ED. - T6 - EDUCATIONAL POLICY AND INEQUALITY

?
View mindmap
  • ED - T6 - EDUCATIONAL POLICY + INEQUALITY
    • Policy in Britain before 88
      • school did not change status. Industrialisation required work force - M/C prepare for office jobs, W/C basic numeracy for factory
      • Selection: tripartite system
        • Meritocratic values meant achieved status to able. Ability lead either grammar, secondary modern, technical school
          • grammar = M/C success. Secondary = W/C fail - manual work
          • reproduces inequality - secure separate two classes
          • reproduces gender inequality - girls need higher pass marks
            • reproduces inequality - secure separate two classes
        • EVAL: children's environment affects success
      • Comprehensive school system
        • aim to overcome class divide of tripartite. 11+ - abolished
        • left to local authority to decide whether to go comprehensive
        • Two theories on the role of comprehensives:
          • Functionalists: brings together all class children
            • Ford - little mingling between two
          • Marxists: reprduce class inequality through streaming. Myth of meritocracy - seems 'fair'
    • Marketisation
      • = inserting consumer choice into state run education - raises standards - New Right favour competition
        • David: parentocracy: markestised ed = rule by parents. Power shifts to consumers, away from school
          • myth of parentocracy: Ball - parentocracy makes education system seem fair by giving choice
            • Gerwitz study of 14 LDN schools: found parents diff. economic capital lead to class ineq. + better choices
              • Privileged skill choosers: aware of how to manipulate system. M/C educated
              • Disconnected local choosers: W/C. restricted by lack of cap. (travel costs also) Less aware.
              • Semi-skilled choosers: W/C but ambitious for children. Frustrated at lack of sense of market
      • Marketisation policies: becoming academies, formula funding, tuition fees for higher ed
      • The reproduction of inequality
      • Gertwitz: parental choice
        • Gerwitz study of 14 LDN schools: found parents diff. economic capital lead to class ineq. + better choices
          • Privileged skill choosers: aware of how to manipulate system. M/C educated
          • Disconnected local choosers: W/C. restricted by lack of cap. (travel costs also) Less aware.
          • Semi-skilled choosers: W/C but ambitious for children. Frustrated at lack of sense of market
      • New Labour and inequality: party policies to reduce: Aim Higher programme, reducing primary class sizes, increased funding
        • EVAL of New Labour: Benn: irony between marketisation + no inequality policy. Aim Higher leads more students to stay in ed. - pay higher fees
    • Coalition government policies from 2010
      • move to free schools from 'dead hand of state' - through academy policy + cuts to budget
      • Academies
        • all schools encouraged to leave local authority control. Funding taken from authority budget + given to academy. Control over curriculum
          • Labour targeted disadvantaged areas but Coalition removed focus on reducing ineq.
      • Free Schools
        • funded by state teachers and parents create and run new schools. Create if hunhappy with local schools.
          • Only benefit M/C children + exclude with strict pupil selection
          • Free schools take less W/C - DoE 2012: 6.4% free schools, 22.5% state schools
      • Fragmented centralisation
        • Ball: Fragmentation: comprehensive replaced by diverse provision (academies) = inequality
        • State can require sch to become academy - reduces local authority in ed.
      • Coalition policy and inequality
        • FSM and Pupil premium = reduce ineq. policies
          • Ofsted: Pupil premium not spent on those need it
          • Tripled uni fees to £9000 deter students from higher ed.
    • The Privatisation of education
      • privatisation = transfer of punlic assets to private companies. Ball: ed. = capitalism profit service
      • Blurring the public/private boundary
        • headteachers leave to set up business in ed. sector. Then bid to provide services to schools. Pollack: companies buy "insider knowledge"
      • Privatisation and globalisation of ed. policy
        • companies are foreign owned. exam board Edexcel owned by USA Pearson, answers marked in AUS.
        • Scanlon: UK top 4 educational software companies = owned by global multinationals (Disney, Hasbro - USA)
      • Cola-isation of schools
        • development of brand loyalty through logo diisplays
        • Molnar: schools targeted because of goodwiill associated with them = good product endorsement
          • Beder: limited. tesco families spent £110,000 for single computer
      • Education as commodity
        • Hall: academies = example of public service handed over to private capitalists
        • ed = "legitimate object of profit making". State loses role as provider
      • Policies on gender and ethnicity
        • Gender: girls excluded from higher ed in 19th century. 11+ - more marks to pass
        • Assimilation policy: focus on assimilating ethnic min. into British culture to help succeed. Especially Eng not first lang
          • Those who already speak Eng fail because of racism
        • Multi-cultural ed. policy: promote ethnic success by valuing all cultures
          • Stone: black pupils do not fail for low self esteem
          • ignores cultural division. Should be one culture shared nationally.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Sociology resources:

See all Sociology resources »See all Education resources »