunction with the other agencies of socialisation] ensures that there is broad based ideological support for capitalism. It follows that so long as the capitalist system remains even if the education system operates with a little relative autonomy, social class, ethnic and gender differences in educational achievement and attitudes sympathetic to the continuation of capitalism will remain because they themselves are essential to the continuation of capitalism. According to Marxists   even radical social Democrats are unlikely to challenge the capitalist system and therefore unlikely to introduce truly liberating education policies which means that education policies will continue to have an important role to play in the reproduction of capitalist class structures. In the Marxist View only the abolition of capitalist can lead to a truly liberating education for all. Of course the entire Marxist analysis of capitalist societies and their education systems can be criticised from all of the other perspectives mentioned in this essay. Perhaps this is a little exercise which you would like to undertake for yourselves.

•  Feminist Perspective

It is clear that in the last twenty or so years the educational achievements of female students have improved rapidly relative to those of males. This is due partly [but not entirely] to education policies in that there is now greater emphasis in schools on equal opportunities which is reflected , for example, in new teaching materials, careers advice and the  introduction of the national curriculum which made sciences compulsory for all students up to the age of 16. All Feminists are no doubt pleased with these developments but while Liberal feminists are broadly supportive of gradualism Marxist/Socialist Feminists and Black Feminists would note the disappointing educational achievements of working class and some ethnic minority girls while Radical Feminists would criticise the continued existence of a Hidden Curriculum which ignores some of the concerns of radical feminism. Thus Marxist/Socialist Feminists would argue that only the abolition of capitalism, possibly via revolutionary means, will result in real equality of educational opportunity for males and females in all social classes and all ethnic groups while Radical Feminists argue that only the ending of Patriarchy in society will create the conditions for equality of educational opportunity.

• Concluding Assignment.

In this essay I have  focussed upon 5 broad policy areas and 6 Sociological Perspectives. I hope that after some further reading and class discussion you will be able to complete the following table indicating the differing sociological views in each broad policy area.