With the publication later today of the Star Academy Trust commissioned report into outcomes for ‘white working-class boys’, I thought I would look at what I posted when the inquiry was announced last year. Class matters more than ethnicity | John Howson

“However, I cannot help thinking that the focus of the inquiry is wrong. All the evidence suggests that of the three factors of race, gender and class, it is the third one that really matters. Yes, they are often inter-related, but looking at socio-economic data, it is often schools in deprived areas, regardless of the ethnicity of their pupils that fare less well in school performance table.”

Way back in 1982, nearly 50 years ago, I used some evidence from a book published in 1926 by Kenneth Lindsay, and entitled ‘Social Progress and Educational Waste’ about the wide variations in the percentages of children obtaining secondary education – not mandatory for all until 19944 – to discuss differences in provision for schooling across England. (Variations in Local Authority Provision of Education Oxford Review of education, Volume 8, Number 2, 1982). Lindsay, in his book, found one school in Lewisham that won as many scholarships to secondary school as the whole inner city area of Bermondsey out together.’ Differences in education by social class were commonplace.

In the 1960s, The Plowden Report into primary education found that ‘the boroughs in which expenditure [on schooling] was generally low were very much the same in 1960-61 as they were in 1950-51.’ Later that decade another report Half our Future looked at the children leaving school at 15. I celebrated its 50^th anniversary with this blog post Half Our Future: A tribute | John Howson both Reports revealed the differences in outcomes for different social classes and how those gaps might be reduced.

Finally, in terms of evidence of the different education outcomes for different groups in society, it is worth reading the Oxfordshire County Council report to Education Scrutiny Committee of 16^th October 2014 ESC_OCT1614R05 Educational Attainment of White Working Class Boys.pdf

So, don’t expect anything new, today, but I would like this report to be linked to the speech by Andy Burnham, also to be given today that should speak about the importance of ‘place’ and devolution in our society.  

Both Lindsay and Plowden wrote when schooling was a devolved activity, sometime described, at the time, as ‘a local service nationally administered’. Since then, the administration of schooling has become more site -based with schools operating their own budgets, but more nationally controlled from Westminster. This shift in ‘place’ doesn’t seem to have done much for the educational achievements of white working-class boys.

So, will a shift back to more local or regional decision-making move on the dial for outcomes? Much, I think depends on the interplay of the 4 ‘P’s of Education power

The Conservatives, after the 2010 general election had ideas, but they didn’t work for those not wanting to go on to high education. Interestingly, although academies were free from following the National Curriculum, few looked at whether it was appropriate as a curriculum for their communities.

However, what is common to all places is the vital need to engage with effective early learning. If all young people achieve successful early in life, then, with the building blocks firmly in place, more can be achieved later. Fail early, fail often in schooling, and with failure comes disillusion and a lack of engagement.  

So, let’s continue the battle to achieve success in education for all, but it won’t be easy, and will need a view of ‘place’ that incorporates local, regional and national policy-making that supports communities and their schools.

So where does parental choice fit into this model of support? More importantly, where does a selective secondary school system fit into the thinking about the issued raised in today’s report?

“