Educational policies Flashcards
What is the 1944 Education Act also known as?
What did it make free and compulsory?
What did two systems did it introduce?
What test did pupils have to take which determined which three schools they had to attend?
What three types of intelligence did it assume people had?
What were the schools intended to be?
-The Butler Act.
-It made secondary education free and compulsory.
-It introduced selective education and the tripartitie system.
-They would take the 11+ test. This test would incllude Maths and English and verbal and non-verbal reasoning?
-Based on the theory that people’s intelligence was either (academic, technical or practical.)
-The schools were intended to be ‘equal but different’.
What three school’s were included in the tripartite system?
Describe them?
-Grammar schools, Technical schools, Secondary Modern school.
-Grammar school- pupils who were deemed academic would go to the grammar school. Pupils would receive a formal, traditional education and be prepared for qualifications and university applications.
-Technical school-pupils who were deemed to have technical intelligence were meant to go to these schools to focus on mechanics, engineering, etc. and prepare for working on trades.
-Secondary Modern schools-Other pupils were deemed to have practical intelligence and attended these schools which do not prepare all pupils for qualifications and would expect school leavers to go straight in the job market.
What form of schooling following the 1944 education Act still exists today?
Which spectrum of politicians argue for more grammar schools? Which are against?
What happened to grammar schools in the 1960s?
What did New Labour introduce to consider the removal for the 11+ ?
Why were grammar schools locally popular?
-Grammar schools and the 11+ exam.
-Politicians on the right(UKIP and some current Conservative policy) while those on the left tend to criticise them for being unfair.
-In the 1960s many grammar schools were replaced by comprehensives.
-Local referendums could vote to end the 11+. Some took place but they did not remove the test.
-Grammar schools tended to be locally popular because they get good results.
Why was the 1944 Education Act criticised?
-Educational psychological theory about different intelligences has been discredited.
-Considered unfair: pupils can develop at different ages; pupils might excel in some subjects not others(rather than being ‘academic’ or not).
-Very few technical schools were built, so most pupils went to Secondary Modern schools.
-This turned the test into a pass/fail test rather than ‘equal but different’.
-Grammar schools were overwhelmingly middle class. While defenders say it enabled social mobility, its main effect was to reproduce the inequality of the previous generation.
-Also accused of favouring white pupils; the 11+ was ethnocentric.
-Many of the political left wanted to get rid of selection altogether and replace with a more egalitarian system.
What are comprehensive schools?
When was it introduced? What intention?
What was the situation by the 1970s?
-What did labour education secretary Crosland say about grammar schools?
Where do the vast majority of pupils in the UK attend today?
-Local schools that did not select on the basis of ability.
-Introduced in the 1960s: intended for all local pupils to attend the same secondary school.
-By the 1970s most education authorities had comprehensives and no 11+
-Crosland said he wanted a grammar school for every child.
-The vast majority of pupils in the UK atttend comprehensive schools.
What are the criticisms of comprehensive schools?
What was there still between schools? How did geographics contribute to this?
What did the New Right argue about comprehensivisation?
-Never quite did what was claimed: some say it just moved selection under one roof(because of the widespread use of streaming).
-Others criticise mixed-ability teaching for failing to meet the needs of those at the top and the bottom.
-There was still social division between schools, tended to be based on location rather than selection: schools in rich areas were overwhelmingly middle class, those in inner cities overwhelmingly working class.
-The New Right argued that comprehensivisation prevented social mobility. While working class pupils could pass the 11+ and go on to elite universities and top jobs, they are less likely to take this path at a comprehensive.
-Some argued that it failed to produce workers the economy needed. Lots of pupils learnt Shakespeare and Algebra, most would never use it, and they didn’t learn vocational skills.
What did James Callaghan argue at Ruskin College?
What did this lead to the development of? What else?
What were some of these equivalent of ?
-Argued that education system needed to be reformed so people learnt the skills needed to operate in the modern economy.
-Led to the development of vocational courses, such as BTECs.
-Pupils were taught for qualifications in a wide range of subjects such as construction, hairdressing, tourism etc.
-There has also been higher-level vocational qualifications, equivalent to university qualifications.
What did Margaret Thatcher attempt to create within state education?
What did she implement in the 1988 Education Reform Act?
-A market.
-1988 Education Reform Act implemented; A National curriculum, SATs, League tables, Formula funding, Local Management of Schools, OFSTED
What could parents do after the 1988 Education Reform Act?
What did schools who attracted the most parents get? What did this create?
Why was there less parental choice in the system than it appeared?
-Parents could choose which schools to send their child to and had information from league tables, OFSTED,etc.
-Schools who attracted the most parents got the most money. This created a clear market incentive to drive up standards.
-There was less parental choice than appeared because of limited places at schools.
-
Why has the 1988 Education Reform Act been criticised?
National curriculum? SATs? League tables?
What did it give the ‘illusion’ of?
-The National Curriculum was criticised for being too restrictive and proscriptive(loosened up considerably since 1988).
-Criticisms that SATs pupils put under too much pressure (especially the youngest pupils).
-Criticisms that SATs and the importance of SATs meant pupils were taught just to pass the tests rather than receiving a rounded education.
-Critcism that league tables only gave academic performance information, not other information that parents might find useful(Support for educational needs,support for the arts).
-Not as much parental choice as appeared to be.(limited places and some had other restrictions such as entry exams or religion).
-Some say just an illusion of ‘parentocracy’, others say too much power to parents not enough professional freedom for teachers.
-Concern that schools that performed less well attracted fewer pupils got less funding and therefore could not improve.
How did New Labour continue marketisation? What did they introduce?
How did New Labour focus on equality of opportunity?
What did they introduce to support this?
How was diversity increased in state education?
-New Labour introduced academies and university tuition fees.
-Surestart centres(compensatory education designed to close the pre-school attainment gap)
-Educational Maintenance Allowance(EMA) grant to encourage pupils to stay in education post 16.
-Education Action Zones.
-Increased diversity in state education with the introduction of specialist schools.
What is equality of opportunity? What would this mean for outcomes? What are policies regarding equality of opportunity designed to achieve?
What is equality of outcome?
-The idea that everyone should have the same opportunities there should be a level playing field. Access to education should be equal; nobody should have unfair advantages.
-However, the outcomes will still be unequal because of natural inequality. Policies to ensure equality of opportunity are designed to facilitate meritocracy, social mobility and fairness.
-Equality of outcome is the idea that society should be as equal as possible: there should be as small a gap between rich and poor as possible. Therefore policies should not just try and ensure a level playing field but also to promote more equal outcomes.
-This includes finding ways to reward and value a range of skills and aptitudes, and providing additional support to those who need it.
What two types of privatisation did Ball and Youdell identify within education? Describe them.
-Endogenous privatisation-schools are privatised from within. The impact of marketisation policies meant that schools increasingly operate like private companies, advertising against their competitiors, paying by results, treating parents like customers, even taking over rival schools.
-Exogenous privatisation- The increased role of private companies within education. Academies and Free schools are often run by companies(even chains of companies). There has also been a growth in private companies providing educational services.
