Adamsrill Primary School Single Equality policy - Essay Example

?A Critical Analysis of Adamsrill Primary School Single Equality policy Outline of Adamsrill Primary School Single Equality Policy In this paper, I critique the application of Single Equality policy at Adamsrill Primary School. British schools are required to demonstrate commitment to the single equality policy which they tailor to meet their needs of working towards the goal of positively combating inequality. Unlike the Equality Act, the single equality policy requires schools to go beyond aspects of race, disability and gender to include sexual orientation, age, and belief or religion, when propagating equality. I believe the single equality policy at Adamsrill primary School is committed to serving the school community’s educational needs especially through protecting equal opportunities, cultivating good relations and eradicating unwarranted discrimination (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.1). As a diverse school, I understand Adamsrill needs to cultivate a culture of value in diversity where discrimination is eliminated, equality propagated and good relations fostered. The culture of value in diversity offers a wonderful experience to students, staff and visitors each day. Through a strong leadership team, I believe monitoring and reviewing the inequality practices regularly will enable Adamsrill to accommodate changes to its profile (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.1). By enrolling students from numerous backgrounds, the enrollment of any new student could result to significant changes in school profile. In my view, Adamsrill Primary School’s efforts to ensure that equal opportunities are available to the entire school community are evident in the school’s mission to provide services without considerations for race, faith, religion, disability, socio-economic background or gender (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.1). I believe that this is a good way to promote an inclusion and diversity culture that every stakeholder takes pride in and motivation to fully participate effectively in all school activities. Adamsrill’s Primary also offers inclusive teaching and uses different attributes of students to assess their performance while the data is used to raise the teaching standards (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.2). Some aspects considered in inclusive teaching are race, gender, age, disability and special educational needs and free school meals. Adamsrill School’s discipline among students is also inclusive as discrimination of any kind is harshly challenged while respect for all is propagated. Students are also made to understand that diversity is strength to be celebrated by all. Each stakeholder at Adamsrill Primary School is required to understand their roles and responsibility in promoting equality (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.2). The governing body identifies equality barriers and sets objectives to address them and also monitors efficiency in the attainment of equality objectives and then publishes review results. Students are the major source of information during equality monitoring progress and the collected information includes exclusions, harassment or bullying complaints and others (Adamsrill single equality policy n.d, p.2). The headteacher is responsible for endorsing the Equality message to the staff, pupils and parents. Background for the text in which the Single Equality Policy is embedded in wider social and policy discourses Educational policy in the UK after the Second World War is divided into welfarism and post-welfarism (Morgan and Williamson 2008, p.16). Welfarism began from 1944 to the late 1980s when the Education Act 1944 was designed with the aim of providing education to all especially those who could not access it previously like the minority groups. Like Bowe, Ball & Gold (1992, p.6), I realize that there was too much control over what was to be taught and how teaching would take place and there was over-commitment to the provision of equal opportunities and revolutionizing social divisions. The welfarism period was characterized by continuation of social inequality patterns that had been previously practiced despite the commitment to the promotion of social equality (Morgan & Williamson 2008, p.16). In my view, the post-welfarist era of educational policy effectively solved the failed welfarism era especially in propagating effective commitment to the promotion of social equality. According to Morgan and Williamson (2008, p.17), teachers’ roles and responsibility on students were reconfigured to hold the teacher accountable for the students’ performance in terms of value added to the student after their interaction (Lewis, Gewirtz & Clarke 2000, p.39). I commend the practice of having the teacher accountable for the value-added to the students they teach since it transformed the social policy (Lewis, Gewirtz & Clarke 2000, p.39). Additionally, the post-welfarism era brought distinctive commitments to market democracy and competitive individualism (Morgan & Williamson 2008, p.17) while forfeiting commitment to Keynesian economics and redistributive justice. More emphasis was placed on the goals of efficiency, performance, effectiveness and productivity to support the focus on diversity and choice as a distinct measure for gauging the teacher’s accountability. Conversely, the welfarist educational policy era was characterized by insufficient teacher accountability, monopolism, resistance to the demands of consumers, and self-serving among others (Ball 1994, p.23). My argument of the emergence of social exclusion in the 1970s agrees with Boardman, Currie, Killaspy & Mezey (2010, p.10) that the key driving force was the need to have schooling restructured to accommodate students from minority groups at school and in the state. However, exclusion was defined on the basis of aspects of gender, disability, unemployed and lone parents as affected persons were not recognized and so were their basic rights and this ignored other aspects like age, sexual orientation and religion. The presence of social exclusion provided evidence that, despite efforts to promote equal opportunity, there was no strategy or procedure to facilitate inclusion. This way, the excluded persons did not have the opportunity to become part of economic, social and cultural life issues. According to Whitty (2002, p.27) and Bagilhole (1997, p.3), equal opportunities development did not meet direct development and harmonization in the EU policy social dimension and early attempts of harmonization failed. I agree with Hill and Cole (2001, p.12) that the failed equality harmonization was linked to persistent practice of education inequality despite the presence of radical changes on educational policy by the government in the 1970s. Bagilhole (1997, p.13) acknowledges that persistent inequality in educational policy was propagated by concentration of EU policy on promotion of market integration and having the social policy as a prerogative of member states. Consequently, social inequality remained an issue of market making and not social justice. In education, gender and achievement were inclined towards girls given the advancing feminist literature and research of 1970s and 1980s (Gaine & George 1999, p.11). Feminists critiqued the state and drew attention to the detrimental place women had both in education and employment. In response, policy makers set in place numerous initiatives to open up access to girls and I believe the policy makers acted under influence of the ongoing education issues back then without expectation that the girls could beat the boys. The girls outperformed boys as experienced in the GCSE examination results by the end of 1980s (Gaine & George 1999, p.11-12). During the 1980s, feminists pushed for a shift from patriarchal schooling through girls’ empowerment and change of attitudes academically. Failure of a shift from partriachal schooling had seen girls with potential denied the opportunity to participate in main activities of the society. My view is that social exclusion denied girls’ participation in schooling not because they chose to, but because they were subject to reasons beyond their control (Byrne 1999, p.24) even though they were willing to learn (Boardman, Currie, Killaspy & Mezey 2010, p.12-15). In setting the goals to increase girls’ access to education, I would say that policy makers had a good starting point. However, access to education was not better girls’ education since there was no definition of the kind of education to be provided and the conditions under which it was provided. My reasoning is founded on the argument by Subrahmanian (2006, p.12) that having girls attend school did not guarantee their attainment of qualitative outcomes. Additionally, Subrahmanian (2006, p. 12) recognized that gender equality was beyond offering incentives and establishing participation opportunities to include the development of a consensus on the relevance girls’ education. The argument by Subrahmanian (2006, p.12) on better education for girls was supported by Alexiadou (2002, n.p) who reasoned that promoting equal outcomes on education was not only undesirable but also very infeasible. The equality of opportunity promoted by Alexiadou (2002, n.p) was in the context of modern, globalized pressures on the economy, and necessitates setting equal likelihood to life for all to facilitate the accomplishment of their potential. In his reasoning, Alexiadou (2002, n.p) does not only require students who have had equality in their education but education that fully shapes up the human capital such that the outcome is the creation of a reliable information economy and new labor in the future. Approach to analyzing the policy text Today, education in countries such as the UK is considered to have particular importance especially in the establishment of a global knowledge economy. Additionally, education is crucial in securing economic prosperity through knowledge production and trade, thereby prompting social inclusion and social justice. The emphasis of education on knowledge production resulted to differences in that manual workers work with their hands while the knowledge workers work with their heads to articulate ideas, information and knowledge (Morgan and Williamson 2008, p.18). In order to facilitate knowledge production and not production of educated persons, I set out to analyze Adamsrill Single Equality policy efficiency. My analysis of the single equality policy focuses on understanding the issue of inequality for its cause and persistence in education and the forces behind current education restructuring (Hill & Cole 2001, p.13-14). I will also integrate the knowledge acquired to Adamsrill Primary School’s Single Equality Policy and recommend changes where necessary. In addition, I set forth to understand how the education policy makes sense by understanding how politics and sociology influence education especially in the mapping race, class and gender. The mapping of race, class and gender is well evaluated by Ball (1994, p.23-26) who defines educational reforms in terms of introduction of market forces, managerialism and National Curriculum in school organizations and teachers’ work. Analysis of the policy text Despite numerous previous attempts to deal with inequality, modern education is still challenged on how to successfully deal with inequality in Britain. Hill & Cole (2001) reveal that the earliest attempts to effectively handle inequality in schooling were through pluralist approaches to education (55) where dialogue was valued more. In my view, the shift to pluralism through school governance, management and evaluation was not only intended at improving education but as a way of fostering and respecting cultural identity of people from given racial groups while recognizing the aspirations and requirements of other cultural groups. Whitty (2002, p.27) defines the educational policy of 1988 as aimed at providing a curriculum that was not only balanced but one that also promoted the pupils’ development physically, mentally, culturally, spiritually and morally. Although having a balanced curriculum was acceptable, the accompanying mandatory National Curriculum defining academic subjects’ terms was not perceived as liberal education for lack of clear focus in preparing students for work and citizenship. Whitty (2002, p.28-30) revealed that the reformed education with mandatory national curriculum assumed that an educated person exposed numerous subject discourses was employable, responsible citizen, environmentally friendly and tax payer living a healthy lifestyle. I agree with Whitty (2002, 28) that producing educated persons through a national curriculum was a good way of responding to political imperatives and avoiding indoctrination and social control charges when preparing students for adult life. However, producing educated persons did not make the students credible to handle market forces of competitiveness and employability. Despite numerous attempts to change education, I perceive that more problems are created than solved. Wright, Weekes & McGlaughlin (2000, p.4) argue that since the Education Reforms Act or ERA in 1988, black minorities were repeatedly made victims of procedures and rules that eventually discriminated unintentionally. In 1998, ERA reforms emphasizing on academic performance and choice of parents were created thereby promoting individualism and competitiveness. Like Wright, Weekes & McGlaughlin (2000,p.4-5) I agree that not all students would withstand such competitiveness and so were some parents which then introduced a new form of social exclusion. The solution to differing competition among students, led the Education Reform Act opt for reduction of Local Education Authority or LEA control of schools by allowing schools to handle their individual budgetary pronouncements while open enrollment allowed parents to choose schools. Open enrollment changes permitted parents to seek for places for their students from far and wide and a racially segregated education system resulted as white parents tended to avoid schools they perceived had many blacks (Wright, Weekes & McGlaughlin 2000, p.5). Current education reforms appreciate that knowledge is not just important for its traditional tangible factors on student performance, but also as a production factor where people’s abilities promote integration to global economy Fennell and Arnot (2008, p.1) acknowledge that numerous changes of the 21st century have brought new accepted wisdom where political and philosophical conceptualizations of gender equality have experienced considerable departure of social agendas to stress on multiculturalism and assortment and women position in the society. The emerging emphasis on multiculturalism and diversity has seen nations like Britain develop systems of dealing with inequality in education, employment, and civil society (Fennell and Arnot 2008, p.1). The Single Equality Policy was intended at integrating the inequalities legislation that existed like the Equal Pay Act, Sex discrimination act, disability discrimination, Race relations act and others. The single equality policy includes elements of age, disability, race, sex, religion and sexual orientation. Like Lewis, Gewirtz and Clarke (2005, p.40-42) I understand that the numerous changes in current aspects, social administration through Single Equality policy is intended at ensuring there are improved conditions of life within the school setting. Adamsrill Primary School, in my opinion, is aimed at promoting the government requirement that all public institutions eliminate discrimination through managerialism and re-organization of teaching practice and schools (Gewirtz 2002, p.25). At Adamsrill Primary School, social inclusion goes beyond race, gender and disability to include age, sexual orientation, and belief or religion thereby indicating the school’s commitment to equal experience to quality education for all. Adamsrill is bound to enroll students from different backgrounds given its location in the inner-city and the resulting multicultural community calls for sustainable inequalities mitigation. Social inequalities mitigation at Adamsrill primary school is cultivated by the strong leadership that ensures that the nature of the wider society, staff, students and parents, remains a sensitive issue in informing the needs of its educational policy. I agree with Alexiadou (2002, n.p) that apart from promoting elimination of discrimination and providing equal opportunities at Adamsrill Primary School, the school’s administration should seek to observe the concept of new labor in their education system. This is possible through the integration of the perception that skills in the students are assets of concern since they will mould the student to become employable and in poverty elimination. In addition, Bauman (1996, p.23-28) asserts that the promotion of a social inclusion is the responsibility of the school’s administration and each school community member on the bass of strong emphasis on moral and consensual social values. The school’s leadership must then work towards the cultivation of a school community that works to rebuild social order, and stability facilitated by strong values that are socially shared by all stakeholders. The attainment of social order and stability within the school environment is argued by Bauman (1996, p.29) as involving division of work, stakeholders’ cooperation and coordination of activities. Conversely, Bauman (1996, p.32) encourages that the school stakeholders must embrace consumerism such that they remain flexible to welcome any equality promoting opportunity such that they not only appreciate it but also make the best use of it. According to Wright, Weekes & McGlaughlin (2000, p.6), schools like Adamsrill Primary School must ensure that the implementation of the Single equality policy is not overly dominated by politics to control its system of schooling and education. The argument by Hill and Cole (2001) is that, schooling should not be founded on social class, gender or race such that the school curriculum is different or such that students are subjected to anticipate occupational outcomes that are different for each social class or gender (56). Alexiadou (2002, n.p) argues that schools should foster a learning environment that does not constrain anyone from acquiring knowledge effectively. Effective learning environment can be obtained by the school leadership through generation of rules and practices that enable possibilities and through the manner in which people treat each other. For a school like Adamsrill that is located in the inner-city the diversity of the school community should receive formal equality of access and provision; equality of circumstance; participation; and outcome. Alexiadou (2002, n.p) asserts that all students should be made to aspire to their full potential. In this case, Adamsrill Primary School’s Single Equality Policy will not just be a guide to offer the school’s community with solutions to problems but the policy should also be a process whose evolution is through cycles that are more or less time, funds or political support bounded (Ball 2008, p.12). My view of policy agrees with (Bagilhole 1997, p.3) who argues that being a tool for problem solving and a process, policy should rectify the inequality issue which not only concerns the multicultural environment at Adamsrill Primary school but also concerned with reforming the education system in Britain. School administration should focus on implementing a single Equality Policy that does not only incorporate the perspectives of students but one that includes all exclusion’s unfavorable effects on parents, students, and local communities individually. In my view, Adamsrill primary school should focus on understanding the effects of the policy on school processes, parents, students, and teachers within the discipline and social exclusion areas. I agree with Wright, Weekes & McGlaughlin (2000, p.6) who argue that the incorporation of new standards and inequality objectives affects the teachers own perception of their practice and resulting relationships between the teachers and students. In the Single Equity Policy at Adamsrill Primary school, monitoring and reviewing of the policy means that the teacher-student relationships is subject to regular changes in order to incorporate the resultant changes in policy objectives for a better learning environment. At all time, the school management must ensure that the interactions between the teacher and student are set such that there is a defined strategy of the construction and experience of race, gender and class within the schools. This implies that the relationships between students and teachers should be through defined links of practice and policy. Ball (2008, p.23) acknowledges that in attempts to have the right form of educational reforms, the learners in Britain today are subjected to extensive and expanding compulsory schooling and course of life. The main aim of such schooling and course of life is the need to develop a new form of learner, citizen, worker who has fresh dispositions and qualities. Ball (2008, p.26) asserts that the result of expanding education policy is the need to include health, sexual behavior, fitness and citizenship and entrepreneurship that makes education to be perceived as an endless process. The endless learning process, in my view, is essential for the creation of individuals who are creative, innovative and entrepreneurial as characterized by their continuous optimization. Apart from solving the problem of inequality as required by the government, Adamsrill Primary School management should seek to define their focus on high quality education through their vision and the head teacher’s determination. The attainment of high quality education is possible through the integration of Hill and Cole (2001, p.23) new labor’s principles that see children leaving the primary school being able to write and read and numerate through improved managerialism. Gewirtz (2002, p.27) argues that the focus on creating managers and not professionals in leading schools is a step towards efficiency. By having managers take control of schools and learning, Gewirtz (2002, p.28) argues that there will be alterations not just of the appearance of the education system but also of the character and the way of life within schools. The fact that there is a single equality policy at Adamsrill Primary School is an indication that the management is not just willing to comply but also remain flexible to accommodate any changes or alterations in the policy objectives to make education quality in the school even better (Gewirtz 2002, p.28). The head teacher has the role to ensure that daily learning is carried out under the umbrella of good practices. Good practices implies that the school management focuses on ensuring that the teachers are well informed of their responsibilities such that they are not subjected to an environment that constrains them. Whitty (2002, p.46) points out that in the presence of numerous education reforms recently, the teaching profession has been de-professionalized on one side and re-professionalized on the other hand. Re-professionalization arises from the need to have the teachers remain in touch with modern day needs. Adamsrill Primary School management should focus on ensuring that teachers perceive their roles and responsibilities under the Single Equality Policy as a way of becoming part of the transformation needed in promoting equality in Britain’s education system and not de-professionalization. As transformers, teachers will seek to support the personal development of school pupils in their spiritual, social, moral, and cultural growth while ensuring that good personal relationships exist between them and the students (Whitty 2002, p.34). Gillborn & Mirza (2000, p.5) reveal that the goal towards an all inclusive schooling strategy for commitment to the racial equality goal was reinforced by The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. The findings from this inquiry revealed that racism at schools was enveloped by lack of clear directions for addressing inequalities attainment for majority of the Local Education Authorities or LEAs and schools. I believe that the mere act of having a Single Equality Policy is not enough if there are no clear procedures for monitoring their implementation and their implications on practice. In addition, there are schools that have strategies but do not know how to raise the minority ethnic Group’s attainment Gillborn & Mirza (2000, p.5). This implies that Adamsrill Primary School should not just be contended in having an equality policy but should promote equality of opportunity as an element of vital social and economic importance. The best way to measure the closure of educational attainment gaps at Adamsrill Primary School is to ensure that no social group underachieves or whose reasons of underachievement are argued to be as a result of their families or personality of pupils but the education system itself (Gewirtz 2002, p.2). After assessing the performance of each group, Adamsrill Primary School’s management must use differences in performance to understand the best way to tailor their education system for the best academic achievement interests of the students. As a school, the best way to make use of differences in achievement amongst students of different social groups is to ensure that all teachers and students do not perceive it as a cause for concern or a way of proving the potential of the underachieving group Gillborn & Mirza (2000, p.7). Conversely, the differences in achievement between students of different social groups should only be part of a necessary analysis of educational outcome inequalities but not an approach that results to hierarchy of ethnic minorities founded on inherent abilities assumptions. Taking up a managerial role would require the school headteacher to create an attitude that all students can achieve regardless of their ethnic background. According to Gillies (2008, p.686), acknowledging that all students can achieve is in line with the recent UK education policy focus on quality and equality themes. The adoption of quality and equality is well suited for the educational concept of experience for all. Consequently, the experience for all concept fits into the aspect of creating societies that are socially just as defined by Mclnerney (2004, p4-6). I agree with Mclnerney’s (2004, p.4-6) social justice concept that calls for addressing educational inequalities that arises from experiences by students on the basis of their class, gender and race is crucial in developing competitive, innovative and employable students. However, the headteacher must ensure that the teachers are provided with clear directions and procedures of how to go about their teaching to avoid creating a highly ambiguous teaching environment. In addition, teachers should be left with the discretion of exercising their expertise and professional judgment such that both the teachers and the students experience effective exploitation of their potential by allowing each to do their best (Gerwitz 2002). Allowing autonomy in teachers practice, at Adamsrill Primary School does not mean that teacher are not subject to the National Curriculum but that they all work towards the attainment of equality driven by the market and where teachers are not subject to stress, resentment, absenteeism, illness or completely leaving the profession (Bowe, Ball & Gold 1992, p.12). Conclusion This paper has analyzed the Single Equality Policy at Adamsrill primary School by focussing on the background information that have led to the need for a policy to combat inequality, and evaluated how well Adamsrill primary school has and should implement its policy for best results. The single Equality policy is requirement for all public schools and should be prepared reasonably such that it is practical. Depending on factors like school size, school population diversity, school budget and school premises among others, the approach adapted in the preparation of the Single Equality policy differs. The policy is aimed at ensuring that all school community members are treated with fairness and that each member has their responsibility to promote equality. At Adamsrill Primary school, the legal duties of the policy are to ensure that discrimination is eliminated at all cost, equality of opportunity is promoted and that good relationships are fostered at all levels. Adamsrill is a school located in the inner-city of London and the population is highly diverse which is why equality policy is an essential aspect in promoting experience for all and social justice through schooling. The Single equality Policy came into effect after so many unsuccessful education reforms to curb social exclusion from education on basis of colour, race, gender, disability and others. However, education reforms have only managed to solve part of the problem but demonstrated persistent in social exclusion promotion. Although it had not been the intention, most students from minority groups have experienced exclusion in schooling and led to stereotypes that students from minority groups cannot achieve academically. However, the experience for all concepts has made it possible for all students to receive equal opportunities and exploit their potential to the highest. In their effort to combat inequality, the leadership at Adamsrill Primary school should not only focus on promoting equal opportunity for students but also ensuring that the teachers have the right environment and skills to meet the needs of each student appropriately. Promoting equal opportunity for students and reasonable teaching environment for teachers will not only create experience for all but also guarantee that students are competent and that teachers remain motivated in their practice. Bibliography Adamsrill Primary School Single Equality Polocy , available from < http://www.schooljotter.com/files/adamsrill/Policies/Single_Equality_Policy_2012.pdf > Alexiadou, N 2002, Social Exclusion and educational opportunity: the case of English Education policies with a European Context, Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, Available from < http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002148.htm> Bagilhole, B 1997, Equal opportunities and social policy: issues of race, Gender and disability, Longman, London. Ball, SJ 2008, The education debate, The Policy Press, Bristol. Ball,SJ 1994, Education reform: a critical and post-structural approach, Open University Press, London. Bauman, Z 1996, Work, Consumerism and the New poor, The Open University Press, London Boardman, J, Currie, A, Killaspy, H & Mezey, G 2010, Social Inclusion and mental health, RCPsych Publications, Available from < http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/files/samplechapter/socialinclusionsc.pdf > Bowe, R, Ball, SJ & Gold, A 1992, Reforming Education and changing schools: Case studies in policy sociology, Routledge, London. Byrne, D 1999, Social Exclusion, Open University Press, Buckingham. Fennell, S & Arnot, M 2008, Gender Education and Equality in a Global Context: Conceptual frameworks and policy perspectives, Routledge, London. Gaine, C & George, R 1999, gender, race, and class in schooling: A new introduction, Routledge, London. Gewirtz, S 2002, The managerial school: post-welfarism and social justice in education, Routledge, London. Gillborn, D & Mirza, HS 2000, Educational Inequality: Mapping Race, Class and Gender, Office for Standards in Education, London Gillies, D 2008, ‘Quality and equality: the mask of discursive conflation in education policy texts’, Journal of education policy, vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 685-699 Hill, D & Cole, M 2001, (eds) Schooling and Equality: fact, concept, and Policy, Kogan Page Limited, London. Lewis, G, Gewirtz, S & Clarke, J 2000, Rethinking social policy, Sage Publications, London. Mclnerney, P 2004, Making Hope Practical: School reform for social justice, e-content management, online. Morgan, J and Williamson B 2008, Enquiring Minds: Schools, Knowledge & Educational Change, Available from < http://www.enquiringminds.org.uk/pdfs/Enquiring_Minds_year3_report.pdf > Subrahmanian, R 2006, Mainstreaming Gender for Better Girls’ Education: Policy and institutional issues, The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), Available from < http://www.ungei.org/resources/files/unicef_issue4_mainstreaming_gender.pdf> Whitty, G 2002, Making sense of education policy: studies in the sociology and politics of education, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd, London. Wright, C, Weekes, D, & McGlaughlin, A 2000, ‘Race' class and gender in exclusion from school, Falmer Press, London. Read More