educational policies prior to 1988 Flashcards
what is educational policy?
the plans and strategies for education introduced by government
education prior to 1944
the state first started spending money on education in 1833
education became compulsory for children aged 5-13 in 1880
education provided by the state was designed to equip children with the basic numeracy and literacy skills needed for routine factory work and to instil in them an obedient attitude to their superiors
wealthier families, who could afford private education, had an academic curriculum to prepare them for careers in the professions such as medicine, law, engineering - or for office work.
the tripartite system
introduced in 1944 by the education act 1944.
school leaving age was raised from 13 to 15, fees for secondary
level education were abolished, and the 11+ exams were introduced.
the 11+ tested 11-year-olds on mental arithmetic, problem solving,
and essay writing.
top 20% would go to a grammar school, those who did not would go to a secondary modern or a technical school.
grammar school
offered an academic curriculum and typically paved the way to higher education.
they were for pupils with academic ability who passed the 11+
secondary modern
offered a non-academic, ‘practical’ curriculum and access to manual work for pupils who failed the 11+
technical school
offered a more specialised vocational curriculum, aimed at semi-skilled work for pupils who failed the 11+
how was the tripartite system thought to make education fairer?
everyone could stay in education until they were 15 regardless of income
the 11+ was an objective test of ability. this made the system more of
a meritocracy
the type of academic education found in grammar schools would
previously have been unavailable to working-class pupils; the new system opened up opportunities for academically gifted working class students.
grouping strong students with academic aspirations together allowed for faster pacing and therefore enabled the capable students to achieve to their full potential.
all students could get an education well suited to their needs and abilities.
criticisms of the tripartite system
the 11+ determined pupils’ futures at a very young age, leaving no room for those who developed later in life.
at age 11, the 80% of students who didn’t make it to a grammar school were labelled as failures.
this often led to psychological harm at a young age, damaging academic confidence and long-term self-esteem.
the crowther report in 1959 showed that just 10% of grammar school pupils came from working class backgrounds and two thirds of them left without getting three ‘o’ levels.
admission was affected by cultural and material deprivation; though all students took the same test, middle-class students had more resources and encouragement.
this worked to reproduce and legitimise class inequality.
the tripartite system and girls
pass mark higher for girls
fewer girls grammar schools
1965 - the comprehensive school
introduced in 1965, comprehensive schools meant the abolition of the 11+, and the end of grammar schools (mostly).
comprehensive schools’ meant there was one type of school for all pupils, and these schools are not allowed to select by ability - they are forbidden from doing so by the schools admissions code
today, although many schools are called ‘academies’ or ‘free schools’ or ‘faith schools’, they are all effectively comprehensives, and so do
not select on the basis of ability.
grammar school hold outs
local education authorities were instructed to phase out grammar schools in 1965.
some areas resisted and it was eventually accepted that some would remain.
of the 3,458 secondary schools in england, 163 are grammar schools.
criticisms of comprehensive schools
ford (1969) - an early study of three comprehensive schools.
- it was harder for working children to get into top streams in comprehensive schools than it was for them to get into grammar school
- ford said that ‘wastage of ability’ among ‘bright working class’ students happened on a larger scale in comprehensives than in grammars
many comprehensives had low academic standards, poor behaviour,
and did not stretch their academically capable students.
