Sociology education
Policy and inequality:
Educational policy= plans and strategies for education introduced by the government with
instructions for schools and local authorities
Intentions of policies= promote equality and ensure promotion of marketisation to make schools
more competitive
- 1944=Winston Churchill both the tripartite system, where children we allocated to 3 different
types of secondary school based on ability (11+exam). These 3 types of secondary school
were grammar that mainly consisted of middle class, secondary modern which included the
working class and the non-academics and then the technical which focused on mechanics
and engineering. The tripartite system therefore reflects white wing values because it justifies
class and gender inequality
- 1965=comprehensive system introduced, aims to make education meritocratic, 11+
abolished, schools replaced by comprehensive schools where all pupils in an area could
attend. This was chosen by local authority, but not all converted so grammar schools still
existed
- Educational reform act 1998= Margaret Thatcher conservative government- established
national curriculum and the department on education, allowing comparison to know which
schools were teaching most effectively. Also, introduced GCSEs where results were published
into league tables - Established the national curriculum and the department of education.
Introduced GCSE’s - standardises assessments – publish results into league tables.ensured
that all schools were teaching students the same, establishing competitiveness between
schools and comparison. It also empowers parents to be able to choose the school their child
goes to, raising standards of the schools. publishing league tables, Ofsted reports, open
enrolment, Specialist schools widen parental choice, funding formula, academies, free schools
- 1997 -New Labour government – similar policies emphasising standards, diversity and
choice.
- 2010 - conservative/liberal democrat coalition government took marketisation further
academies and free schools.
- Ever since 1988, marketisation has been a clear focus on education policy.
New labour and inequality:
- New Labour (1997–2010) introduced a range of policies aimed at reducing educational
inequality while still maintaining marketisation.
- Their approach focused on raising standards in disadvantaged areas by improving support for
pupils who faced structural barriers such as material deprivation, low aspirations and limited
access to high‑quality schooling. The intention was to create a more meritocratic system by
providing targeted interventions that would help close the attainment gap between social
classes.
- One example is Education Action Zones, which directed extra funding and resources into
deprived communities to support schools serving disadvantaged pupils or, Education
Maintenance Allowances-payments to students from low-income backgrounds to encourage
them to stay on after 16 to gain better qualifications.National literacy strategy-literacy and
numeracy hours, reduce primary school class sizes-benefit disadvantaged groups
, - This illustrates how educational policy can be used to reduce inequality by redistributing
support to those most affected by structural disadvantage, aiming to create fairer educational
outcomes.
- A03 - Benn argues that New Labour created a “New Labour paradox”: while policies like
Education Action Zones attempted to reduce inequality, the government simultaneously
expanded marketisation. The introduction of higher university tuition fees, for instance,
discouraged many working‑class students from progressing, meaning inequality was reduced
in some areas but reinforced in others.
Free schools and academies:
- David Cameron education policy was to encourage ‘excellence, competition and innovation’ by
freeing schools from the state
- Academies and free schools were expanded under the 2010 Coalition government, aiming to
raise standards through autonomy and competition. Funded by state but ran by parents,
teachers, faith organisations or businesses
- These reforms removed many schools from local authority control, giving them greater
freedom over curriculum, staffing and budgeting. The intention was that increased
independence would drive innovation, improve teaching quality and create a more competitive
educational environment, ultimately raising standards for all pupils.
- Ball argues that these reforms have contributed to fragmented centralisation, where the
education system becomes increasingly patchy and uneven, with a mix of school types
offering different levels of provision and opportunity.
- This highlights how policies intended to improve standards can instead deepen inequality by
creating a system where access to high‑quality education varies significantly depending on
the type of school a pupil attends.
- Allen found that free schools in Sweden tend to benefit children from highly educated families,
suggesting that such policies may increase rather than reduce inequality. She also notes that
apparent improvements in standards often result from selective admissions rather than
genuine teaching quality, reinforcing class‑based advantages
League tables and cream skinning:
- Marketisation policies introduced under Margaret Thatcher, particularly the publication of
league tables, have significantly increased inequality by encouraging schools to select the
most desirable pupils.
- League tables create strong incentives for schools to prioritise high‑achieving students who
will boost their published results. This leads to cream‑skinning, where schools select
academically strong, often middle‑class pupils, and silt‑shifting, where they avoid lower‑ability
pupils who may negatively affect performance. As a result, “good” schools become
increasingly middle‑class, while less successful schools become concentrated with
disadvantaged pupils.
- Thatcher’s 1988 Education Reform Act introduced league tables and open enrolment,
enabling schools to compete for pupils and making selection practices more widespread.
- This shows how marketisation policies intended to raise standards can instead deepen
educational inequality by structuring competition in ways that favour middle‑class families
and high‑performing schools.
, - A03: Ball argues that league tables reproduce class inequalities because middle‑class parents
possess the cultural capital needed to navigate the system and secure places in
high‑performing schools. Working‑class families, lacking the same resources, are
disproportionately pushed into lower‑status schools, reinforcing existing inequalities.
Parentocracy:
- Marketisation policies have contributed to growing inequality by creating a system where
parental choice determines access to educational opportunities.
- By positioning parents as consumers, schools must compete to attract pupils. This
competition encourages schools to raise standards, improve teaching quality and enhance
their reputation in order to appeal to families. In theory, this should drive overall improvement
across the education system, as schools are incentivised to perform well to remain desirable.
- David describes this shift as parentocracy, where power moves from schools to parents, and
schools respond by competing for parental approval.
- This shows how educational policy can reshape school behaviour, with marketisation
encouraging schools to improve in response to parental choice.
- AO3: However, this improvement is not equally accessible. Middle‑class parents possess
greater economic and cultural capital, enabling them to secure places in the
highest‑performing schools. Working‑class parents, lacking the same resources, are often
restricted to lower‑performing local schools. As a result, parentocracy reinforces inequality,
because the benefits of school improvement are disproportionately enjoyed by those already
advantaged.
The funding formula and parental choice:
- The funding formula allocates money based on pupil numbers, which increases inequality
between schools
- Popular schools attract more pupils and therefore receive more funding, allowing them to hire
better teachers, expand facilities and maintain high standards. In contrast, unpopular schools
lose funding, struggle to improve and become trapped in a cycle of underperformance — a
pattern that disproportionately affects working‑class communities. Middle‑class parents are
more able to secure places in well‑funded schools, meaning these advantages accumulate
over time.
- Gewirtz found that parental choice is deeply shaped by class differences. She identified
privileged‑skilled choosers(middle class), who use their cultural and economic capital to
access the best schools, and disconnected‑local choosers(working class), whose limited
capital restricts them to local, often lowerperforming schools.
- This shows how the funding formula and parental choice work together to reinforce class
divisions, as schools with more middle‑class intakes become increasingly advantaged
- A03: Supporters argue that giving parents choice empowers families and encourages schools
to improve through competition.
Vocational education
- Work‑related education giving practical skills for employment
- Includes apprenticeships, BTECs, NVQs, T‑Levels, work experience
, - Aims: improve employability, reduce youth unemployment, meet skills shortages
- Strong link between education policy and economic needs
- THE NEW VOCATIONALISM (1980s → now)
- Shift towards work‑focused education
- Introduced mainly under Thatcher, continued by all later governments
- Key policies: YTS (Youth Training Scheme) – 1983, NVQs – 1986, GNVQs – 1990s, Modern
Apprenticeships – 1994, Work‑related learning in National Curriculum, T‑Levels – recent
attempt to raise vocational status
- Aims: Reduce youth unemployment, Solve skills shortages, Promote work ethic, Link schools
to industry needs, Increase economic competitiveness
- debates about purpose:
- Skills vs social control: real training or just keeping young people out of unemployment stats
- Employability: some schemes offer limited progression; employers often prefer academic
routes
- Status divide: vocational routes seen as lower status than A‑levels
- Economic alignment: training doesn’t always match actual labour market needs
- Equality: working‑class and some ethnic minority students disproportionately steered into
vocational tracks
- strengths of vocational pathways = reduces youth, unemployment, Practical, hands‑on
learning, Helps non‑academic learners, Builds employer links, Supports economic growth,
Offers alternative pathways (apprenticeships, T‑Levels)
- limitations of vocational pathways = Often low status, Class‑biased: WC students pushed into
it, Gender‑segregated routes, Sometimes poor‑quality training, Can be used to hide
unemployment, Limited progression into higher‑paid jobs
Selection
- Selective Education policies are those which allow schools to select pupils on the basis of
academic ability or other criteria.
- the opposite of selective education is comprehensive education – where schools just take in
any students, irrespective of criteria.
- 1944 Education Act (Tripartite System) - Introduced 11+ exam → selection at age 11.
Grammar schools (academic) — 15–20%. Technical schools (vocational) — 5%. Secondary
moderns (basic education) — 80%. Based on idea that ability is fixed at 11. a03 - Intelligence
not fixed at 11 → unfair to late developers. Secondary modern pupils labelled as failures.
Reproduced class inequality (MC passed, WC failed).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. There was little recognition of racial or cultural diversity
in policy
- Many ethnic minority pupils faced language barriers, low teacher expectations, and
institutional racism
- Comprehensive Schools (1965 onwards) - Abolished 11+ and grammar/secondary modern
divide. One type of school for all → no selection by ability. Admissions Code forbids selection
by class or ability. a03 - Still selection by postcode (selection by mortgage). MC parents can
move into best catchment areas. Children of different abilities and social classes mix, which
can promote tolerance and understanding. A range of academic and vocational pathways
Policy and inequality:
Educational policy= plans and strategies for education introduced by the government with
instructions for schools and local authorities
Intentions of policies= promote equality and ensure promotion of marketisation to make schools
more competitive
- 1944=Winston Churchill both the tripartite system, where children we allocated to 3 different
types of secondary school based on ability (11+exam). These 3 types of secondary school
were grammar that mainly consisted of middle class, secondary modern which included the
working class and the non-academics and then the technical which focused on mechanics
and engineering. The tripartite system therefore reflects white wing values because it justifies
class and gender inequality
- 1965=comprehensive system introduced, aims to make education meritocratic, 11+
abolished, schools replaced by comprehensive schools where all pupils in an area could
attend. This was chosen by local authority, but not all converted so grammar schools still
existed
- Educational reform act 1998= Margaret Thatcher conservative government- established
national curriculum and the department on education, allowing comparison to know which
schools were teaching most effectively. Also, introduced GCSEs where results were published
into league tables - Established the national curriculum and the department of education.
Introduced GCSE’s - standardises assessments – publish results into league tables.ensured
that all schools were teaching students the same, establishing competitiveness between
schools and comparison. It also empowers parents to be able to choose the school their child
goes to, raising standards of the schools. publishing league tables, Ofsted reports, open
enrolment, Specialist schools widen parental choice, funding formula, academies, free schools
- 1997 -New Labour government – similar policies emphasising standards, diversity and
choice.
- 2010 - conservative/liberal democrat coalition government took marketisation further
academies and free schools.
- Ever since 1988, marketisation has been a clear focus on education policy.
New labour and inequality:
- New Labour (1997–2010) introduced a range of policies aimed at reducing educational
inequality while still maintaining marketisation.
- Their approach focused on raising standards in disadvantaged areas by improving support for
pupils who faced structural barriers such as material deprivation, low aspirations and limited
access to high‑quality schooling. The intention was to create a more meritocratic system by
providing targeted interventions that would help close the attainment gap between social
classes.
- One example is Education Action Zones, which directed extra funding and resources into
deprived communities to support schools serving disadvantaged pupils or, Education
Maintenance Allowances-payments to students from low-income backgrounds to encourage
them to stay on after 16 to gain better qualifications.National literacy strategy-literacy and
numeracy hours, reduce primary school class sizes-benefit disadvantaged groups
, - This illustrates how educational policy can be used to reduce inequality by redistributing
support to those most affected by structural disadvantage, aiming to create fairer educational
outcomes.
- A03 - Benn argues that New Labour created a “New Labour paradox”: while policies like
Education Action Zones attempted to reduce inequality, the government simultaneously
expanded marketisation. The introduction of higher university tuition fees, for instance,
discouraged many working‑class students from progressing, meaning inequality was reduced
in some areas but reinforced in others.
Free schools and academies:
- David Cameron education policy was to encourage ‘excellence, competition and innovation’ by
freeing schools from the state
- Academies and free schools were expanded under the 2010 Coalition government, aiming to
raise standards through autonomy and competition. Funded by state but ran by parents,
teachers, faith organisations or businesses
- These reforms removed many schools from local authority control, giving them greater
freedom over curriculum, staffing and budgeting. The intention was that increased
independence would drive innovation, improve teaching quality and create a more competitive
educational environment, ultimately raising standards for all pupils.
- Ball argues that these reforms have contributed to fragmented centralisation, where the
education system becomes increasingly patchy and uneven, with a mix of school types
offering different levels of provision and opportunity.
- This highlights how policies intended to improve standards can instead deepen inequality by
creating a system where access to high‑quality education varies significantly depending on
the type of school a pupil attends.
- Allen found that free schools in Sweden tend to benefit children from highly educated families,
suggesting that such policies may increase rather than reduce inequality. She also notes that
apparent improvements in standards often result from selective admissions rather than
genuine teaching quality, reinforcing class‑based advantages
League tables and cream skinning:
- Marketisation policies introduced under Margaret Thatcher, particularly the publication of
league tables, have significantly increased inequality by encouraging schools to select the
most desirable pupils.
- League tables create strong incentives for schools to prioritise high‑achieving students who
will boost their published results. This leads to cream‑skinning, where schools select
academically strong, often middle‑class pupils, and silt‑shifting, where they avoid lower‑ability
pupils who may negatively affect performance. As a result, “good” schools become
increasingly middle‑class, while less successful schools become concentrated with
disadvantaged pupils.
- Thatcher’s 1988 Education Reform Act introduced league tables and open enrolment,
enabling schools to compete for pupils and making selection practices more widespread.
- This shows how marketisation policies intended to raise standards can instead deepen
educational inequality by structuring competition in ways that favour middle‑class families
and high‑performing schools.
, - A03: Ball argues that league tables reproduce class inequalities because middle‑class parents
possess the cultural capital needed to navigate the system and secure places in
high‑performing schools. Working‑class families, lacking the same resources, are
disproportionately pushed into lower‑status schools, reinforcing existing inequalities.
Parentocracy:
- Marketisation policies have contributed to growing inequality by creating a system where
parental choice determines access to educational opportunities.
- By positioning parents as consumers, schools must compete to attract pupils. This
competition encourages schools to raise standards, improve teaching quality and enhance
their reputation in order to appeal to families. In theory, this should drive overall improvement
across the education system, as schools are incentivised to perform well to remain desirable.
- David describes this shift as parentocracy, where power moves from schools to parents, and
schools respond by competing for parental approval.
- This shows how educational policy can reshape school behaviour, with marketisation
encouraging schools to improve in response to parental choice.
- AO3: However, this improvement is not equally accessible. Middle‑class parents possess
greater economic and cultural capital, enabling them to secure places in the
highest‑performing schools. Working‑class parents, lacking the same resources, are often
restricted to lower‑performing local schools. As a result, parentocracy reinforces inequality,
because the benefits of school improvement are disproportionately enjoyed by those already
advantaged.
The funding formula and parental choice:
- The funding formula allocates money based on pupil numbers, which increases inequality
between schools
- Popular schools attract more pupils and therefore receive more funding, allowing them to hire
better teachers, expand facilities and maintain high standards. In contrast, unpopular schools
lose funding, struggle to improve and become trapped in a cycle of underperformance — a
pattern that disproportionately affects working‑class communities. Middle‑class parents are
more able to secure places in well‑funded schools, meaning these advantages accumulate
over time.
- Gewirtz found that parental choice is deeply shaped by class differences. She identified
privileged‑skilled choosers(middle class), who use their cultural and economic capital to
access the best schools, and disconnected‑local choosers(working class), whose limited
capital restricts them to local, often lowerperforming schools.
- This shows how the funding formula and parental choice work together to reinforce class
divisions, as schools with more middle‑class intakes become increasingly advantaged
- A03: Supporters argue that giving parents choice empowers families and encourages schools
to improve through competition.
Vocational education
- Work‑related education giving practical skills for employment
- Includes apprenticeships, BTECs, NVQs, T‑Levels, work experience
, - Aims: improve employability, reduce youth unemployment, meet skills shortages
- Strong link between education policy and economic needs
- THE NEW VOCATIONALISM (1980s → now)
- Shift towards work‑focused education
- Introduced mainly under Thatcher, continued by all later governments
- Key policies: YTS (Youth Training Scheme) – 1983, NVQs – 1986, GNVQs – 1990s, Modern
Apprenticeships – 1994, Work‑related learning in National Curriculum, T‑Levels – recent
attempt to raise vocational status
- Aims: Reduce youth unemployment, Solve skills shortages, Promote work ethic, Link schools
to industry needs, Increase economic competitiveness
- debates about purpose:
- Skills vs social control: real training or just keeping young people out of unemployment stats
- Employability: some schemes offer limited progression; employers often prefer academic
routes
- Status divide: vocational routes seen as lower status than A‑levels
- Economic alignment: training doesn’t always match actual labour market needs
- Equality: working‑class and some ethnic minority students disproportionately steered into
vocational tracks
- strengths of vocational pathways = reduces youth, unemployment, Practical, hands‑on
learning, Helps non‑academic learners, Builds employer links, Supports economic growth,
Offers alternative pathways (apprenticeships, T‑Levels)
- limitations of vocational pathways = Often low status, Class‑biased: WC students pushed into
it, Gender‑segregated routes, Sometimes poor‑quality training, Can be used to hide
unemployment, Limited progression into higher‑paid jobs
Selection
- Selective Education policies are those which allow schools to select pupils on the basis of
academic ability or other criteria.
- the opposite of selective education is comprehensive education – where schools just take in
any students, irrespective of criteria.
- 1944 Education Act (Tripartite System) - Introduced 11+ exam → selection at age 11.
Grammar schools (academic) — 15–20%. Technical schools (vocational) — 5%. Secondary
moderns (basic education) — 80%. Based on idea that ability is fixed at 11. a03 - Intelligence
not fixed at 11 → unfair to late developers. Secondary modern pupils labelled as failures.
Reproduced class inequality (MC passed, WC failed).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. There was little recognition of racial or cultural diversity
in policy
- Many ethnic minority pupils faced language barriers, low teacher expectations, and
institutional racism
- Comprehensive Schools (1965 onwards) - Abolished 11+ and grammar/secondary modern
divide. One type of school for all → no selection by ability. Admissions Code forbids selection
by class or ability. a03 - Still selection by postcode (selection by mortgage). MC parents can
move into best catchment areas. Children of different abilities and social classes mix, which
can promote tolerance and understanding. A range of academic and vocational pathways
