The 1988 Education Act Effects on State Schools - Essay Example

Describe the impact the 1988 Education Act had on the curriculum and assessments in schools. What concerns did some people have about educationin the 1980s which led to the changes proposed in the Act? The 1988 Reform Act radically altered the face of English education, abandoning the “non-interventionist” approach of the 1944 Act and creating a new, centralised system (Fisher 2008, p. 194). The Act had far-reaching consequences for the organisation and management of state schools in England but had an even greater impact on both curriculum and assessment. This essay will consider these changes and the social, political and economic reasoning which underpinned them. To begin, in the decades prior to the 1988 Act, there was a general consensus view among all political parties that English state school performance was poor. Children were not achieving their potential. When compared with state schools performance throughout Europe, the English education system was deemed “ineffective” (Fisher 2008, p. 157). Public discussions on reforming the education system and initiating serious change had started in the 1970s. In a speech made in 1976, the Labour Prime Minister, Lord Callaghan, had voiced his concerns and called for a “Great Debate” on education (Haralambos et al 2000, p. 801). More specifically, he was worried about the lack of students basic skills, such as literacy and numeracy, current, “informal” methods of teaching and a lack of control over the curriculum (The Times). Economically, there were serious concerns about youth unemployment and a general failure to equip young people with the industrial skills a strong workforce needed (Haralambos et al 2000, p. 801). In the early 1980s, according to McLaughlin, the “picture was bleak” for young people. Apprenticeships had massively declined and there was little opportunity to gain vocational qualifications. The introduction of the Youth Training Scheme (YTS), however, helped to improve the situation as young people did not need to worry about their educational achievement in order to gain a placement (McLaughlin 1992, p. 35). However, the Youth Training Scheme did not address the underlying issue of the education system in the 1980s. As McLaughlin argues, qualifications at basic level were still a big problem for the government. The numbers of young people leaving school with very little or no qualifications at all had not changed. In addition, there were many young people failing to complete the YTS and problems associated with gaining a quality placement, if a student did not have prior educational achievement. As McLaughlin points out, training is not the same as raising educational attainment, the YTS was incapable of addressing the basic problem (McLaughlin 1992, pp. 35-36). As argued by Prime Minister Callaghan, the curriculum was another issue in the education debate. In 1960 the Minister of Education, David Eccles, coined the phrase “the secret garden of the curriculum” (Cited in McCulloch 2000, p. 26). By this he referred to contemporary teachers ability to control “what they taught and how they taught it”, without any interference from government or parents. McCulloch argues that 1976 was a turning point in the teacher autonomy; the worlds of education and economy collided as it became realised that students must be equipped with workforce skills to avoid economic crisis (pp. 35-36). In addition, such teacher control of the curriculum had caused a degree of popular resentment as it was felt that teachers were running the system according to their own interests and avoiding public scrutiny (Fisher 2008, p. 257). So what changes did the 1988 Act bring about? Firstly, the Act had massive impact on learning. For the first time schools across the country were united with the National Curriculum. The government recognised that due to an “increasingly geographically mobile population” there was a need for students to be taught similar subjects regardless of where they studied or lived. This was further reinforced by little “direct controversy” at the prospect of a national curriculum (Walford 2002, p. 213). English, Maths and Science became “core” subjects, encompassing 30-40% of the teaching timetable. A further seven subjects – technology, music, art, history, geography, physical education and a modern foreign language - became “foundation” subjects, comprising 50% of the timetable. Prior to the founding of the National Curriculum, Religious Studies had been the only compulsory subject, but with the 1988 Act it became a curriculum option for schools (Livesey & Lawson 2005) It can be argued that the promotion of science and technology were directly linked to Prime Minister Callaghans speech and the requirements of the labour force. It certainly seems the governments drive to improve literacy and numeracy (Lawson & Livesey 2005). There were big changes for teachers too; where they had once been responsible for writing study material, the Government set up numerous Councils to compile full and comprehensive programs for each of the subjects, ranging from ages 5 to 16. There were drawbacks to the new curriculum ; for example, teachers became “inundated” with new teaching material and experienced a significant increase in their workload (Walford 2002, p. 214). Many accused the new teaching material as being too “traditional” and even “unimaginative”, and that it was difficult to create a consensus on what subjects should be included or excluded (Cited in Haralambos et al 2000, p. 811). However, the implementation of the 1988 Act fostered a “creative relationship” between teacher and the government, the first of its kind the education system (Barber 1993, p. 24). Accompanying the introduction of the National Curriculum were changes to the way students were assessed. Individual teacher assessments were replaced by a national system of four Key Stages. At the end of each Stage, students would sit national tests, Standard Attainment Tests, “to ensure all children achieved a certain level of competence relative to their age” (Lawton & Livesey 2005, p. 260). Local authorities were then required to produce League Tables using the data from the Standard Attainment Tests (Childs 2001, p. 258). Increasing the amount of testing and publishing the results gave parents to opportunity to make “informed choices” about their childs school. The government was creating a culture of competition between schools (Haralambos et al 2000, p. 802). This increase in “parent power” had two advantages; on the one hand parents could choose the best school for their child and see how well schools in their area performed, and on the other hand the country would benefit from an overall increase in educational standards (Fisher 2008, p. 257). For the first time in the history of English state school education, all powers over assessment, from the subjects to be assessed to the methods of testing, were defined and approved by the Secretary of State. Simply put, if it was not approved by the Secretary, it would not be allowed in English state schools (Fisher 2008, p. 256). In conclusion, the 1988 Education Reform Act was a significant piece of legislation. It addressed the popular concerns of English state school education, such as low levels of literacy and numeracy, whilst creating a young workforce capable of meeting the needs of industry. The Act implemented a National Curriculum which wrestled control away from teachers and ensured children were studying the same broad subjects and material. In addition, the Act introduced thorough, regular and centralised assessments which could be used to produce national statistics in the form of league tables. For the first time in the English state school system, some control was given back to parents, they had the opportunity to make an informed decision about their childrens education. References Barber, M. (1993) Teachers and the National Curriculum: Learning to Love It? In: Barber M., Graham G., (eds). Sense, Nonsense and the National Curriculum. Basingstoke: Falmer Press, pp. 10-25. Callghan J. (2001) Towards A National Debate. The Times. http://education.guardian.co.uk/thegreatdebate/story/0,,574645,00.html. Accessed 7th March 2010. Childs D. (2001) Britain Since 1945: A Political History. London: Routledge. Fisher, T. (2008) The Era of Centralisation: the 1988 Education Reform Act and Its Consequences. FORUM, (Vol. 50, No. 2), pp. 1-10. Gray Leaton S. (2007) Teacher As Technician: Semi-Professionalism After the 1988 Education Reform Act and Its Effect On Conceptions Of Pupil Identity. Policy Futures in Education, (Vol. 5, No. 2), pp. 194-203. Haralambos M., Holborn M., & Heald R. (eds). (2000) Sociology Themes and Perspectives. London: Collins. Lawson T., & Livesey C. (eds). (2005) AS Sociology For AQA. 5th edition. London: Hodder Arnold. McCulloch, G. (2000) The Politics of the Secret Garden: Teachers and the School Curriculum in England and Wales. In: Day C., Fernandez A., Hauge E., Moller J., (eds). The Life and Work Of Teachers: International Perspectives in Changing Times. London: Falmer Press, pp. 26-38. McLaughlin, E. (ed.) (1992) Understanding Unemployment: New Perspectives On Active Labour Market Policies. New York: Routledge. Walford, G. (2002) Educational Reform and Sociology in England and Wales. In: Cookson P., Levinson D., Sadovnik, A., (eds). Education and Sociology: An Encyclopedia. London: Routledge Falmer, pp. 211-220. Read More