“Poorer pupils far more likely to be in failing schools, finds research” – so goes the limp and dismal headline. Well, knock me down with feathers. This could pertain to anytime in English history. I don’t know which is more depressing, the fact or the findings.
And it does beg a few questions. “Poorer” than what? What is a “failing” school? One with “failing” pupils? What’s a “failing” pupil? A “poorer” one? Do “poorer” pupils cause schools to “fail”? Murky stuff.
In England “poorer” pupils are nine times as likely to attend an “inadequate” school as the wealthiest.
Other dreary headlines confirm these things: “New exams favour the rich.” Don’t they all? “Disadvantaged pupils doing watered down curriculum.” It was ever thus. We had Secondary Moderns in my day. “Schools funding will hurt poorer pupils.” I thought it was meant to do rather the reverse. “State schools more socially exclusive than ever.” Enough already!
Register now, read forever
Thank you for visiting SecEd and reading some of our content for professionals in secondary education. Register now for free to get unlimited access to all content.
What's included:
-
Unlimited access to news, best practice articles and podcast
-
New content and e-bulletins delivered straight to your inbox every Monday and Thursday
Already have an account? Sign in here