The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for schools to discriminate against, harass or victimise a pupil or potential pupil in relation to admissions, in the way they provide education or access to any benefit, facility or service because of their:
- Sex
- Race
- Disability
- Religion or belief
- Sexual orientation
- Gender reassignment
- Pregnancy or maternity
These seven identifiers are called “protected characteristics”. There are nine in total, with “age” and “marriage and civil partnership” completing the list.
But I don’t think the law goes far enough. I think there should be a 10th protected characteristic: social class. It should be unlawful to discriminate against someone on the basis of their social class. This is especially important in schools – after all, class plays an important role in education and in later life.
Classism in education leads to underachievement and under-representation. Class inequality is intersectional – its impact is entwined with other social injustices like racism and sexism.
Working-class students are among the lowest performers in our schools. If you’re a high-ability student from a low social class, you won’t do as well in school and in later life as a low-ability student from a high social class. It is social class and wealth – not ability – that define a pupil’s educational outcomes and their life chances.
Working-class people are also less likely to have a degree, work in professional employment, or be an academic compared to those from more elite backgrounds.
For proof of this, look at the Institute for Fiscal Studies’ Deaton Review of Inequalities. The education section of the review concludes that disadvantaged students start school behind their better-off peers, and the education system isn’t succeeding in closing these gaps.
Educational inequalities result in substantial differences in life chances, leaving millions disadvantaged throughout their lifetime. The report finds that those who have not been successful at school are left behind by an education system that doesn’t offer the right opportunities for further education. The review also points out that inequalities, such as the disadvantage gap at GCSE, have barely changed over the last 20 years.
Class as a protected characteristic
William Ming Liu identified four forms of classism: downward, upward, lateral, and internalised (Liu, 2011). The concepts most relevant to this argument are:
- Downward classism occurs when people in higher social class groups discriminate against or marginalise people whom they perceive to be in a lower social group, often simply via their everyday interactions.
- Internalised classism is the acceptance and justification of classism by working-class people themselves. Examples include feeling inferior, deference to the values of higher-class people, or shame about your family background or heritage.
The working class are not synonymous with those living in poverty. Many working-class people don’t, in fact, live in poverty. But it is equally important to note that all those who do live in poverty are, by definition, working class.
At the time of writing, more than one in five of the UK population are classed as living in poverty, which equates to a staggering 13.4 million people.
Furthermore, 4.2 million children are now living in relative poverty (household income below 60% of the median after housing costs). This is 29% of all UK children. Of these, 2.7 million are living in “deep poverty” – families below 50% of the median income.
According to the Child Poverty Action Group, pupils experiencing poverty in England are financially excluded from full participation in a wide range of school subjects and activities, including PE, music, swimming and art and design.
In addition, common practices in schools often unintentionally draw attention to family incomes and make children feel embarrassed and different. These include expensive uniform policies, non-uniform days, and requests from school to bring in material possessions like pencil cases.
Some policies and practices relating to food in school often mean that children experiencing poverty don’t have the same options as their peers at lunchtime.
Professor Diane Reay – author of Miseducation: Inequality, education, and the working classes – claims that working-class children get less of everything in education: “If you’re a working-class child, you’re starting the race halfway round the track behind the middle class child (because) middle class parents do a lot via extra resources and activities.”
Less affluent children get a more restrictive educational offer and are denied an education in art, drama, or dance because, Prof Reay says, “their parents can’t afford to pay for them to do those activities out of school”.
Class and the curriculum
The content of the school curriculum is not covered by discrimination law and so schools are free to include a full range of issues, ideas, and materials in their syllabus, and to expose pupils to thoughts and ideas of all kinds without fear of legal challenge based on a protected characteristic.
But, crucially, the way in which a school provides education – curriculum delivery – is explicitly included. As such, schools need to ensure that the way in which issues are taught does not subject individual pupils to discrimination.
I believe schools should consider curriculum delivery through the lens of social class. Why? Because there are currently three problems with classism with regards curriculum delivery.
1, Curriculum design
The stated aim of the national curriculum is to ensure that all students in England encounter the same content and material to provide “an introduction to the essential knowledge that they need to be educated citizens”. There are two problems...
First, curriculum coverage – one size doesn’t fit all. Providing all students with the same curriculum further disadvantages those who are already disadvantaged.
We must deliver the same ambitious curriculum to every pupil. But we should offer more, not less – but, crucially, not the same – to working-class students. This may mean additional opportunities for those whose starting points are lower or for whom opportunities are more limited.
Second, curriculum content – definitions of core knowledge are classist. Selection of knowledge is made by those of a higher social standing rather than by a representative group of people from across the social strata.
And cultural capital – inspected by Ofsted since 2019 – is described as “the best that has been thought and said”, but who decides what constitutes the best? Ultimately, every school’s curriculum should celebrate working-class culture alongside culture from the dominant classes.
Also, we know of course that working-class students tend to be denied the experiences their middle-class peers are afforded, such as books at home, visiting museums and galleries, taking part in educational trips, foreign holidays and so on.
2, Curriculum assessment
Our current assessment system could be regarded as classist. Let’s consider three elements:
- Home advantage: Those who don’t have a home life that is conducive to independent study are placed at a disadvantage, which is compounded for those who don’t have parents with the capacity to support them – whether in terms of time, ability, or buying resources.
- Content of exams: Exams tend to have a middle-class bias, such as requiring students to have personal experience of foreign travel or theatre visits.
- Exam outcomes: The assessment system is designed to fail a third of students every year – and it is the working classes who the suffer most. This is because the spread of GCSE grades is pegged to what cohorts of similar ability achieved in the past. Young people who fall below this bar pay a high price in terms of reduced prospects.
3, The hidden curriculum
All schools have a hidden curriculum. It exists in a school’s rules and routines; in its behaviour policies, rewards, and sanctions; in its physical, social, and learning environments; and in the way all the adults who work in the school interact with each other and with the students. How sure can we be that our hidden curriculum does not discriminate against our working class students?
Class a protected characteristic
If social class became the 10th protected characteristic, then schools would be required to:
- Remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by working-class pupils.
- Take steps to meet the particular needs of working-class pupils.
- Encourage working-class pupils to participate fully in a full range of school societies.
One way in which schools commit to equality duties is through the publication of equality objectives. Schools are free to choose the equality objectives that best suit their circumstances and contribute to the welfare of their pupils and community. Objectives need to be specific and measurable, and they should be used as a tool to help improve the school experience of a range of different pupils.
We can see how a set of equality objectives pertaining to social class would be framed and how they would help raise the issue of classism in education and set all schools on a path to equity.
So, let us all commit to:
- Increasing participation by working-class pupils in after-school activities.
- Narrowing the gap in performance of working-class pupils.
- Reducing exclusion rates for working-class pupils.
- Increasing understanding between different socio-economic groups.
- Reducing the number of classist incidents.
- Raising the attainment of working-class pupils.
- Encouraging working-class pupils to consider career options traditionally the preserve of their middle-class peers.
- Anticipating the needs of incoming working-class pupils, including gaps in their lived experience and cultural capital.
Of course, we don’t have to wait for the Equality Act to catch up – we can start doing this now…
- Matt Bromley is an education writer and advisor with more than 20 years’ experience in teaching and leadership. He is a public speaker, trainer, school improvement advisor, and the author of numerous books on education. Find him on X (Twitter) @mj_bromley. Visit www.bromleyeducation.co.uk. Find his previous articles, podcasts and webinars for SecEd via www.sec-ed.co.uk/authors/matt-bromley
The Working Classroom: You can find out more about supporting working-class pupils in The Working Classroom, which has been written by Matt Bromley and Andy Griffith and is published by Crown House. For information and to access free resources, visit www.theworkingclassroom.co.uk
Reference: Lui: Social Class and Classism in the Helping Professions: Research, theory, and practice, Sage, 2011.