Criteria of Justice

Pupils’ views on equity in UK schools

Emma Smith and Stephen Gorard

Cardiff University School of Social Sciences

King Edward VII Avenue

Cardiff

CF10 3WT

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 11-13 September 2003

Abstract

This paper presents student perspectives about what they consider to be a fair and equitable national education system. The emphasis is on the responses of over 1000 Welsh students to a questionnaire administered as part of a wider EU funded project (5432 students) to develop indicators of equity in European school systems. The experience of (in)equity in schools is important in helping to create learner identities and, more generally, for citizenship studies. Overall, UK students reported favouring an egalitarian system where all students were treated in the same way in class and this was largely what they felt that they experienced. In this respect, the Welsh students differed from their peers in several other EU countries, a significant proportion of whom thought that the least able should receive more support and attention in class, but who found that more attention was given to the more able. The Welsh students also appeared to be more self-confident about their ability to succeed in school.

Introduction

Ensuring the equity of national school systems has been a central issue in educational research for many years. Concerns over equity were as pertinent in determining the effectiveness of the UK tripartite education system in the 1940s as they are today in concerns over measuring the differential attainment of groups of students in school (such as those formed by ethnicity). In many developed countries, education is increasingly seen as something the State owes to its citizens, and it has therefore become the State’s responsibility to provide an equitable education for all. As a consequence, guaranteeing a fair and equitable education system has political as well as social implications. Usually, it is the schools themselves which are seen as having this responsibility to society for producing at least minimally qualified individuals. There are diverse ways in which inequalities can and do manifest themselves within schools; for example, some pupils achieve better results than others, attend more ‘effective’ schools or have longer school careers (Meuret 2001). One particular way in which a fair and equitable school system can impact upon students’ lives is in the experience of the poorest pupils. Most research has shown that the poorest pupils, in terms of income, are the least successful in school, in terms of examination performance (Heath 1989, Smith 2003).

Much has been written in the academic literature about inequalities in school, and particularly in the classroom. This research is complex and the results are indicative rather than conclusive (Foster et al. 1996). Teachers may distribute their time and attention unequally among different groups of students, particularly among boys and girls (Stanworth 1983, Spender 1982). Factors such as ethnicity and class can play a role in determining what value is attached to education, and to the curriculum that students are taught (Gillborn and Youdell 2000, Mac an Ghaill, 1988, Murphy 1988). Such inequalities also extend beyond the classroom and can impact upon school outcomes and opportunities in later life (Gorard and Rees 2002)..

The 1988 Education Reform Act which introduced a compulsory National Curriculum with a specified number of ‘core’ subjects to be taken by all students, sought to equalise the opportunities for all children to receive a ‘broad and balanced curriculum’ (Gorard 2004). In doing so it moved the school system from one based on comprehensive intake towards one of comprehensive provision. This curriculum has been expanded to include provision for the teaching of ‘Citizenship’. The inclusion of this subject as a compulsory element of the National Curriculum has important implications for developing students’ perceptions about what it is to be part of an equitable and democratic society. The teaching of citizenship and democracy is needed to counter ‘worrying levels of apathy, ignorance and cynicism about public life’ (QCA 1998, p.8). The final report from the advisory group on Citizenship (the Crick report) proposed a model for Citizenship teaching which has, at its foundation, a curriculum based around the key concepts of ‘fairness, rights and responsibilities’ (p.20).

One of the three inter-related components of Citizenship teaching – Social and moral responsibility (the other two being Community involvement and Political literacy) seeks to encourage in pupils ‘self-confidence and socially and morally responsible behaviour both in and beyond the classroom, towards those in authority and towards each other’ (DfES 2002), to such an extent as to cause ‘no less than a change in the political culture of this country both nationally and locally’ (QCA 1998, p.7). Close to the heart of developing a model of Citizenship among students is the need to encourage children to develop their own concepts of fairness. Probably the fundamental influence on pupils in developing their perceptions of what constitutes a fair and equitable society is their experience of school.

This paper explores students’ perceptions about how equitable they feel their education system to be. It focuses on descriptions of their everyday experiences in school, in particular their relationships with teachers, as well as wider perceptions about the fairness of the national school system and the implications this might have for developing and implementing a curriculum of citizenship.

The study

This study forms part of a larger project to develop indicators of equity in education systems across the EU. It has involved a partnership with five European countries – Belgium, France, Spain, Italy and the UK – funded under the Socrates 6.1 Programme. It involved, among other components (Gorard and Smith 2004), a questionnaire survey of over 5,000 13-14 year old students in each of the partner countries (Table 1). The sample was selected from the schools in and around a capital of each of the participating countries – Paris, Madrid, Rome, Cardiff and Brussels. This means, of course, that our ability to generalise is limited (see below).

Table 1: The sample size

The UK sample consisted of the following schools:

A1 – medium, single sex comprehensive, in poor rural area

B1 – medium, mixed comprehensive, in poor rural area

C1 – large, mixed comprehensive, in well-to-do suburban area

C2 – medium, mixed Catholic, in poor rural area

F1 – medium, mixed comprehensive, in poor rural area

H1 – medium, single sex independent, in well-to-do inner-city area

L1 – small, mixed comprehensive, in well-to-do rural area

P1 – medium, mixed comprehensive, in poor rural area

S1 – medium, mixed Anglican, in average inner-city area

V1 – small, mixed comprehensive, in poor rural area

W1 – very large, mixed comprehensive, in well-to-do suburban area

W2 – small, mixed comprehensive, in inner-city area

Y1 – medium, mixed comprehensive in poor rural area

The aim of this survey was to gather the students’ views on what makes a school system fair, and whether their experiences suggest that their own system is a fair one. The focus of the paper is the perspective of the UK students, although comparisons are made between their responses and those of their peers in the other partner countries, where appropriate. It is acknowledged that comparison between different national education systems is difficult for many reasons, but largely because school systems differ in so many respects that it is difficult to mount a convincing argument that any one difference is related to another (Gorard 2001). For example, countries such as Germany and Austria offer a choice – frequently linked to ability – between vocational, technical and general education at the age of 12 (in the case of Germany) and 14 (in the case of Austria). Other countries, such as the UK, Denmark, Finland and Portugal offer a general education up to the end of compulsory schooling(usually age16) (Eurydice 2002). As a result, the school experiences of the students in these countries is likely to be very different. Nevertheless, their perspectives on what constitutes a fair and equitable national school system and the extent to which this mirrors their own experiences can give an important insight into the dynamics of classroom level inequalities.

The questionnaire asked students about equity in school systems, what they wanted from schools and what they had experienced. It also asked the respondents for personal information about their family and home backgrounds. The questions were prepared in both French and English and then back-translated into and from the languages of the other countries, including Welsh for the UK sample. A few of the questions were not asked in some countries because our pilot work suggested that these might be misunderstood or culturally inappropriate, with the danger of leading to reduced responses.

One of the questions asked whether the students themselves generally receive ‘low marks’ in class. In most countries, the proportion reporting low marks was substantial, rising to 23% of the sample in Spain. The figure for the UK was of a completely different order of magnitude – at less than 3% of the sample. Although this difference is based on self-reporting, and not on performance data since this was unavailable for all countries, the pupils in the UK may have some justification for their opinions. The recent PISA study shows that UK pupils have the fourth highest reading score for all EU countries, as well as one of the smallest gaps between the scores for richest and poorest and for boys and girls (Smith and Gorard 2002). Nevertheless, the scale of the difference between the UK and elsewhere in terms of their perceptions about receiving low marks requires considerable further explanation.

In this paper, the survey findings are collapsed into three sets of ‘indicators’ – criteria of justice, judgements on the equity of the educational system, and feeling of being treated with justice. The components of each indicator and a comparative analysis of the students’ responses are described in detail below. With a non-probability sample it is not appropriate to conduct tests of significance, and even with such a large sample, therefore, small differences between countries and groups are ignored. The differences remarked on in this paper are substantial.

In addition to multiple choice questions, the survey elicited students’ open-ended comments about fairness in their own schools. The responses to this element of the survey are only available for the UK students and are used here to illustrate and develop our understanding of the third indicator – the feeling of being treated with justice. It is important to note that the additional students’ views elicited by the questionnaire were not compulsory, and not all students chose to comment (in fact we received extended responses from approximately 50% of the sample). Those that chose not to comment may have done so for several reasons including poor literacy skills, or perhaps not feeling strongly enough about the issue to wish to make additional points. Their responses need to be read with this in mind.

Indicator 1: Criteria of justice

This indicator reveals pupils’ opinions about what a fair schooling system should be like. It concerns both how teachers should allocate their care and attention, and how pupils should be treated (Table 2). The results suggest that the education setting, whether primary or secondary, makes little difference to the students’ estimation of what constitutes fair treatment of pupils by their teachers (the figures in table 2a and 2b correlate at around 0.85). The major difference is that the pupils express greater concern for the less able while in the primary sector. In both sectors, a majority of students felt that teachers should give equal attention to all pupils, and this was felt slightly more strongly by female pupils, and particularly strongly by the UK students. In the other countries there was, in addition, considerable support for the idea that more attention should be given to the least able pupils, and this was particularly marked among pupils who reported achieving low marks. There was almost no support among pupils from any of the countries for the notion that able students should receive the most attention in class.

Table 2: Desired equity in teacher attention

1. For a primary school to be fair, its teachers must give…

1. For a secondary school to be fair, its teachers must give…

Tables 2 to 4 show the percentage of students who chose each statement as corresponding the closest with their opinion.

Students were also asked to determine the features of a fair school by reporting what they thought should happen in such a school in terms of the treatment of pupils by teachers and in the allocation of marks/grades (Table 3). Many of the responses were fairly evenly distributed between countries and between groups (table 3a). However, the Spanish students, in particular, reported that the most important criteria for equity was a school which would award marks reflecting the amount of work put in by a pupil, whereas the UK students especially felt that all pupils ought to be treated the same way irrespective of their effort, ability or attainment. This contention is borne out by the UK students’ unprompted comments on the fairness of their schools, as described later.

Table 3: Desired equity in the treatment of pupils

1. In your opinion, a school is fair if….

1. In your opinion, a school is fair if…

There was less agreement overall to the question on treating all pupils in the same way in class compared with the similar questions in table 2. However in the question in table 3a, students have to make a selection from four options. So while treating all pupils in the same way is seen as important, it may not be as important as giving pupils marks which reflect their effort. In addition, the respondents were asked to describe an equitable system according to academic outcomes. Students from each country were most concerned that schools provide children with equal chances of success, regardless of their family background, and this was especially marked among female pupils (table 3b). Pupils in Italy showed the greatest concern that all pupils leave schools with appropriate skills. Interestingly, relatively few students reported feeling that the achievement gap ought to be narrower at the end of compulsory schooling – they were, apparently, happy that an equitable system would eventually discriminate between high and low achievers.

Indicator 2: Judgements on the equity of the educational system

This indicator measures the students’ estimation of how equitable they perceive their educational system to be (table 4). The clear opinion across all countries and groups is that schools generally provide the same quality of education for all pupils (around 75% reported this in all countries). There is also some limited support, especially in France and Spain, for the idea that schools actually provide a better education for the most able. There is almost no support for the idea that schools are providing a better education for the least able. Therefore, by comparing this with the previous indicator (‘Criteria of justice’), in which pupils showed substantial support for more attention for the least able, all systems are seen to be failing to meet one specific demand for equity. Other than in the UK, there is considerable disparity between the proportion of pupils wanting a system in which less able students receive more attention (around 40%) and the proportion who experience this in their school. For example, in Italy, 46% of students felt that secondary schools should provide more attention to the least able students (table 2b); whereas only 9.5% report that this was actually the case in their country (table 4). Conversely, only around 2% of pupils had reported wanting a system which gave more attention to the most able (table 2b), whereas around 20% reported experiencing such a system (table 4).

Table 4: Experience of equity at school

This finding, of course, raises the greatest unanswerable question about fairness – the difference between social democracy and liberalism. Is it fairer to have a system that treats everyone the same, or one that seeks to overcome early disadvantage and handicap? There is a clear difference between the UK and elsewhere in the pupils’ answer to this underlying question. In the UK, most pupils want all pupils treated the same, and this is largely what they report experiencing. In France, Spain, Belgium and Italy, more pupils want greater attention for the least able but students in all countries also report actually experiencing somewhat greater attention for the most able.