Inequality in education is not just about the opportunities afforded to learners but starts before they have even started school . How a school is measured by the government is equality important as we need fair comparisons. Interestingly, the new Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) which is being introduced for higher education does compare like for like institutions, as such further education colleges that offer some higher education provision are measured against others and will not be compared with traditional red brick universities such as those in the Russell group, which would be grossly unfair.
When you talk about inequality in education you can’t help but discuss the postcode lottery that is the modern comprehensive education system. Often a good education depends upon where you live and this leads to unfair comparisons.
I often hear people say how a private education is better than a comprehensive education, which as a teacher frustrates me greatly. Should a good education come from income? Of course a good education can not be guaranteed but if you live a certain part of a town or city then your children may be restricted to poorer performing schools.
If you examine local demographics then most successful primary and secondary schools tend to be where parents live who own their own homes and are subsequently employed, not always – I don’t want to generalise – but statistically it is more often than not, particularly in the North of England. Frustratingly, you start to see that a good education does in fact come in areas of less deprivation and subsequently a poor education comes in areas of greater deprivation.
If you take North East Lincolnshire, for example, and in particular the town of Grimsby, where I am from and have taught for many years, you have a typical east coast town where the major industry, in this case fishing, was eroded beyond recognition during the nineteen nineties so called Cod Wars and the town is now an area of economic deprivation, as is much of the east coast.
The successful secondary schools in the town, based on Ofsted inspection reports, are those on the periphery of the town, in this case Waltham Toll Bar, Healing and Humberstone – all academies. In fact, you are hard pressed to find a council run school in North East Lincolnshire as all have converted to become an academy. That said, the success of the academies programme is still open to much debate and the jury is definitely out as to whether they are a success or not (currently, as many are failing as are successful). However, in Grimsby, these three secondary schools, whose catchment areas are all villages on the outskirts of the main town, are the more successful with league table achievement in 5 GCSE’s including English and Maths, and now the new Progress 8 measure (basically, progress in a learners best 8 subjects rather that final outcomes). These academies are in areas that are the most affluent in the town and it does beg the question whether a good education is really down to pupils attending a school in an affluent area? The remaining secondary schools in Grimsby, again all academies, are, in the main, in the requires improvement category of Ofsted reporting. As such, if you live in central Grimsby you are more likely, statistically, to get a worse education.
That said, what do we mean by a worse education? In reality, we are talking only about achievement of GCSE qualifications in year 11, not any holistic education pupils might get over their time at the school. As such, in Grimsby, according to Ofsted reporting, you will only get a good or better education if you attend a school in a more affluent part of the town.
But, surely, if schools in more affluent areas achieve better results, and you will find this across the country, then why are schools from less affluent areas compared in league tables to schools from more affluent areas? Why is a school in a deprived city centre part of Grimsby, or Bradford, or Barnsley compared to a school in the Tower Hamlets, for example. Of course the learner demographics will be wildly different. Subsequently, staff in schools from deprived areas are being asked to work harder, in more challenging circumstances, than colleagues in the schools in more affluent areas. The problem is compounded by the difficulties in recruiting teachers – why would a teacher want to work in the more challenging school (especially if they had the choice)? Why would a head put their reputation on the line in a more challenging school? Lets be honest, school leaders are getting less and less time to make an impact, one poor Ofsted report and they are on the scrap heap.
JD