educational policy in britain before 1988

Question 1

what was education like before the Industrial Revolution?

Answer 1

• no state schools
• education available only to a minority of the population
• provided by fee-paying schools for the wealthy or churches and charities for the poor
• before 1833, the state spent no public money on education

Question 2

how did education change during industrialisation?

Answer 2

• industrialisation increased need for an educated workforce
• state became more involved in education from the late 19th century
• schooling made compulsory from age 5 to 13 in 1880
• education type depended on class background
• did little to change pupils’ ascribed status
• middle-class pupils given an academic curriculum for professional or office careers

Question 3

how was education different for working-class pupils?

Answer 3

• given schooling for basic numeracy and literacy skills
• prepared for routine factory work
• aimed to instil an obedient attitude to superiors

Question 4

how did education change from 1944? (selection: tripartite system)

Answer 4

• influenced by the idea of meritocracy
• individuals should achieve status through their own efforts and abilities
• status no longer determined by class background

Question 5

what did the 1944 education act introduce?

Answer 5

• introduced the tripartite system
• children allocated to one of three types of secondary school based on aptitudes and abilities
• selection done through the eleven plus (11+) exam

Question 6

what were the types of secondary schools in the tripartite system?

Answer 6

• grammar schools: academic curriculum, access to non-manual jobs and higher education, for pupils with academic ability who passed the 11+, mainly middle-class
• secondary modern schools: non-academic ‘practical’ curriculum, access to manual work for pupils who failed the 11+, mainly working-class
• technical schools: existed in few areas, so in practice it was more of a bipartite system

Question 7

how did the tripartite system affect inequality?

Answer 7

• reproduced class inequality by channelling middle-class and working-class pupils into different schools with unequal opportunities
• reproduced gender inequality by requiring girls to get higher marks than boys on the 11+ to attend grammar school
• legitimised inequality by promoting the idea that ability is inborn
• suggested ability could be measured early on through the 11+, but children’s environment greatly affects their chances of success

Question 8

what was the aim of the comprehensive system introduced in 1965?

Answer 8

• aimed to overcome the class divide of the tripartite system
• made education more meritocratic
• wanted to abolish the 11+ and grammar/secondary modern schools
• to be replaced with comprehensive schools for all pupils in the area

Question 9

what was the issue with the implementation of the comprehensive system?

Answer 9

• local education authorities decided whether to ‘go comprehensive’
• however, not all areas adopted the system
• the grammar-secondary modern divide still exists in many areas

Question 10

how do functionalists and Marxists view the role of education?

Answer 10

• functionalists: see education as fulfilling essential functions like social integration and meritocratic selection for future work roles
• Marxists: see education as serving the interests of capitalism by reproducing and legitimating class inequality
• both theories can be applied to the role of comprehensive schooling

Question 11

how do functionalists and studies view social integration in comprehensive schools?

Answer 11

• functionalists: argue comprehensives promote social integration by bringing together children from different social classes
• however, an early study by Ford found little social mixing between working-class and middle-class pupils
• this lack of mixing was largely due to streaming

Question 12

how do Marxists view comprehensive schools?

Answer 12

• Marxists argue comprehensives are not meritocratic
• they reproduce class inequality from one generation to the next
• streaming and labelling continue to deny working-class children equal opportunities

Question 13

what is the ‘myth of meritocracy’ in comprehensive schools?

Answer 13

• comprehensives may appear to offer equal chances to all by not selecting children at eleven
• the ‘myth of meritocracy’ legitimates class inequality
• makes unequal achievement seem fair, with failure appearing to be the individual’s fault rather than the system’s