1. Education Reform Act (1988)
1.1. Aims
1.1.1. Raising educational standards
1.2. Introduced…
1.2.1. National curriculum
1.2.1.1. Standardised set programmes for study
1.2.1.2. Introduced standardised testing for KS1,2,3 (SATS)
1.2.1.3. Teachers are accountable for minimum attainment targets
1.2.1.4. Took autonomy away from schools and teachers
1.2.2. OFSTED
1.2.2.1. 1992
1.2.2.2. Regular inspections for state funded schools and colleges
1.2.2.3. Tries to ensure all institutions are doing a good job
1.2.2.4. Reports are published for parents to read
1.2.2.5. Weaknesses are monitored to raise standards
1.2.3. School league tables
1.2.3.1. Allows parents to compare schools and their performance in standardised tests
1.2.3.2. Middle class parents spend more time researching the best schools to make use of the league tables
1.2.3.3. High performing schools alienate the working class
1.2.4. Competition
1.2.5. Vocational subjects
1.2.6. Target setting for student achievement
1.2.7. Allowed schools to be managed locally
1.2.7.1. Allows schools to be in control of budgets
1.2.7.2. Opt out of any control by the local government
1.2.7.3. Schools respond to the needs of parents and students in the local area
1.2.7.4. Schools can be managed by businesses
1.2.8. Created more choice for parents
1.2.9. Open market for schools
1.2.9.1. Give parents more choice and allow schools to be run like businesses
1.2.9.2. Each students brings in a certain amount of money
1.2.9.3. Schools that provide a good product (grades) are oversubscribed and so get more money to become better schools
2. New Labour Policies (1997-2010)
2.1. Aims
2.1.1. Creating a meritocratic society
2.1.2. Raising educational standards
2.2. Introduced…
2.2.1. Continued marketisation
2.2.2. Academies
2.2.2.1. Independently funded
2.2.2.2. Improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils
2.2.2.3. Often sponsored by businesses
2.2.2.4. Status given to failing schools
2.2.2.5. Disadvantaged students can’t be covertly excluded
2.2.2.6. Often paired with beacon schools
2.2.3. Reduced inequality of achievement
2.2.3.1. Money injections
2.2.3.1.1. Gave extra money to schools for resources and teaching
2.2.3.1.2. Max primary class size of 30 children
2.2.3.1.3. 15 hours free education for all under 3-4
2.2.3.1.4. Sure start centres in deprived areas
2.2.4. Focus on deprived areas and children
2.2.5. Competition between schools
2.2.6. “High skill, high wage” society
2.2.7. 85% of schools became specialist schools
2.2.8. University fees
2.2.8.1. Students have to pay to access higher education
2.2.8.2. Harder for disadvantaged to attend
2.2.9. Beacon schools
2.2.9.1. Close the gap between the best and worse schools in England
2.2.9.2. Additional funding given to beacon schools to help teach other schools skills to perform well
2.2.9.3. Work with other schools to pass on their expertise
2.2.9.4. Must be amongst the highest performing schools in the country
2.2.9.5. Must be amongst the highest performing schools in the country
2.3. How they reduced inequality
2.3.1. Education Action zones
2.3.1.1. Some deprived areas were given more funding and resources
2.3.2. Aim higher
2.3.2.1. Raise aspirations of under represented groups (e.g women, ethnic minorities)
2.3.3. Educational Maintenance allowance
2.3.3.1. Bursary
2.3.3.2. Disadvantaged pupils were given funding to help them attend post 16 education
2.3.4. Raised school leaving age
2.3.4.1. Raised to 18 in 2015
2.3.4.2. Wanted to reduce 16-17 year old “NEETS”
2.3.4.2.1. Not in Education, Employment or Training
2.3.5. GIST and WISE
2.3.5.1. Girls into Science and Technology
2.3.5.2. Women into Science and Engineering
2.3.6. The new deal
2.3.6.1. Gave training and employment to 18-24 year olds out of work for 6 months
2.3.6.2. Helped more than 250,000 young people according to Tony Blair
2.4. Advantages
2.4.1. Reduces number of 16-18 year olds out of education
2.4.2. Smaller classes allow more focus per student
2.4.3. EMA helps students stay in education
2.4.4. Allows girls to achieve in STEM subjects
2.5. Disadvantages
2.5.1. Specialist schools can focus on one gender
2.5.2. University fees take away hope for disadvantaged
2.5.3. Grammar schools and private schools still exist
3. Coalition government (2010)
3.1. Aims
3.1.1. Creating a meritocratic society
3.1.2. Raising educational standards
3.2. Introduced…
3.2.1. EBACC subjects
3.2.1.1. Emphasis on “traditional subjects”
3.2.1.2. Ball and Exley
3.2.1.2.1. Changes were made depending on subjects that conservatives saw as “real subjects”
3.2.1.3. 2012- 49% students took EBACC subjects at GCSE
3.2.1.4. 2010- 22% of students took EBACC subjects at GCSE
3.2.2. Budget cuts
3.2.3. Furthering academies
3.2.3.1. Continued to push failing schools out of government control
3.2.3.2. 2021- 75% of schools were academies
3.2.4. Pupil premium
3.2.4.1. Students from poorer backgrounds and get free school meals
3.2.4.2. Schools get extra funding for taking on these students
3.2.4.3. Positive discrimination against these students
3.2.5. Changes to national curriculum
3.2.5.1. Made the national curriculum more rigorous and demanding
3.2.5.2. Hand in hand with new GCSE and A-levels
3.2.5.3. Removed coursework
3.2.5.4. Final year exams not modular exams
3.2.6. Progress 8
3.2.6.1. Progress from SATS to GCSE across 8 subjects
3.3. Evaluations
3.3.1. Some academies are privately run and funded by the state
3.3.2. £359m of cuts to education budget
3.3.3. Did not try to reduce inequality in school
3.3.4. Less places in higher education and more expensive fees
3.3.5. Scrapped EMA, replaced it with bursary
4. Globalisation
4.1. Privatisation and marketisation
4.1.1. Ball
4.1.1.1. Education is a source of income
4.1.1.2. “Education service industry”
4.1.2. Hancock
4.1.2.1. ESI boosted economy by £18b
4.1.2.2. Private schools, university fees, educational publishers
4.2. International comparisons
4.2.1. PISA league tables
4.2.1.1. Achievement in maths, science, and reading across multiple countries
4.2.1.2. Policies are often introduced based on these comparisons
4.2.1.3. E.g out worst subject is maths so OFTSED inspections focus on this
4.2.2. Policies formed as a result
4.2.2.1. 2 hours of literacy per day in primary schools
4.2.2.2. Slimming down the national curriculum to essential information
4.2.2.3. Raising standards for trainee teachers
4.2.3. Evaluations
4.2.3.1. Strengths
4.2.3.1.1. Can compare educational achievement
4.2.3.1.2. Good for benchmarking standards
4.2.3.1.3. Sharing knowledge of policies that aren’t working
4.2.3.2. Weaknesses
4.2.3.2.1. PISA tests are based on a limited amount of knowledge
4.2.3.2.2. Kelly
4.2.3.2.3. Rankings aren’t always a measure of success
4.2.3.2.4. Policy can be damaged by unreliable tests
5. The Tripartite system (1944-65)
5.1. Aims
5.1.1. Creating a meritocratic society
5.1.2. Economic efficiency
5.2. Introduced…
5.2.1. School types
5.2.1.1. Grammar school
5.2.1.1.1. Focus on academic education
5.2.1.1.2. Free to attend
5.2.1.1.3. 15-20% of students attend
5.2.1.1.4. Selective based on ability
5.2.1.2. Technical school
5.2.1.2.1. Vocational education
5.2.1.2.2. Mechanical, scientific, and engineering skills
5.2.1.2.3. 5% of schools
5.2.1.2.4. Faded out over time
5.2.1.3. Secondary modern
5.2.1.3.1. Basic education
5.2.1.3.2. No focus on exams
5.2.1.3.3. No national curriculum
5.2.2. Free, compulsory education
5.2.3. All students must sit 11+ exam
6. The comprehensive system (1965)
6.1. Aims
6.1.1. Creating a meritocratic society
6.2. Introduced…
6.2.1. Abolished the 11+
6.2.2. Abolished the 3 school types
6.2.3. Schools can’t be selective by ability
6.2.4. Postcode selection policy
6.2.5. Schools can’t be selective by ability
6.2.6. Streaming
6.2.6.1. Sorting children into groups based on ‘ability’
6.2.6.2. Middle class tend to be in higher streams and working class in lower streams
6.2.7. Labelling
6.2.7.1. Teachers may subconsciously label students and minimise their opportunities
6.3. Positives
6.3.1. All students have same education regardless of ability
6.3.2. Working class and upper class can attend together
6.3.3. Boys and girls have more equality
6.3.4. Equal opportunities for all
6.4. Negatives
6.4.1. Children separated within school based on ability
6.4.2. Teachers often negatively label the working class
6.4.3. Children have to go to the closest school regardless of rating, middle class live near better schools
6.5. Evaluations
6.5.1. Teaches students meritocracy- the idea that achievement is based on the effort put into work
6.5.2. Selection by postcode can still cause inequality, higher status schools in richer areas