Education Policy: Pre 1988 (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

Equality of opportunity & outcome

• Sociologists are interested in how educational policies have attempted to reduce inequality between social classes, genders, and ethnic groups

• A key question is whether policies have successfully provided equality of opportunity (giving everyone the same chances) or equality of outcome (ensuring similar results regardless of background)

Historical Context: 19th to Early 20th Century

• The development of state education in the UK was closely tied to industrialisation

• As society modernised, an educated workforce became essential

  • 1870 Elementary Education Act: introduced the first formal state involvement in education.

  • 1880 Education Act: made school attendance compulsory for children aged 5–13.

• However, education was highly class-based

  • Middle-class children received an academic curriculum, preparing them for careers in management, administration, or the professions

  • Working-class children were offered basic literacy and numeracy, preparing them for manual or factory work

Compensatory education policies (1960s–1970s)

• To tackle social inequality, compensatory education policies were introduced to support disadvantaged pupils from low-income backgrounds

  • Educational Priority Areas (EPAs) were introduced in 1967 in deprived regions like parts of London, Birmingham, Liverpool, and West Yorkshire

  • EPAs provided schools with additional funding, resources, and support to

    • raise academic achievement

    • improve facilities

    • encourage parental involvement

• These policies recognised that children from poverty-stricken areas needed extra help to reach the same standards as their peers

The tripartite system

• From 1944, education policy in Britain began to be influenced by the idea of meritocracy

  • I.e., students should achieve their status and be rewarded through their efforts and abilities rather than it being ascribed at birth by their class background

• The 1944 Education Act (Butler Act) aimed to improve equality of opportunity by creating the tripartite system

• This was where children were selected and allocated to one of three different types of schools:

  • Grammar schools for the academically gifted

  • Secondary modern schools for practical or vocational training

  • Technical schools for science and engineering

• Entry was decided by the 11+ exam, intended to sort students based on merit, not background and was seen as a step toward a meritocratic system

Evaluation of the tripartite system

• There are several reasons why the tripartite system failed:

  • It reinforced class divisions

    • Although designed to be meritocratic, it favoured middle-class pupils, who had more support at home and access to resources

    • Working-class children were disproportionately placed in secondary moderns, which limited their academic and career prospects

  • It reinforced gender inequality

    • Girls were required to gain higher marks than boys in the 11+ to obtain a grammar school place, so they had fewer educational opportunities

    • Subjects were gendered, e.g., girls steered toward domestic science while boys were guided into academic or technical subjects

  • The system was bipartite

    • Few technical schools were built

    • This widened the gap between academic and non-academic routes

  • Limited support for ethnic minorities

    • There was little recognition of racial or cultural diversity in policy

    • Many ethnic minority pupils faced language barriers, low teacher expectations, and institutional racism

The comprehensive school system

• The comprehensive school system was introduced in 1965 by the Labour government to promote equality of opportunity in education

• It aimed to replace the tripartite system with non-selective, all-ability schools where children of all backgrounds and abilities would be educated together

• The 11+ exam was to be phased out, and students were expected to attend their local comprehensive school, regardless of ability or class

• The goal was to create a meritocratic system where success would be based on individual effort and ability, not background.

Theoretical views on comprehensive schools

Evaluation of the comprehensive system

Advantages

• Social barriers are broken down

  • Children of different abilities and social classes mix, which can promote tolerance and understanding

• Non-selective admissions:

  • All children have access regardless of academic ability, so no child is labelled a "failure" at 11, due to the 11+ exams

  • This is a fairer system, particularly for late developers

• Broader curriculum and qualifications

  • A range of academic and vocational pathways supports less academic students

• Strong comprehensives perform well

  • Top schools often match or exceed private school results

• Catchment areas

  • Encourages community engagement by enrolling local students

Disadvantages

• Limited parental choice

  • Most students must attend their nearest school, regardless of its quality or reputation

• Reproduces class inequality

  • Schools in working-class areas remain predominantly working-class (e.g., inner-city schools), limiting true social mixing

• Catchment inequality

  • Popular comprehensives increase local house prices, pricing out working-class families

• Streaming and setting

  • Organising students in classes according to ability reinforces class divisions, as middle-class pupils dominate top sets

• Mixed-ability teaching challenges

  • Critics argue that more able students may be held back by slower learners in mixed-ability classes

• Not fully comprehensive nationwide

  • Some local authorities still maintain grammar schools, meaning selection still exists in parts of the UK