‘Opportunity areas’ for education

Dan Moloney shares his thoughts on the Secretary of State for Education ‘s Conservative Party Conference speech

Secretary of State for Education, Justine Greening, took to the stage of the Conservative Party Conference 2016 at just after 3:50pm, introduced by Jessica Shaw, a 19 year old Marketing Apprentice, who briefly explained the opportunities that taking a vocational path to a qualification rather than an academic one had opened up to her.

This segued nicely into Greening’s speech, in which there was a focus of rhetoric on the idea of creating a level playing field and giving parents and students more choice in the path they take towards entering the country’s workforce.

Greening began by drawing attention to the impact the government has had on education over the last six years, listing raised standards of having 1.4 million children educated in schools rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ by OFSTED; record numbers of applications to universities; and an increase of 2.5 million in the number of apprenticeships. All of this, she claimed, showed that the Conservatives are creating a genuine “meritocracy” through their education policy.

By paving the way for 500 new free schools, Greening suggested that the government was addressing the issue of overcrowded classrooms in many localities across the country and hopefully ending the postcode lottery that many families face in relation to their children’s education.

The current controversy in the Conservative education policy however, revolves around Theresa May’s plan to allow the building of new Grammar Schools. A policy that was discontinued under Margaret Thatcher in a move away from selection at the age of 11. Justine Greening very briefly proclaimed that Grammar Schools have a track record of reducing the attainment gap between those on free school meals and their classmates from wealthier families, as they improve at a much faster rate in the Grammar School environment. In the interest of balance, it is only fair to point out that the minister declined to mention that the average number of pupils on free school meals in Grammar Schools is just 3%, compared to the national average of 20%.

At the Labour Party conference last week, Angela Rayner — Greening’s opposite number — was keen to point out that Grammar Schools label 80% of children as “failures” at the age of 11, and that the chief of OFSTED, the National Association of Head Teachers and the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) are all united in the view that selection entrenches division and increases inequality. Greening was keen to point out however, that new Grammar Schools will be encouraged to admit more children from underprivileged backgrounds and that Labour politicians, whilst denouncing selective schools, are guilty of sending their own children to them.

Greening concluded by announcing six new “opportunity areas” across the UK where a new approach to increasing social mobility would be trialled. This will involve a combined effort of schools, teachers and businesses to try to improve the life chances of school children from lower income families. The aim is to give young people knowledge and skills, advice and guidance, and excellent life experiences to set them on the right track, although how the success of this trial will be measured was not made clear.

Throughout the speech, the minister emphasised the desire to give parents and students more choice about what kind of education they get. Greening echoed Angela Rayner’s comments last week in committing to increasing the value of technical and vocational education as well as continuing to encourage UK businesses to invest in apprenticeships.

Parents of very young children will perhaps have been disappointed not to hear anything about early years education. However, the speech covered a reasonable amount over the course of 20 minutes. This won’t have resolved the ongoing debate about Grammar Schools, and it was interesting to note how little effort and time was given to advancing the Prime Minister’s position on the matter.

Aside from the “opportunity areas”, Justine Greening’s conference speech didn’t reveal much. It was very much an exercise in cheerleading for achievements and existing policy positions without responding to opposition criticisms and failing to add much flesh to the bare bones of broad policy commitments.

Dan Moloney Research Assistant (Policy and Knowledge Exchange) for the University of Northampton’s Institute for Public Safety, Crime and Justice

Follow @danmoloney