Education would be split into a tripartite system whereby it was deemed possible to categorise children’s ability at age eleven. Children would be selected for secondary education on the basis of the eleven plus exam. This exam consisted of an I.Q test which determined an individuals next level of schooling. There were three categories of schools, these were, grammar, secondary modern and technical schools- There was not many of the latter built so the system more or less became bipartite- If an individual passed the eleven plus there place at grammar school where an academic curriculum would be pursued was guaranteed. For those who did less well a place in a secondary modern, to follow a more practical based course awaited them. The problem with this system was that the I.Q test (Eleven plus) did not provide a true estimate of ability and potential. A 1950s study carried out by Brian Simon stressed that kids could be coached and results could be improved by such coaching therefor undermining any notion of constant measurable intelligence.(I.T.C.S,1953) It could be argued that rather than lead to a more equal society, the system perpetuated class divisions in that this type of examination suited the resources and lifestyles of the middle classes.
As well as class inequality the system was experiencing gender inequalities, girls places at grammar school were being restricted. There was a feeling around the time girls should be prepared for married life and motherhood as a result girls pass marks were set at a higher standard than boys. As a result of this expectation, there was not a lot of studies carried out on gender issues, none the less future studies have shown the existence of inequality of teaching for boys and girls in this period-Although recently the situation has improved for girls with legislation in the form of the sex discriminations act 1975. To combat the feelings of failure among those assigned to low status schools a comprehensive system was piloted and eventually implemented through the 1960s and 70s. It is this system I want to now discuss on its effect of tackling inequality.
The first comprehensives experiments were set up in London and Wales. The Labour government asked all L.E.As to introduce the system nationally, needless to say the response from labour controlled councils was quicker and smoother than the conservative run wards. The aims of the system were to abolish the eleven plus that had created a stigma of failure and to develop a greater social mix between the classes. It was now recognised that grammar schools had been creaming of the more able students from middle class homes while most of the working class children attended secondary modern. (Finch p20) It is important to stress that there were some children from not so affluent families who made it to grammar schools but in very insignificant numbers. comprehensives attempted to close the gap of inequality within education but the issue of privately run schools can be seen to perpetuate this problem.
In tandem with state schools there was a growing number of independent schools who were financially self supporting and essentially fee charging. The main criticism of these schools is that access is only available to those who can afford the fees, uniforms books and travelling expenses. This sector it could be argued provides an education which leads its pupils into top and powerful professions. This could be partly due to the fact that children from higher income families do better at exams-which are imperative for the job market-than kids from poorer backgrounds. Indeed a 1989 study shows that six percent of the former group failed to attain any qualifications compared to fifty four percent of the latter.(DfEE) As there has been no significant action taken to alter the status of this group it could be argued that even if the comprehensive system did work it did not challenge the basic inequalities in wider society, namely an education where a child would be more likely to end up in a top job through an accident of birth- an issue Butler recognised in the 1944 act.
Having discussed the possibilities of education reproducing class inequalities instead of reducing them I want to now consider education as a means of socialisation and social control for the benefit of the economy. My starting point for this will be from the 1970s to the installation of the new labour government 1997. This is not to say that these functions of education are a new phenomenon, it is easier to see the patterns of these functions within recent education policy and indeed through the conservative parties response to social policy implemented by previous Labour governments.
The conservative reaction to comprehensive education on returning to office in 1970 was to say that the system lacked choice and as a result was lowering the standards of more able students but despite this comprehensive expansion continued until the return of a Labour government in 1974. It was during this period that the debate for an egalitarian education moved to one of turning out an educated labour force able to compete in the growing capitalist economy. It was James Callaghan the then labour prime minister who initiated a “great debate” into the success of comprehensive schools in an ever increasing capitalist world. With rising unemployment and increasing ‘juvenile delinquency’ Schools were perceived to be failing in their duty to turn out the well educated and good ordered work force now needed for a modern economy. It was time for central government to take control as the incoming Thatcher government did in 1979.
The development of social policy during the Thatcher administration saw education transformed from local government control- which had its roots in social welfare- to a more centrally regulated market place commodity. This was a return to selection through tests and parental choice with central control of the curriculum This intervention as Stephen Ball states is “necessary to the needs of a competitive economy...rather than individual needs”.(Ellison & Pierson,p151) It was an attempt to drive up academic standards to improve Britain’s position in a global market. This may allow limited social mobility but it also helps to ensure certain sections of a society get certain jobs. For example in 1992 the Guardian newspaper reported that twelve members of the conservative cabinet had all attended private schools. Selection may not only provide an education suited to certain employment it may also give what would be deemed as societies correct attitudes within a ‘hidden curriculum’. For example time keeping, from arriving and leaving school at certain times. Acceptance of authority, especially to professionals like teachers and a common culture, which does not take into account the diverse ethnic and class cultures, it assumes all society shares. By preparing people for different positions in the occupational structure, education can- as Marshal argues- provide less challenge to the economic order. (Finch,p87) In other words an education system that promotes hierarchy and compliance to middle class values.
Having now argued that socialisation and social control lead to acceptance of the economic order and that the inequalities still persisted through five decades I will now discuss the New Labour educational policies of 1997 to see how they compare to social policies of previous governments in relation to the functions of education.
There has been very little change to the education system since 1988 and on the one hand Labours policies have become very much in line with the previous Conservative government. The emphasis on parental choice and testing to determine a persons academic ability at a certain age is still the norm and has done little to change the inequality of choices and opportunities available to certain sections within society. The demands for an education system to meet the needs of the economy as opposed to the individual are still a top priority and would seem to be pursued with as much vigour if not more than there predecessors. On the other hand there has been significant changes to further education with the relevant institutions becoming free-standing business enterprises, in line with the free market economy which some would argue has reduced costs to the government but, tuition fees and non payment of grants has meant that further education is only available to those who can afford it or there parents/partners are in a position to support them. “Cost efficiency does not necessarily mean effective education for all students”(Ellison and Pierson, p155)
In this essay I have argued that early education’s function of achieving equality of opportunity failed as it did not address the wider issues of inequality within British society. Early social policy did attempt to tackle this problem but left systems in place-independent schools-that were hierarchical and virtually guaranteed there pupils a higher status within society. It is conceded that it did give for the first time a free compulsory secondary education for all.
I have also attempted to show that the functions of socialisation and social control have succeeded in enhancing the economy. Selection and testing has provided a compliant work force accepting their different positions in the occupational ladder. In other words, if success or failure can be seen as a result of fair competition, then inequality can be justified in terms of different levels of educational achievement leaving virtually no challenge to the economic order.
Bibliography
Ball, S. (1998) ‘Educational Policy’, in Ellison, N. And Pierson, C. (Eds) Developments in British Social Policy London: Macmillan
Clark, M .M. and Munn, P. (1998) (eds) Education in Scotland: Policy and practice from pre school to secondary school London, Routledge: Chapters 3-5, and 9
Department for Education and Employment (1992) Social Trends 22,
Finch, J. (1994) Education as Social Policy London: Longman
Hill, M. (1997) Understanding Social Policy Oxford: Blackwell
Humes, Walter. M. (1994) The Management of Educational Policy: Longmans
Lawton, D. (1992) Education and Politics in the 1990s: Conflict or Consensus? London: Falmer Press
Simon,B. (1953) Intelligence Testing and the Comprehensive School. Lawrence & Wishart:London
