Memorandum submitted by Socialist Educational
Association ("SEA")
1. Jesson's Research We assume that
the Committee has had made available Professor David Jesson's
"Selective systems of education—Blueprint for lower
standards." (Education Review Autumn 2001 NUT) which gives
the evidence for the following statements:
— "in the 15 selective LEAs the
incidence of failing schools is substantially higher than in the
116 non-selective LEAs"
— "for non-selective LEAs the
average (of schools) is around 18% facing challenging circumstances
whilst for selective LEAs the percentage is close to double this
figure at 36%. Given that selective LEAs serve relatively `advantaged'
communities the figure is surprisingly high";
— "DfEE's evaluation of comparative
performance for the 25% `brightest' pupils showed that the `top'
quarter of pupils in comprehensive schools did as well if not
better than their peers in grammar schools"; and
— "Value-added evaluations of
all pupils' GCSE performance give clear indications that pupils
in selective areas do less well than their peers in selective
areas".
2. Kent Ofsted Report We likewise
assume the Committee has access to the Kent Ofsted Report (January
2003) which produces evidence that Kent, a largely selective authority,
"has a much higher proportion of low achieving schools at
Key Stages 2,3 and 4 than its statistical neighbours, taking account
of free school meals", "the quality of education was
very good in 13.1% of Kent schools compared with 16.5% nationally"
and "Kent schools are substantially more likely to require
special measures or to have serious weaknesses than those nationally."
3. London Institute of Education Report
on "The underfunding of Bucks Upper Schools" We
wish to submit one piece of evidence which has been brought to
our notice and may not have come to the Committees. In October
2002 Prof Rosalind Levacic, Dr Alan Marsh and David Newson produced
a report for the Buckinghamshire Upper Schools Forum entitled
"The Penalty Costs of Upper School Funding Towards Greater
Fairness in the Secondary Sector". "Upper School"
is the Bucks nomenclature for "Secondary Modern". As
well as demonstrating how the upper schools in Bucks are underfunded
compared to the grammar schools, it also showed that selection
in Bucks discriminates on the basis of class, race, behaviour
and special educational needs. What is clear is that while Bucks,
not surprisingly considering the socio-economic status of its
population, achieves well in GCSE results, it has the possibility
of far better attainment amongst pupils in the Upper Schools.
The apposite facts presented are as follows:
Class The only indicator of socio-economic
status available is eligibility for free school meals. In Bucks
11% of Upper School Pupils are eligible for free school meals
but only 1% of grammar school pupils.
Race The Annual Schools Census (2001)
reports that 70% of pupils in Upper Schools were of white ethnic
origin compared to 82% in the Grammar Schools.
Behaviour The following table shows the
exclusions per 10,000 pupils in Bucks Upper and Grammar Schools
:
| | Permanent
| More than 15 days
| Less than 15 days
|
| | 2000-01
| 2001-02 | 2000-01
| 2001-02 | 2000-01
| 2001-02 |
| Grammar Schools | 5.6
| 12.2 | 3.8
| 5.6 | 101.5
| 158.8 |
| Upper Schools | 28.3
| 28.3 | 21.2
| 30.7 | 456.6
| 721.5 |
While it is difficult to isolate cause and effect, it is
clear that children are in fact if not in intent being segregated
according to their likely behaviour and this becomes a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
Special Educational Needs "The Annual Schools
Census (2001) records that in Bucks Upper Schools 21% of pupils
has special educational needs (SEN) but no statements of SEN compared
to 4% in Grammar Schools. All Upper Schools include students with
significant additional educational needs."
Attainment Percentage of pupils achieving 5 or more
GCSE A*-Cs 1998-2001
| | 1998
| 1999 | 2000
| 2001 |
| Upper Schools | 37%
| 39% | 39%
| 42% |
| Grammars | 97%
| 97% | 98%
| 97% |
| County average | 60%
| 61% | 62%
| 63% |
| England average | 46%
| 48% | 49%
| 50% |
Clearly any great leap forward in pupil achievement has to
come from students in Bucks Upper Schools which we believe is
possible but very difficult so long as selection exists and over
70% of Bucks children are labelled failures at 11+.
4. The Distribution of Statemented Children in English
Schools Martin Frey of Kent STEP has produced the following
analysis of distribution of Statemented Children in English Schools
(E-mail: martinfrey@clara.co.uk). Within each LEA schools were
ranked from least to most percentage of statemented pupils on
roll, and then divided into three groups, lowest, middle and highest
proportion of statements. The ratio of most to least is revealing.The
national figure is 3.9 and the table contains the 13 LEAs with
the highest ratio:
| LEA | Schools
| Grammars | Least
| Mid | Most
| Ratio |
| Southend | 12
| 4 | 00.0
| 22.3 | 77.7
| WOW |
| Sutton | 14 |
5 | 0.3
| 23.2 | 76.5
| 224.2 |
| Torbay | 8 |
3 | 0.5
| 20.8 | 78.7
| 163.0 |
| Trafford | 18
| 7 | 1.4
| 16.1 | 82.6
| 163.0 |
| Slough | 11 |
4 | 1.1
| 33.1 | 65.7
| 57.5 |
| Bucks | 34 |
13 | 1.6
| 27.5 | 70.9
| 43.8 |
| Poole | 8 |
2 | 2.1
| 46.3 | 51.6
| 24.5 |
| Bexley | 16 |
4 | 2.9
| 26.4 | 70.8
| 24.5 |
| Medway | 19 |
6 | 2.7
| 34.6 | 62.7
| 22.9 |
| Bournemouth | 10
| 2 | 3.5
| 20.0 | 76.5
| 21.7 |
| Kent | 102 |
33 | 3.0
| 34.9 | 62.1
| 21.0 |
| Wirral | 22 |
6 | 3.6
| 29.6 | 66.8
| 18.7 |
4. All the material we are submitting bears on the question
of the damage selection does to standards but the Bucks material
and the evidence of the distribution of children with statements
show clearly how selection also discriminates against groups of
children and this impacts on their performance.
February 2003
| 
