inequality – Page 2 – The Equality Blog

School exclusions ‘fuelling gang violence’ – Barnardo’s

Councils across England are obliged to make every effort to reduce their NEET (Not in Education Employment or Training) numbers which identify how many young people in the region are not actively involved in education, employment or training. In the main, Councils will work closely with schools to identify pupils who are at risk of not being involved in education, employment or training when they leave school whilst supporting the schools intervention strategies. Worryingly, where schoolchildren are excluded from education there is a significant rise in their likely hood to become NEET.

However, a recent report by Barnardo’s highlights a worrying trend that excluded schoolchildren are at serious risk of becoming involved in knife crime, the children’s charity has warned. Barnardo’s says excluded children are also at risk of “being groomed and exploited by criminal gangs”.

The charity said 47 councils, about one in three in England, had no spaces in pupil referral units (PRU), which look after excluded children. The government said a review of school exclusions and their impact on children was ongoing.

The research, which was carried out in collaboration with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Knife Crime, shows a 56% rise in exclusions in England since 2014. The group’s chairwoman, Sarah Jones, said knife crime was at its highest level on record and “our schools are on the front line”. She added: “Exclusions are rising and in many cases there is literally nowhere for those children to go. This is heartbreaking.” She said excluded children were “marked as failures”, and added professionals often talk about the “PRU to prison pipeline”.

Barnardo’s chief executive, Javed Khan, said: “We know children excluded from mainstream schools are at serious risk of being groomed and exploited by criminal gangs.” He urged the government to reduce the number of pupils excluded from schools and to improve alternative provisions so “vulnerable young people get the help they need to achieve of positive future”.

A government spokesperson said: “Permanently excluding a child from mainstream school should only ever be a last resort, and we support teachers in making these difficult decisions where they are justified.” They added the government was undergoing a review of exclusions led by the former education minister Edward Timpson.

The spokesperson said: “We are transforming alternative provision to improve outcomes for these children which helps them to flourish, backed by our £4m innovation fund that has created nine new projects around the country.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46027265

League tables changes ‘toxic’ for poor white schools

Interesting article here by Sean Coughlan, BBC News education and family correspondent, highlighting the challenge of school league tables for schools with predominantly poor, white, British students.

As a former school manager I can confidently say that schools in economically challenging parts of the country – where there pupils are predominately disadvantaged white students – are both rewarding and challenging environments to work in. However, when being compared to a school in leafy suburb somewhere where the students come from financially better off communities it is certainly a challenge.

What the league tables don’t reveal is just how much progress that school actually has made, instead it is vilified for not being at the standard of a school in a more privileged part of the country.

The same can be said of recent comparisons between poorly preforming schools and the local privately educated and independent schools. There were calls for private schools to take over failing state funded schools but as mentioned in my previous post what on earth do private and independent schools know about the needs of learners from deprived areas?

This has noting to do with class or money, instead it has to do with privilege which is something entirely different. It is not uncommon to find two parents who are, lets say both doctors, at an independent school that charges £13,000 fees per year. For the pupil they have very clear role models there who can support them through their studies, attend parents evenings and pay £500 so ‘Sebastian’ can go on the schools annual skiing trip to the Black Forest in Germany. Now compare that to an inner-city school in an economically deprived part of the country. That pupils role models at home might both be unemployed, there could be a long history in the family of low skills, low wages and long term unemployment. That pupil might not get the academic help at home and parents might not even attended parents evening… lets not be naïve here – I worked in a school where parents evening attendance was as low 38%. Admittedly, I am using two extreme examples here that are clearly poles apart but when asking an independent school to run a poorly performing state school the leadership will have to get to grips with the fact that the pupils they have to work with are already highly disadvantaged and might not be saved by good intentions alone. What happens when the schools outcomes don’t improve? Will they then be jettisoned by independent schools?

League tables should compare like for like – so an inner-city school in an economically disadvantaged part of the country should be compared to other inner-city schools which are situated in an equally economically disadvantaged part of the country. However, people might argue that will lead to lower standards in inner city schools as well as those in deprived parts of the country, a two tier system so to speak. But, don’t we already have a two tier education system in this country? Its called the haves and the have not’s… It’s certainly not a system based on equality for all.

What do you think? Should we be using league tables to compare all schools or should we be comparing similar situations to see what is working and what is not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44196645

Too many firsts risk universities’ credibility, says think tank

Interesting article here from the BBC regarding grade inflation at UK Universities and Reform’s recommendations on how to tackle it.

The report is fascinating for several reasons, firstly, Universities are under increasing pressure with the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) to award ‘good’ degrees and have high levels of students satisfaction. Well, fundamentally, the concern with that is students will be very satisfied if they get a ‘good degree’ and those who get a third or a 2:2 might well be unsatisfied, especially as many higher education students have a perception that they are buying a degree for £30, 000. Furthermore, anyone who has studied marketing or customer service will tell you that an unsatisfied customer is more like to be vocal bout that than a satisfied customer, satisfaction becomes the expectation not the extraordinary. Hence, unsatisfied students will vocalise their unhappiness in students surveys.

Secondly, the report states that ‘since 1995 the proportion of 2:1 degrees rose from 40% to 49%’, which in its self is not a shocking rise, but has anyone pointed out that number of students accessing higher education since the mid nineties has more than doubled. However, for me, the really stand out statistic is that ‘in more than 50 universities the proportion of first class degrees has doubled since 2010’.

Universities have always been the guardians of their own standards. However, with increased importance being put on student outcomes has the pressure of students satisfaction been a factor in grade inflation? Previously, if University staff wanted to move up the pay scales then they focused on research which brought in money and prestige to the university. Now, that focus is rapidly shifting towards the learner or as University staff are now learning – the customer. Higher education staff across the country are currently being asked about their non-continuation rates, retention, attendance and the number of ‘good’ degrees they get. This is more like the further education sector, at this rate universities will be adopting performance management processes in line with schools and colleges.

If, as the report recommends, the government step into ensure only the top 10% get a first class degree this will throw a spot light on the actual quality of teaching and learning that goes on in our higher education classrooms. That in itself can’t be a bad thing as Universities have been the custodians of this for a very long time, whereas in schools and the further education sector OFSTED have had the final say on matters of teaching, learning and assessment.

The Office for Students may have some impact on this, however, their preferred quality inspection partner, the QAA, don’t observe teaching and learning during inspection… instead they look at data and if student satisfaction is high and the number of ‘good degrees’ are high then the quality of teaching and learning is ‘assumed’ to be good or better.

So, when your inspection regime exclusively fits around students satisfaction and the number of ‘good degrees’ awarded by an institution is anyone really surprised that Universities will do what ever it takes to make sure they have satisfied learners with good degrees? Interestingly, the report does not comment of ‘satisfaction inflation’. I wonder what the percentage increase since 2010 is on student satisfaction, I suspect that has likely increased in line with grade inflation as well.

However, that said, if the Government intervene and follows Reform’s suggestions whereby ‘the top 10% of students would receive a first, the next 40% a 2:1, and the 40% after that a 2:2. The bottom 10% would get a third.’ Then it will mean one year 70% is enough to be awarded a first class degree and another year it will not, which leads us to a point where gaining a first class degree is more about what year you join a programme, or more importantly an accident of birth. When you were born will determine if you can gain a first class degree, regardless of ability. Where is the equality in that system? It’s called a bell curve, where the top 10% get awarded the highest grades but that boundary changes with each cohort that takes the exam and has been criticised in GCSE’s for many years.

Don’t get me wrong. I want to see a degree as a highly valued qualification and a first even more so. A degree awarded at one institution should be comparable to a degree awarded another institution, regardless of the designer label that comes with some of our more prestigious higher education institutions. However, is artificially restricting the grade a students can achieve the right idea?

Take a look through the article below, I would be very interested in peoples thoughts on how the government should progress with this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-4454832

BTEC snobbery and class prejudice is alive in our moribund HE sector

Alice Barnard, Chief Executive of Edge, wrote an interesting article for fenews.co.uk which references Nick Hillman, HEPI Director who is quoted as saying: “It is a good thing that these people [BTEC students] are going into higher education. But they do have clearly a slightly different background to people who have done A-levels.”

There has been a historic snobbery in this country, one where the A-Level is perceived as the course for the ‘bright kids’, one could argue that is euphemism for ‘privileged kids’. However, the establishment, another euphemism for universities, has often viewed the BTEC with suspicion, its something ‘poor people’ undertake. That said, in light of Government aims to further embed employability into higher education a vocational education at college may be the ideal start for the modern learner. Certainly, A-levels are hard and so they should be as they are the elite L3, post compulsory qualification in this country. On the other hand, we have employability based BTECs and it is true that entry criteria is not as high, candidates still need 4 good GCSEs to be enrolled but the qualification is highly embedded with employability skills relevant to the sector. These two different qualifications are aimed at two very different audiences.

For example, the fundamental difference between an A Level in Media, for example, and BTEC in Media is actually very simple… the A Level student can write you an excellent essay comparing the opening sequence from Baz Lurhman’s Romeo + Juliet (1996) and Franco Zeffirelli‘s Romeo and Juliet (1968) where as the BTEC Media student can put you together a multi-camera live broadcast using industry standard professional equipment. At best, the A-Level Media student might be able to put together something via a handheld camera and Microsoft movie maker but work in TV they won’t.

Now, as Alice points out, HEPI consistently make the case for widening access to Higher Education – and yet comments such as those by Nick Hillman simply perpetuate the unhelpfully simplistic stereotype that the clever kids take A levels while ‘these people’ from a ‘slightly different background’, study BTECs or other vocational qualifications.

Interestingly, according to UCAS, the number of university applicants with BTECs has been increasing in recent years, by 6,300 (18 per cent proportionally) from 2014, and by 13,970 (50 per cent proportionally) since 2011. That is significant numbers and it indicates that opportunities for widening participation are working in UK Universities and those who might not normally aspire to higher education, such as BTEC learners, are getting the opportunity.

However, Nick Hillman goes on to suggest that Further Education colleges should be providing better support for BTEC students, such as extra essay writing classes to bring them up to speed with their A-Level counterparts.

“I haven’t met an employer yet who has said that the ability to write an essay is top of their recruitment criteria.” Well said Alice.

If learners need more support then why are Universities not putting on additional study workshops? If learners need more support why are Universities allowing them onto these courses that they may fail without further support? Is it because of the money? Are ‘bums on seats’ more important to them?

The Further Education sector is very good at supporting learners something that the higher education sector could learn from, as indicated recently by the Universities Minister.

For balance, Nick Hillman has subsequently clarified his position on BTECs “I think BTECs can provide a good preparation for higher education and I think universities should do all they can to support BTEC students once they are in.”

Take a look at Alice’s article via the link below?

https://www.fenews.co.uk/featured-article/17516-btec-snobbery-and-class-prejudice-is-alive-in-our-moribund-he-sector

Call for action on UK’s screenwriter gender inequality

The Writers’ Guild of Great Britain recently commissioned a report which suggests the number of female writers working for film and television in the UK has not improved in the last 10 years.

The following article by Lucy Todd, Entertainment reporter from the BBC, highlights the shocking statistic that only one in 10 feature films is written chiefly by a woman, the figure dropping even lower for those with a budget greater than £10m – to just one in 14.

The Guild is calling for change in the industry and having worked in post 16 education I can see the problems start when students are young. Better information and guidance as well as aspiring female role models are needed in the classroom in order to inspire the next generation of female writers. However, attitudes in film and television studios need to change, diversity needs to be respected and sort out whilst opportunities must be for all, regardless of gender or any other barrier to success.

Hollywood has been under fire for a number of years regarding its gender equality and hit the headlines recently when Patty Jenkins, director of feature film ‘Wonder Woman’, called out the industry on its record of female directors. In the UK, Fleabag, Happy Valley and Ordeal By Innocence are among the few TV shows to be written by women.

Writer and presenter Sandi Toksvig is also among those to give her support to the campaign, saying: “There is no shortage of talented women writers in the UK, and therefore no excuse that so few of them are getting commissions in film and TV.”

Screenwriter Kay Mellor said: “It’s criminal that I can count on one hand how many women signature writers there are on TV right now. Sometimes it takes a collective to say – ‘this is not fair’ and it’s not. It’s time things changed.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44209815

Ethnically mixed schools lessen hostility

Interesting article here from Sean Coughlan, BBC News education and family correspondent, highlighting research from the London School of Economics and the University of Bristol which indicates those who attend ethnically mixed schools harbour less hostility to those from different backgrounds.

Now, as an experienced teacher and manager in education I can confidently say that this is no surprise to those of use who work in state funded education. However, if learners benefit from an ethnically diverse schooling, as the research here indicates, what does that say for selective education? It’s well known that private, Grammar and faith schools select on the basis of a range of specific criteria and that these schools are not as diverse environments as those found in state funded education. As such, through selection, are we not hindering the ability of students from selective backgrounds to effectively engage with a diverse work force when they leave education.

Will this actually lead to greater inequality and hinder integration in business, industry, military and Government? After all, in the UK, senior roles are often fulfilled by those from a selective education, just take a look at the make up of the current Cabinet and our senior policy makers in the Civil Service. As such, it is concerning to think that our future leaders of industry, policy makers and business elite may not be adequately equipped to deal effectively with a diverse workforce.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44196646

Grammar schools and faith schools get green light to expand

It’s well known that Grammar Schools do little for social mobility and the Government announcing its decision to green light the expansion of both Grammar and faith schools is concerning for various reasons.

Firstly, the Academy process has yet to prove its worth in comprehensive education. In fact, we have no definitive proof that the forced academisation of schools has made any improvements whatsoever. What we do hear about is how much Principals, Executive Principals and CEO’s are earning per annum rather than their actual impact on learner outcomes. As such, Government policy on education is yet to demonstrate competence.

Secondly, often, our Government policy makers were privately educated, or at best went to a Grammar school. Very few attended what you and I would call a normal comprehensive education and yet they are making the policy, in this case expanding they type of schooling they perceive to be the best, in this case ‘selective’. In fact, just 7% of the population attend independent fee-paying schools but half of the current Conservative cabinet were privately educated. That said, that’s better than the military where 71% of top military officers were privately educated as were 61% of doctors, anyway I digress.

Sure, outcomes are better from Grammar and faith schools but they will be when you consider that Grammar schools select only the highest achievers – they are guaranteed success. In fact, I spoke with an Ofsted inspector recently who said the worst teaching he had ever witnessed was at a Grammar school… two hours of didactic, teacher led regurgitation which saw learners passively write word for word in their books.. no engagement, no active learning, nothing. But, the head teacher waved the 98% A-C outcomes in front of the inspector and his hands were tied… outstanding school. However, faith schools are effectively being selective in their own right which not only harms integration it is allowing ‘back door selection’ where some parents can ensure their children don’t mix with those outside of their perceived community.

Clearly, this is a divisive topic but what is clear is by expanding selective education we are damaging social integration and furthering a two tier education system. How does selective education further Government aims of improving equality, diversity and inclusion?

Interesting article here from the BBC regarding the Governments decision to allow further Grammar and faith schools.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44067719

Cuts put deaf children’s education at ‘breaking point’

Unfortunately when funding in education is cut the most disadvantaged of our learners lose out. We already have less teaching assistants in our schools due to funding cuts and between them they had a vital skill set in supporting learners with ADHA, Autism, Dyslexia and a myriad of other complex support needs. This article by Judith Burns for the BBC highlights how another, already disadvantaged, group of learners are further let down by funding cuts affecting our schools.

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion measures by education providers are supposed to ensure that disadvantaged groups are not disadvantaged? However, as this article demonstrates, where funding is cut how can support measures effectively be put in place?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44108900

University racism ‘complacency’ warning

Interesting article here from the BBC regarding the startling lack of diversity in senior leadership across our Universities. Remarkably, only 3.2% of academic managers, directors and senior officials are from ethnic minorities and there is an average 16% pay gap between UK-domiciled white and ethnic minority academic managers, directors and senior officials. That makes for interesting reading in its own right, however, what further compounds the issue is the higher dropout rates for black undergraduates. The newly formed Office for Students has its work cut out ensuring equality, diversity and inclusion is high on the agenda for all Universities and higher education providers. From a student perspective, the Teaching Excellence Frame work (TEF) will certainly help contribute to improvements in EDIMS (Equality and Diversity Impact Measures) data through measurement of outcomes. However wider issues surrounding social mobility, the slow pace of change and on-going ‘rhetoric’ or ‘lip service’ by Universities need to be addressed by Government.

That said, they very same conclusions could be drawn from ‘widening participation’ and the achievement of students from poor backgrounds. In that situation, often, (which is supported by national statistics) students form poorer backgrounds who undertake higher a education programme at further education colleges rather than a University appear to achieve better overall.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44125777

Why is Hinds suddenly letting teachers ‘get on with the job’?

Interesting article here from tes.com. Whilst the academisation of our school system was heralded as giving heads more autonomy over how their school were run it has ended up with greater centralised control, especially when you introduce multi-academy trusts. As such, the education secretary’s recent announcement of the dramatic changes to school accountability is made all the more interesting… are Whitehall admitting defeat, such is the complete change in direction of recent policy. What do we think of Damian Hinds proposals?

https://www.tes.com/news/long-read-why-hinds-suddenly-letting-teachers-get-job