“Selection entrenches privilege and fuels a rampant private tuition industry”
Following a series of changes at Westminster, we've seen yet another missed opportunity for education reform that might actually address inequality, says Fiona Millar…
- by Fiona Millar
Post-referendum education politics certainly feels different. The last time my words appeared here, David Cameron was prime minister, Nicky Morgan was the secretary of state for education and mass academisation was the only game in town.
Today we are headed back to a 21st century version of the 1950s, where children are divided into sheep and goats at 11 through a discredited test for something called ‘fixed ability’, which most scientists now agree doesn’t exist.
This new government (albeit without a mandate) could actually have provided an opportunity for some interesting new thinking if Prime Minister Theresa May were indeed, as some have suggested, a politician who considers evidence and takes time over decisions. The last half-century of education reform, when one looks at what has worked and what hasn’t, provides clear signposts to where further reform is needed.
Past lessons
The first and obvious lesson comes from the evidence that comprehensive, rather than selective, schools benefit the majority of children. In 1959, when the ‘sheep and goats’ system was in full flight, only 9% of 16-year-olds got five O levels and 10% of the population went to university. Today, around 66 % get five good GCSEs and 40% go to university. So much for the socially mobile ‘golden age’ of the grammars.
Where it does still exist today, selection entrenches privilege and fuels a rampant private tuition industry. Any gains to poor children who get into grammar schools are offset by the poor performance of those who don’t.
The second lesson is that the quasi schools market introduced after the 1988 Great Education Act has brought benefits, but also harm. More choice, competition, diversity and accountability to parents have provided incentives for schools to improve, alongside investment and a focus on teaching and leadership.
But many aspects of the market experiment need reviewing. We now know that improvement doesn’t automatically follow from creating new ‘types’ of schools run by different providers. This has led to fragmentation and muddled local oversight that no one seems able to resolve.
The mix of parent choice, league tables, residential geography, local demographics and too much freedom on admissions (70% of all secondaries are now their own admissions authorities) has meant that in some parts of the country schools are highly segregated, leading to a inevitable cycles of success or failure.
At the same time, tools of the market such as performance measures and Ofsted rating – which were originally designed to help parents choose – have in many cases become a club with which to batter heads, governors and teachers over the head, particularly in the context of forced academisation.
This has repercussions for inclusion, student wellbeing, the curriculum, teacher morale, recruitment and retention, and teachers’ willingness to progress to headship – especially in challenging areas, where evidence also shows that quality of teaching is the biggest single factor in pupil success.
Future prospects
Recruiting and retaining enough good teachers should be the driving mission of government. It may not make for the sort of catchy headlines ministers love, but it makes political sense. Most polls show that what matters to parents is that their children are well taught, happy and safe. All three are a product of school culture, teaching and leadership.
We could now be looking forward to a new stage of reform focused on parent choice and fair access, accountability and reform of Ofsted, recruiting and retaining great teachers and improving local oversight of schools, moving the market-driven philosophy of the last 25 years to a new, more constructive level.
Instead, we have the laughably named ‘Schools that work for Everyone’ consultation. This is thin gruel. More selection by faith and ability, and a bit of tinkering with the charitable status of private schools, will do nothing to mitigate the worst aspects of the market. If it ever becomes law, it may actually exacerbate them.
The best that can be said for this plan is that it may yet unite parents, governors, MPs and educationalists from across the political spectrum around a renewed passion for comprehensive education. It may also allow schools to keep their heads down and focus on implementing the last round of changes while the rest of us try and fight a battle that is so last century.
But for a new government determined to make its mark, and break with the past, it really isn’t good enough.
Fiona Millar is a columnist for The Guardian and a co-founder of the Local Schools Network; for more information, visit fionamillar.com or follow @schooltruth
This article originally appeared in issue 5.7 of Teach Secondary magazine
