Since the introduction of education for all in the late nineteenth century, the education system has been much debated and leg

The idea of the tripartite system was to provide separate but equal types of schools aimed at the pupil's talents. Each school should have "parity of esteem" (equal status), the buildings, recourses and staffing being of similar quality. This system however did not work in practice.

The private schools were not included in the act; they still charged fees to educate the better off. Some Local Education Authorities (LEAs) did not support the tripartite system and set up comprehensive schools, as all LEAs had to do was provide free and equal education for all pupils.

The criticisms of the tripartite system were many. It was thought that intelligence testing was not the best way of deciding which school a pupil should attend.

Most parents wanted their children to attend grammar school. There were few technical schools and the secondary modern schools were regarded as inferior by parents and employers, this gave the secondary modern schools a low status. Being placed in a low status school could give children a low opinion of their abilities, the may think they are not very cleaver and so will not try at school. This gives them a low educational attainment, processes known as a self fulfilling prophesy.

The 1944 Education Act gave equality of education to all but the social division was still apparent. Working class children were less likely to go to grammar school than middle class children, so unequal education led to unequal life chances.

These criticisms gave way to comprehensive schools, children of all abilities and social backgrounds attending the same school, with the same opportunities to achieve qualifications. There is no entrance exam and each school sad a certain area or neighbourhood to enrol pupils; this is called a catchment area.

As well as the national curriculum, the 1988 Education Reform Act also established a national testing system.

There was now a national curriculum, which basically meant that the government what to teach all pupils aged 6-16 years old. English, maths and science were the core subjects. The rest were not compulsory after the age of 14 and pupils were tested on the core subjects at the ages of 7, 11, and 14.

Parents were allowed to choose which school their child attended. Schools had to provide a prospectus including their exam results and national curriculum test results, so parents could choose the best school for their child. Parent's choices made a difference to the schools budget. Schools were to compete against each other to attract pupils so their budget would be bigger.

The 1988 Education Reform Act also brought in grant maintained schools and city technology collages. These schools opted out if local authority control and are funded directly by central government. Although they teach national curriculum there is particular emphasis on maths, science and technology. In July 1994 there were 592 grant maintained schools out of 3773 state secondary schools and 334 grant maintained primary schools out of 18828. The Conservatives argued that grant maintained schools could specialise in certain subjects and "more academically able" pupils. Critics saw this as a return to grammar schools, with the national curriculum test at the age of 11 as a form of the "11 plus"

Some sociologists believe there is a "hidden curriculum" in schools. They say that the lessons taught are not all academic. Students learn certain ways of behaving and thinking, it is argued that we learn to obey authority and learn social and political values. It is in school that people learn to conform and obey authority, pupils soon learn that the teacher is in charge and they are to do as they are told. Some sociologists argue for social control and social stability to be achieved pupils have to accept that there are people with more power than themselves. Some sociologists go as far as saying that the "hidden curriculum" was the real reason that schools were set up.

The basis of education today is to give all students equality of opportunity. However this is often criticised on a number of issues, one of these issues is how ethnicity can result in differential educational attainment. The Department of Education do not have statistics on exam results of ethnic groups. For this information sociologists must rely on surveys conducted by LEAs and individual researchers.

David Smith and Sally Tomlinson (The School Effect 1989) argued that it was not ethnicity that determined which courses a student took but their social class. Although the students that belonged to ethnic minority groups were seen to underachieve, this was because of lower test results, and they were more likely to come from the lower social classes. Smith and Tomlinson believed that the difference in the classes was more apparent than the ethical view.

The question on ethnicity in education always leads to the subject of racism in schools. Some times teachers are unaware that they are discriminating against the ethnic groups. In a study of a northern comprehensive school in 1988, Asian student had a higher percentage of A-C grades than the white students. In spite of this, the white student's averaged 6 GCSE passes where as the Asian student only averaged 5 passes. It was concluded that the setting system at the school was the reason for these results; it had appeared to have set up barriers to Asian pupils. Asian pupils were more likely to be placed in lower sets even though their assessments from primary school were the same as white students. The teachers were unaware of this and were quite shocked at the results.

An article in the Observer in 2002 claimed that White female teachers were failing black schoolboys as they were frightened of them. According to Diane Abbot staff unfamiliar with black culture were intimidated by black children, so bad behaviour went unchallenged.

The subject of education will be debated for years to come as it is the most important part of a child's life if they are to become successful adults. Legislation will come and go but the system will always have room for change.