Education Inequality In Britain Today

Fundamentally, education is a pathway for opportunities through which children and young adults obtain knowledge and skill relevant in the 21st century. However, Britain experiences educational inequality whereby a significant percentage of students from economically disadvantaged families drop out of school, acquire fewer degrees, and possess lower academic skills compared to their peers from privileged peers. Ideally, the majority of British citizens view education as a potential source to increase future opportunities that would, in turn, foster social mobility. Equal access to education assists children from disadvantaged backgrounds overcome cycles of deprivation thereby promoting economic growth. Politicians, lobbyists, and other relevant stakeholders advocate for equal access to education in Britain as a means to advance equal opportunity and as a foundation to develop a just and fair country. Despite the effort from political leaders and other public figures, Britain continues to experience educational inequality in all levels of the education system.

In this context, family income acts as a primary factor that determines a child’s level of educational attainment. Family income also influences access to opportunities, child welfare, and general equality to opportunities. Nonetheless, despite the existence of multiple literature works that highlight the importance of income as the primary determinant to attaining high levels of education, the British government lacks the in-depth insight of the way income has affected the country through time. To some extent, the education inequality puzzle has intensified debate on whether the government should offer a full and partial scholarship for children and young adults from low-income backgrounds. Education subsidies for children from humble backgrounds have gained traction since Tony Blair gained power in 1997. Since then, numerous studies indicate that Britain continues to experience a sharp increase in educational attainment while the legislators continue to enact and amend education Acts to ensure post-compulsory education participation is achieved. It is thus vital to consider whether the increase in educational attainment is evenly distributed amongst children from wealthy and low-income backgrounds. Unfortunately, the sharp increase not only favours children from affluent backgrounds but also widens the educational gap between the wealthy and low-income earners in British society.

Education inequality affects current and future generations. Multiple researches on intergenerational mobility discuss the significance of educational achievement as a means that influences the extent of mobility. In this case, if children from wealthy backgrounds succeed in attaining high levels of education, they are more likely to secure better jobs and earn higher compared to their peers from the lower class. Evidence from the birth cohort survey in Britain indicates that educational achievement has experienced a sharp decrease in intergenerational mobility compared to children who attended school in the 1990s and early 2000s. Notably, the current British government had set a goal of enrolling approximately a mixed population of young adults to attend higher institution of learning by 2017. However, a significant percentage of citizens question the validity of such a target without analysing the distribution of educational opportunities among children from various social classes. For example, the current Secretary of State for Education, Damian Hinds, states that the 50% target is not feasible since the government had not factored various aspects such as the affordability of the plan from the parents and government’s side. Nonetheless, the Secretary of State for Education has indicated that the government has settled on a 43% population of young adults who are currently attending university. Despite the government’s ambition to advocate for more students to proceed to institutions of higher learning, the project is deemed expensive since a majority of students from humble backgrounds would require full sponsorship programmes due to the high cost of university education.

The Universities and College Admissions Service indicate that young adults from humble backgrounds consist of a lower percentage compared to their peers from wealthy families. In this view, students from low-income earners stand at less than 5% in the last five years. The number is likely to decrease since the introduction of the White Paper in colleges and universities, which proposes an increase in students' tuition fee. Exponents of the White Paper policy claim that provision of loans with income-contingent repayment measures will counter the link between family income and participation. Nonetheless, if students from lower classes exhibit uncertainty about the advantages of loans compared to students from wealthy backgrounds or if rich parents decide to pay the tuition fee for children, then this outcome may further increase educational inequalities.

According to Schutz, Ursprung & Woessmann (2015), Britain ranks among the countries with the highest educational inequality in Europe. Education inequality is attributed to different standards of education in schools across the nation. For instance, if a school invests in their students more through contact hours, learning materials, high-quality teaching then a student from a less fortunate school who possesses equal natural ability will be disadvantaged. The situation is worsened since the current schools funding system is out of date and unfair (Department for Education, 2016). Underfunding certain schools lead to discrepancies in resource allocation for public schools. On the contrary, private schools in which wealthy children attend are mostly well equipped since parents pay a substantial amount of tuition fee to allow their children to access quality education. In this case, private schools establish free to attend grammar schools to equip privileged children with the necessary communication skills that will be vital in their future (Cribb, et al. , 2013: Bolton, 2013; Skipp &Sadro, 2013). In light of the developmental infrastructure in private schools, the Sutton Trust (2014) indicates that students from private schools perform well compared to their peers in public institution. The outcome illustrates that family income contributes to the development and performance of a student; therefore, students from affluent backgrounds outshine their counterparts who exhibit low grades due to inadequate resources in their respective institutions.

The quality of preschools affects the cognitive developments of children. In this case, children learning in public schools may not likely solve basic analytic test compared to a child from a private school. In addition, if the equality of education in a school is below the recommended levels, then a naturally talented child would not be in a position to attain better academic results if the current situation is held constant. The situation remains the same if preschools charge more on their tuition fees or if they are located in affluent neighbourhoods. Making the quality of preschool education more evident is the essential nature of preparatory education in affluent schools. Essentially, if the basic competencies and skills taught in kindergartens and schools are not standardized across the nation, then this forms the basis of inequalities which later become more challenging to solve when students’ progress in higher institutions of learning. In this view, several related literatures elucidate that early learning instills skills that motivate a student to learn more (Knudsen, Heckman, Cameron & Shonkoff, 2016). Thus, this point complements the general view that early childhood development is vital to a child’s achievement in life.

The parents’ level of education, the duration they spend with their children, the amount of disposable income parents have to set aside for recreational investments influence children’s academic performance. According to Sutton Trust (2015), high parental wages and co-curricular involvement equips their children with the modern skills that would enable them to earn better salaries and live a decent life in the future. However, children from disadvantaged backgrounds are not only deprived quality time with their parents but also the chance to engage in recreational activities that would enhance their cognitive abilities and hone their skills. Thus, the lifestyle difference between students from affluent and privileged backgrounds attributes to education inequality in Britain.

Gibson (2015) asserts that the community within which a student is raised and educated has a profound effect on their educational accomplishment. He states that neighbourhoods with high levels of educated adults influence education attainment of pupils and young students in that area. This is to say, a student raised in an educated family is more likely to succeed in education. Nonetheless, students from informal settlements and high crime areas tend to perform dismally in academics (Strand, 2014). Similarly, a concentrated labour market also contributes to academic attainment and effort. In 2015, the local authorities in England revealed the Arc of Underachievement, which aims at identifying students that exhibit below average performance and compare the results to economic deprivation. Strand (2014) argues that educational institutions located in marginalised areas are of poor quality that in turn translates to dismal academic performance. He claims that the affected schools should be the primary focus of school improvement policies. Nonetheless, such an argument is more problematic as it is complex to separate effective and less-effective schools in marginalized areas or whether having a biased intake system causes the institutions to exhibit low-test grades. Mcknight, Glennerster & Lupton (2015) conducted a study in schools located in informal neighbourhoods and concluded that the features of the schools interfered with learning environment thereby disrupting the students’ focus. However, the effectiveness of schools is achieved through fair student intake system, which leads to dedicated parents and staff.

Teachers play a vital role in creating the overall quality of education in schools. However, schools located in marginalised areas tend to attract tutors with less experience, and turnover rates in these institutions are higher which disrupts the learning process. On the contrary, schools in affluent neighbourhoods offer quality education standards since a majority of experienced teachers prefer to teach private schools due to the availability of resources, decent allowances, and supportive parents that are willing to offer education-related support for their children. Beyond teachers’ quality, studies claim those tutor expectations to their students positively influence their academic performance. Primarily, the impact of peer group composition also affects educational attainment. Research has it that female peer groups tend to perform better than their counterparts. In this view, female students exhibit high-test scores while the boys perform dismally. To counter the difference, the majority of the instructors mix the different genders to allow them to share ideas and benefit from each other. Thus, a significant percentage of British schools discourage selective segregation in educational institutions to minimize and curb education inequalities in British schools.

Family influence affects student performance. In this case, it starts several weeks before conception. Maternal stress is believed to affect student performance through psychological stress (Aizer et al. , 2012). Therefore, educational inequality is to some extent embedded at birth. At the early childhood stages, cognitive development is attained through proper nutrition while stunted growth in the brain is attributed to low family income levels. Thus, it is in this time that the foundations of educational inequalities develop. Mainly, by the age of five children raised by low-income parents would have developed a stunted brain while their wealthy peers would experience cognitive development. Thus, this outcome indicates that educational inequality develops before pupils enrol into compulsory schooling.

Notably, parents and guardians make important choices about academic investments they would undertake to enhance their children learning and create a learning environment away from school. Most of the privileged families set expectations and provide recreational and educational resources that will be vital to their children education attainment. Multiple studies indicate that help with reading, private tutoring, help with homework, extracurricular activities, establishing a mini-library at home enhance academic performance. Therefore, when these factors are merged, a serene home learning environment empowers a student to put effort in academics both in the short and long-term period. On the contrary, disadvantaged families cannot afford to create a learning environment for their children or set time to help them with their homework because they spend most of their time working in workstations that offer inconducive working environments. The widespread education inequality has forced the school accountability body to conduct school inspections that would raise educational standards especially in educational institutions located in disadvantaged areas. It is important to note that educational policies implemented in 2017 have promoted collaborative teamwork between schools especially institutions whose students perform dismally in academics ( Allen, Quinn, Hollingworth & Rose, 2013). Even though the collaborative approach yields positive results, concentration on school improvement weakens the link between educational attainment and a student's background.

Ideally, educational inequality in Britain is attributed to socioeconomic factors. The situation is exacerbated due to several determiners. Firstly, income inequality between the privileged class and low-income earners is widening every day. As a result, the pros of wealth and cons of wealth in terms of accessing quality education is heightened. Secondly, many major cities in Britain experience high poverty rates, which in turn leads to residential segregation based on the income levels Subsequently, young adults living in disadvantaged family backgrounds are more likely found in neglected neighbourhoods, which to a greater extent affect their educational progress. Furthermore, research shows that British parents invest in children’ education more than the past however wealthy families have concentrated more on their children education thereby increasing their investments significantly thus widening the educational gap between the rich and the poor.

The Grant Foundation establishes a four-point case that focuses on reducing educational inequality among young adults in Britain. Firstly, it acknowledges that education inequality is excessive. The foundation’s argument is evident when experts compare Britain with other countries and when Britain compares itself through assessing causal factors in British society (Gamoran, 2013). Secondly, extreme educational inequality is socially and economically harmful thereby minimizes the countries productivity, impedes societal cohesion, lowers civic participation and eventually democracy in Britain. Thirdly, education inequality is attributed to the growth of capitalism, which is exacerbated with social policies adopted in the education sector. Lastly, collaborative research in the education sector can identify policies that would minimize inequality in the current and future generations.

Education inequality is subject to debate in the local and international platforms whereby socioeconomic pundits have offered and received an array of responses. Unfortunately, the discussions do not receive adequate answers on which steps are efficient and sustainable to curb education inequalities. Nonetheless, the British government relies on the research community to create specific programs, practices, and policies that would moderate educational inequality for young adults in the platforms that affect their future social, economic success, and along with other dimensions such as racial and economic background (Gamoran, 2014). Thus, it is clear that inequality in education cannot be tackled without addressing the social structures that have prevented historical advances to turn into future gains. It is important to note that discussions are currently underway to invest in residential areas and pass tax policies that promote opportunities for the middle and low-classes instead of creating opportunities for the rich. With that said, existing studies pinpoint a few strategies within the education sector that may assist reduce unequal outcomes. Among them are standards-based reforms, activities to intensify evidence-based innovations, the establishment of local programs through standards-based reform.

Over the past few years, there has been a growing consensus among scholars and education experts to implement policies that would minimize assessing a student’s background in relation to educational attainment. Instead, the policies and laws should focus more on the individual students and the activities conducted within the affected schools. To cater for the disadvantaged students, the British government initiated the pupil premium policy whose aim is to fund educational institutions based on the students that need free meals. The primary goal of the policy is not only to provide free school meals to deserving children but also to reduce the educational attainment gap between the privileged and disadvantaged students. Moreover, Trust funds and foundations such as the Endowment Foundation and Sutton Trust have proposed cost-effective interventions that would reduce or curb education inequality. Some of the interventions include developing instructors’ skills with the goal of providing tailored feedback to students and teaching students methods of self-regulation and meta-cognition. Secondly, assist parents in different ways to engage the learning needs of their children. Thirdly, develop peer tutoring whereby the tutors establish a system that pupils tutor each other within the classroom environment.

Despite the interventions, many educational pundits argue that interventions are not effective enough to realize the goals of education inequality. It should be noted that the effectiveness of the interventions is dynamic and the interventions are limited in certain situations. Furthermore, effective learning and teaching is a complex task that cannot be narrowed down to simple interventions. Above all, any activity to minimize education inequality in Britain would be effective over a sustained period of a student’s life in school. It is therefore worth noting that socio-economic factors affect not only educational attainment but also the academic progress of the student. The parents’ level of income and determines the students' academic achievement and future opportunities.

Currently, Britain is among the most affected countries in Europe affected by education inequality. In this case, a significant percentage of students from economically disadvantaged families and minority backgrounds drop out of school, acquire fewer degrees, and possess lower academic skills compared to their peers from privileged peers. Despite the existence of multiple literature works that highlight the importance of income as the primary determinant to attaining high levels of education, the British government lacks the in-depth insight of the way income has affected the country for decades. Ideally, education inequality affects current and future generations. Various studies on intergenerational mobility outline the significance of educational achievement as a means that influence the extent of mobility. The previous research indicates that if students from privileges backgrounds succeed in attaining high levels of education, then they have a better chance to secure better job opportunities and earn high salaries compared to their peers from the disadvantaged families. Nonetheless, the British government and other education stakeholders have proposed interventions that would minimize inequality in education across the country. In this case, Trust funds and foundations such as the Endowment Foundation and Sutton Trust advocate for policies such as capacity building for teachers that would enhance individualised feedback to the students. Secondly, the establishment of the pupil premium that would offer school meals to disadvantaged students. The program would ensure that students obtain a balanced diet that would, in turn, help them learn. Despite the effort from the government and other stakeholders, Britain continues to grapple with education inequalities, students from humble backgrounds attain low test grades, drop out of school, and lack funds to sustain themselves in institutions of higher learning.

References

1. Schütz, G. , Ursprung, H. W. and Wößmann, L. , 2008. Education policy and equality of opportunity. Kyklos, 61(2), pp. 279-308.
2. Department for Education, 2014. Fairer Schools Funding: Arrangements for 2015 to 2016.
3. Cribb, J. , Jesson, D. , Sibieta, L. , Skipp, A. and Vignoles, A. , 2014. Poor grammar: Entry into grammar schools for disadvantaged pupils in England.
4. Bolton, P. , 2013. Grammar school statistics. London: House of Commons Library. SN/SG/1398.
5. Sutton Trust, 2014. Extra-curricular inequality.
6. Knudsen, E. I. , Heckman, J. J. , Cameron, J. L. and Shonkoff, J. P. , 2016. Economic, neurobiological, and behavioral perspectives on building America’s future workforce. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(27), pp. 10155-10162.
7. Gamoran, A. , 2014. Inequality Is the Problem: Prioritizing Research on Reducing Inequality. Annual Report. William T. Grant Foundation.
8. Gibbons, S. , Machin, S. and Silva, O. , 2015. Choice, competition, and pupil achievement. Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(4), pp. 912-947.
9. Strand, S. , 2014. School effects and ethnic, gender and socio-economic gaps in educational achievement at age 11. Oxford Review of Education, 40(2), pp. 223-245.
10. Allen, K. , Quinn, J. , Hollingworth, S. and Rose, A. , 2013. Becoming employable students and ‘ideal’creative workers: exclusion and inequality in higher education work placements. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), pp. 431-452.
11. McKnight, A. , Glennerster, H. and Lupton, R. , 2005. Education, education, education. . . : an assessment of Labour’s success in tackling education inequalities. A more equal society, pp. 47-68.