Class and Education - Lampl

[Xenia]

In today's FT:

Break down the barriers in English education

By Sir Peter Lampl

English schools are undergoing another major shake-up as Michael Gove removes them from local authority oversight and introduces a broader range of providers. No wonder, then, that the first fortnight of the new school year has been a turbulent one. Many headteachers are angry that Ofqual, the exam regulator, regraded GCSE English papers downwards midyear. Teaching unions are threatening a work-to-rule protest over pay and pensions. And many more schools have become academies, with more control over funding, governance and the curriculum.

This is the battleground of English education. But another piece of news this week was even more significant. On Tuesday the OECD reported that our schools were the most socially segregated among advanced economies. This underlines the biggest problem facing England?s schools: the close relationship between family income and how good a school a child goes to. The result is that children from poorer backgrounds have fewer opportunities to move up the ladder.

English education has improved under successive governments. Standards of teaching, and especially school leadership, are better. There have been significant improvements in London schools, particularly for some ethnic communities. But this is not good enough. We have to outpace other economies, particularly in Asia, that have improved faster. The UK languishes in 25th place in the OECD?s league tables for reading and in 28th place for maths, where Shanghai is now the best in the world. This does not reflect the position of all our young people. Rather it is a stark reminder that levels of social mobility have worsened since the 1960s and remain very low, despite government investment and reform in education.

I believe one reason for this is that governments have focused on structural reform, such as creating academies or free schools, rather than on improving teaching. Yet it is good teaching that really matters. Teachers? salaries account for four-fifths of a school?s costs and this reflects the value they deliver. Research by McKinsey has shown that the world?s best-performing education systems are those with the best teaching. The OECD now rates leadership in English schools highly, but we still have much more to do to improve teaching.

First, we need to attract more of the best graduates to the classroom. Ten years ago I helped establish the Teach First programme in England, modelled on the successful Teach for America programme. Teach First is recruiting almost 1,000 graduates this year from top universities, including Oxford and Cambridge, to teach in inner-city schools for a minimum of two years. Approximately half then leave to pursue other careers.

It has been a great success. But with 36,000 teachers recruited each year, it is only a part of the solution. In Finland and South Korea there are 10 applicants for every teaching place. Here we regard it as a success if every place is filled.

Even more important will be to improve the quality of the existing 440,000-strong workforce. Sutton Trust research shows that English schools could move into the world?s top five education performers within a decade if the performance of the least effective 10th of teachers were brought up to the average.

While improving teaching is crucial, we also have to address inequality in our education system, which has a substantial cost to society and the economy, since it prevents many of the most able children from non-privileged backgrounds from achieving their potential.

The best schools in England are world-class. But they are also socially exclusive. Seven per cent of English pupils go to fee-paying independent schools, which are out of reach for the rest of the population. Another 4 per cent attend the remaining selective grammar schools, which draw just 2 per cent of their pupils from the poorest households. The top-performing comprehensives ? mainly faith schools and comprehensives in well-off areas ? take just 6 per cent of their pupils from the poorest households. This compares with a national average of 16 per cent.

We should address this inequality in three ways. First, we should use random ballots to determine admissions to our urban secondary schools, rather than basing admissions on how close you live to the school or how religious you are. This would ensure a good social mix. Second, grammar schools should select more fairly, attract able students from poorer backgrounds and provide them with the extra help that better-off pupils get in prep schools or from private tutors.

Third, we must open independent day schools to all. Their students are 55 times more likely to win an Oxbridge place and 22 times more likely to go to a top-ranked university than a state school student from a poor household. The absence of poorer students from these universities is a shocking waste of talent.

My independent day school was totally funded by the local authority. Indeed, seven out of 10 independent day schools were principally state funded until 1976 through the direct grant scheme and local schemes.

Between 2000 and 2007, I co-funded a pilot scheme at Belvedere, an independent girls? day school in Liverpool, replacing fees with admission based on academic ability. Parents paid according to means. As a result, a third of pupils paid no fees. Academic standards improved and it was a happy place for pupils of all backgrounds. Moreover, the cost per pupil was less than at the average state school.

More than 80 leading independent day schools would back such a state-funded scheme, which would benefit more than 30,000 able students, whose parents could not afford full fees. It would require selective admissions, which political parties oppose. Yet far from creating new selection, such a scheme would democratise existing selective schools and break down the barriers between the independent and state sectors.

Taken together, I believe that these measures to improve teaching and reduce inequality would transform social mobility and unleash a wealth of talent to fuel our economy. And they would put England in the education premier league.

The writer is chair of the Sutton Trust and of the Education Endowment Foundation "

Do you?
More so say, than religion or culture or ethnic origin?
Is money really that much of a defining character?

^thinking aloud here btw^

Sorry that was to tosn on the over arching thing.

Yes thank you word my thought exactly.

Within the terms of this conversation, yes I do. I think where you have an environment in a school where everyone can afford fees, everyone has chosen to be there, everyone is ok with private education, that is the thing that defines that environment. I think it's a bit bogus to suggest that a private school with a variety of ethnicities and faiths is a kind of 'come one, come all' environment where everyone's welcome and we're all different, because you've got this huge barrier in the way for the majority of people. Private means just that.

That's not to say I don't think ethnicity, religion etc are hugely important in society at large, of course, but the yoking issue in a private school is - as you say - not any of those things.

Oh I would never claim that private school is come one, come all. That would be daft.

What I'm disputing is that the students are from such a narrow background that they will never learn to negotiate, mediate, manage, manipulate etc.

Because whilst wealth is obvioulsy a common denominator, not much else seems to be, from what I can see.

How many of you mix with/talk to the indigent? What are your attitudes to immigrants alcoholics the homeless those on benefits.
Do you give the homeless money or food. What do you think really about immigrant who are here illegally receiving "state handouts"? Are you campaigning for an increase in benefits paid to the poor, the disabled or how about pensioners living in poverty. How about campaigning to let detained illegal immigrants stay many are hard working and well educated we need these people in the UK. Do you tell you state educated children that our government is penalising these people in our society, those at the bottom of the heap are doing worse now then ever under this government and that in a civilised society this is unacceptable. Do you tell your children how badly illegal immigrants are treated when they are detained that the treated worse than animals. Again unacceptable in a so called civilised society. Do you encourage you children to speak out against these things. To speak out when they hear their friends spouting Daily Mail type rhetoric?

We can mix with people from all different back ground but remain unmoved by their plight. I know I work with people who are unmoved by the plight of the disadvantaged/illegal immigrant/alcoholics /drug addicts/homeless even though they are "caring" for them every day. This ethos is not just created by the school you've attended if that was the case then it would be easy to change attitudes.
Im proud that my DS gives money and food to the homeless, that he's not racist, that he challenged a friend on his views on poverty in the UK. He's copying my actions/beliefs his school has given him the confidence to stand out from the crowd and be different.

I'm not sure about the manage/negotiate issue, but then that's not really my focus anyway.

So yes, I think by definition if you say 'we don't care what your skin colour/faith/ethnicity is, but you must have enough money', then of course the 'having enough money' is over-arching, because it's the one single issue on which the school decides whether children can come in or not! insert acknowledgment of some bursaries but I still don't think that alters the basic premise.

I'm inclined to say that class rather than money is the important defining feature. We have less money than some of our children's friend's families- very much less than some- but our children would fit indistinguishably into a private school tomorrow. As would all of dd's school friends.

Not sure where I'm going with this.

But you are assuming that money is the only thing that makes us what we are. I hope to God that this is not the case.

Happy - I don't encounter the indigent all that much as an adult in a job, so to claim I mix with them would be a stretch. The girls do, though.
My attitudes to immigrants alcoholics etc - god, big area! In general more deserving of help and empathy than not!
Do I give the homeless money - yes, if I see them and have it.
What do I think about illegal immigrants receiving state 'handouts' - not great, not convinced it's quite the problem the Mail suggests.
"
Do you tell you state educated children that our government is penalising these people in our society, those at the bottom of the heap are doing worse now then ever under this government and that in a civilised society this is unacceptable. Do you tell your children how badly illegal immigrants are treated when they are detained that the treated worse than animals. Again unacceptable in a so called civilised society. Do you encourage you children to speak out against these things. To speak out when they hear their friends spouting Daily Mail type rhetoric?" - Christ yes, all the time! Half my dd's facebook posts seem to be about the Daily Mail!

.... But I don't know now why I answered all that or what I think it proves!

Seeker, I don't agree , because private schools don't let you in for being middle class, or turn you away for not being.

But what about your DC's face book posts are they speaking out or the disadvantaged. Do they speak out when they hear racist comments from their friends? Do they feed the homeless or give them money?
Being aware concerned about those disadvantaged and challenging racism discrimination and the ill informed is not the sole preserve of the state educated.

Ah you see seeker I'd have to disagree with you there.

The type of people who have enough cash to pay school fees these days are very different from the previous generation.

I remember having a conversation with a master at a local prep who noted the changing client base at his school. Where are the university lecturers, the GPs, the editors he wondered. I almost laughed out loud.

Private schools are no longer the bastion of the genteel. There are lots of immigrant families who wouldn't really fit into our class system. Lots of 'new money' (the very well educated self made from WC backgrounds) who don't give a flying fuck about class and its identifiers. The upper class who are on their knees but have family trusts for fees.

Erm, I'm trying to think of the last one: I dunno, she'll put some scathing comment about something the Daily mail have said about immigrants, or something about the stupid language they've used or something - can't think of an example now. She does get 'likes' on them, too. I don't think she would see facebook as the right forum for posting big sentiments, but I do know what sides she takes in debates in RE or Critical Thinking or form group discussions (things like minimum wage, abortion, immigration)

I don't think her friends particularly do make racist remarks, as far as I know, though I remember her being infuriated a few years ago that some of them thought 'coloured' was the right word.

I don't know what she does when she sees a homeless person, which won't be all that often to be fair, but she knows that I would put a pound in whatever their collecting receptacle, and I have explained to her my rationale for doing that despite arguments about 'oh they just spend it on meths' that she might hear. I think she would do the same, but I'd have to ask.

I don't know why I'm trying to prove my daughter is a good person, but you're not catching me out on any of those issues!

Im not trying to catch anyone out but I am tired if peoples prejudices towards those who are educated in independent schools, The endless assumptions that a child from an independent school has not learnt "negotiation, mediation, management, manipulation and perception skills" that independent school "entrench and perpetuate" segregation, that he wont be the "best rounded individual who is to make a success of their next 50 years of productive life".
Yet the numbers in independent ed increase year on year people send their children to independent schools not to avoid the indigent but because they believe there child will get a better education.
Most of you have no current experience of how independent school work I don't know where you get you views from but you seem to me to be more prejudiced and out of touch than the schools parents and pupils who you criticise. Most parents we meet are thoughtful and considerate they do not want their children to turn into inconsiderate uncaring braying hooligans, having money does not have to turn you into the devil incarnate.

Well to be fair, you're the one challenging me on my daughter's atttidues and beliefs, not the other way around!

Actually, I would hazard a guess that all our children (mine, yours Word's and Seeker's and doubtless most of the other people on this thread too) are pretty nice. But I still think private schools can and do entrench segregation on the basis of cash. And as much as many of the children in them may be delightful human beings, I am not in favour of that system.

TOSN I do understand your view and your concern and of course (bursaries aside) independent ed is only open to those with cash especially the top schools.
There will always be those who chose to pay regardless of what the state offers especially at boarding schools Im afraid I come into this category but many middle class families are "struggling" to pay the fees and would I suspect happily return to the state sector if they had more confidence that it would provide their individual child with an appropriate education.
Interestingly despite the increasingly poor press the NHS gets people remain fundamentally loyal to it knowing that when the chips are down the NHS is the place to be. Somehow the same faith need to be restored in state ed I don't know how we go about doing this or whether or not its too late. I thought the current economic crisis might have an impact and maybe it is I don know the figures but Im remain unconvinced that endless government intervention is going to have make that much difference.

I think what most wealthy children and children at private schools are protected from is the colossal stress of being at the bottom of the heap or being confronted by it on a daily basis and how that affects your ability to cope. It is far easier to worry about the poor if you are a very long way from being poor yourself - you aren't the one dragged down further by your tolerance (which is not the same thing as help, after all - I will happily tolerate, like or keep an open mind towards pretty much anyone, and give a nice smile and some money to a homeless person, or have a chat with them for a bit, if I don't actually have to spend too long in their company, get their lice and be kept up all night by their anti-social behaviour!).

I also think your relative wealth does affect your perception of things - I was always better off than my friends and have always viewed myself as incredibly lucky and well off, to the point that I felt that this ought to result somehow in greater responsibility for my actions and choices. If I had been privately educated, I would not have been one of the wealthy ones (or one of the poor ones, come to that). I would have perceived what I had and how I spent my money entirely differently, I suspect. So private schools do have an impact on behaviour as a result of the wealth surrounding them (cushioning them, you could say). It's much easier to appreciate other cultures and viewpoints when comparing guilded thrones rather than hovels and easier not to feel stabs of envy when you see how other people live, if you already have your basic needs met.

You too make a valid point rabbit surely alot of it is your home situation we are not jaw dropingly wealthy but if both children were in a state schools we would certainly be better off than most of their friends. But I believe my DS at his independent school knows how incredibly lucky he is he is aware that we don't have even half of what his friends have so I have too hope that he like you will feel "greater responsibility for my actions and choices." Life as I've said is not perfect and Im prepared to take the risk that he will be socially aware and as I've got leftie leaning and never stop going on about it he'll turn into a screaming fascist he too will feel as I do. But education is about so many other things things that I and for that matter the state sector cant provide.

"Somehow the same faith need to be restored in state ed"

It never will be.

Because people understand that life is a competition. And it's a competition they want their children to win.

Therefore whatever the state can offer will never be good enough for those who can opt to buy better. And there will always be someone offering better.

And of course the state sector HAS to accommodate those children, whom parents in the private sector simply do not want their children to be taught alongside of.

It's as basic as that.

Happygardening - intellectually knowing that other people are different and less fortunate is often an irrelevance. Many deeply fascistic and horrible right wing people are aware of the existence of poverty and privilege, but because they simply don't KNOW anyone other than people like themselves this awareness doesn't impact on their world view.

It's like the whole nastiness about immigrants and refugees in the UK. In my experience nobody who regularly mixes with and talks to and works alongside of immigrants and refugees can maintain a prejudice against them. Because they are able to see that they are struggling human beings just like the rest of us.

In other words just knowing isn't enough. You have to share some of your life with them to really understand.

"In my experience nobody who regularly mixes with and talks to and works alongside of immigrants and refugees can maintain a prejudice against them."
Oh contraire I have direct first hand experience of the detention of illegal immigrants I can tell you that those who look after them are more prejudiced against them than a shed full of Daily Mail readers who've never met them!

Isn't it partly a twisted competitive spirit that breeds nastiness towards refugees and immigrants? They are your competitors in the scramble for a share of jobs and resources if you are at the bottom of the pile.

Those in detention are not generally competing with anyone for jobs. Some are refugees others are economic migrants just wanting a better life for their families (something anyone can understand) many are well educated nearly all are very polite. So its just good old fashioned plain prejudice from the Sun reading working class people who look after them (no old Etonians working in these places!).

happygardening's experience echoes findings published in "Freakonomics" where children who went through a school which forced integration across race and class (the whole bussing fiasco in the US) were MORE racist and held more predjudices than those with more segregated educational backgrounds.