In one of her first major decisions as Prime Minister after the resignation of David Cameron, Theresa May ended decades of political consensus in the education policy by choosing to end the ban on the creation of new grammar schools in the UK. Immediately her decision was met with intense criticism from both the opposition and her own party, with many believing the ban – which has been in place since 1998 – should remain in place indefinitely.
So why is this decision so unpopular among UK politicians? According to Theresa May, we have “tolerated a system that contains an arbitrary rule preventing selective schools from being established, sacrificing children’s potential because of dogma and ideology.” But reactions to her announcement, which includes a raft of other policy changes such as expanding selection by academic ability, allowing existing schools to become grammars and allowing new faith schools to choose more pupils on a religious basis, have been intensely negative and have encouraged infighting amongst Conservative party members.
According to the shadow attorney general Shami Chakrabarti grammar schools enforce segregation, telling ITV’s Peston on Sunday that ‘I have met too many people, including incredibly bright, successful people, who carry that scar of failing the 11-plus and that segregation in schooling’. Although supporters of May’s new policy have pointed out the potential hypocrisy in here statement, given that she sends her son to an £18k per year private school.
Sir Michael Wilshaw, head of Ofsted and the chief inspector of schools, has also been extremely critical of the new policy, insisting that more grammar schools will be socially divisive and ‘reduce standards for the great majority of children’. In an interview with the Observer, he suggests that the government should be focusing on Brexit, rather than on May’s ‘obsession with grammar schools’. He is quoted as saying ‘if you’re going to make a success of Brexit, this is number one. It should be the number one government priority, not grammar schools’.
Further criticism has come from the Education Policy Institute, who concluded a recent study on GCSE performance in state schools with ‘no evidence to suggest that overall educational standards in England would be improved by creating additional grammar schools’. Part of May’s defence of her policy is the suggestion that bright students would do much better at grammar schools, but this too was rejected by the study, which found ‘no benefit to attending a grammar school for high-attaining pupils’.
Russel Hobby, the general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers also heaped criticism on May’s policy, suggesting that ‘grammar schools don’t close the education gap, they widen it’.
Sensing this consensus in the opinion of critics, May has suggested that new selective schools will take in more pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, particularly those from a poor household. However a BBC study has shown that fewer than half of England’s grammar schools give any priority to poor pupils, with 90 (of 163 grammars) not taking a child’s eligibility for free school meals into account. This is particularly pertinent as free school meals are traditionally used as a strong measure of poverty, and it has been focused on by critics of the planned expansion of grammar schools in England.
The funding gap between state schools and grammar schools has also been brought up by critics, who believe that grammar schools receive far more in the way of funding, thus increasing the education gap. However, research from the Sunday Telegraph found that the best performing schools in the country are receiving up to £1,800 less per pupil that their neighbours. With government directives ordering councils to spend more on schools with disadvantaged pupils, their is a huge disparity between funds directed at poorly performing schools and those given to the most successful, often resulting in higher performing schools having to focus more on internal fundraising compared to others.
Despite the criticism however, May remains steadfast in her adoption of the new policy, insisting that revoking the ‘arbitrary’ ban on new grammar schools will improve the education system and ensure all students get the best possible experience and schooling. Whether she is right however, remains to be seen.
Image credits: Charlie Bard / Frederic Legrand – COMEO / Shutterstock.com