Working class – The meritocracy myth of schools
Matt Bromley explains why schools are classist – and offers some thoughts on what we might be able to do about it…
- by Matt Bromley
If you’re a high-ability pupil from a working class background, you aren’t going to do as well in school and in later life as a low-ability pupil from a high social class.
Put another way, it’s social class and wealth – not ability – that ultimately define a pupil’s educational outcomes and their future life chances.
Closing the gaps
For proof of this, observe the 2021 Deaton Review of Inequalities carried out for the Institute of Fiscal Studies. It concluded that disadvantaged pupils “Start school behind their better-off peers, and the education system isn’t succeeding in closing these gaps.”
Further, “Educational inequalities result in substantial differences in life chances, leaving millions disadvantaged throughout their lifetime.” So, what, if anything, can schools do to help?
To answer that question, let’s pose another: why are schools classist? So much of what schools do, whether by accident or design, is classist. That’s from the way they design their curriculum, down to how the assessment system works and the impact of the ‘hidden curriculum’ on pupils. Let’s examine each of those problems in turn.
Problem 1 – curriculum design
The stated aim of the National Curriculum is to ensure that all pupils in England encounter the same content and material.
As the National Curriculum framework document puts it, we should provide pupils with “an introduction to the essential knowledge that they need to be educated citizens.”
There are, I believe, two issues with this. The first is curriculum coverage. Providing all pupils with the same curriculum only further disadvantages those who are already disadvantaged. I hope readers will agree we shouldn’t reduce the curriculum for working-class pupils.
We ought to offer the same ambitious curriculum to every pupil, irrespective of background. However, we should offer more, not less – and crucially, not the same – to our working-class pupils. We must broaden the curriculum for working-class pupils to ensure equity, as opposed to equality.
Equity in education should aim to celebrate and embrace pupils’ working-class roots. It should simultaneously ensure those roots don’t restrict their life chances.
We want to broaden horizons and remove barriers to success. However, we don’t want the sun to set on working-class pupils’ rich and proud ancestry.
The classist issue in schools, however, is the pervasive belief that we should feed all pupils the same diet and offer equality of opportunity, rather than equity.
The way to counter this is to offer the same ambitious curriculum to all, ensure fair access to the same extracurricular activities, and then do more for those who start with less.
Core knowledge
The second issue with the National Curriculum is that definitions of ‘core knowledge’ are inherently classist. Said definitions are based on the notion that wealth and social status confer taste and discernment, and that selections of knowledge hence ought to be made by those of a higher social standing. This is rather than groups more representative of the country’s broader social strata.
Since 2019, Ofsted has inspected how schools develop pupils’ cultural capital. The regulator has previously (perhaps controversially) described this as ‘The best that has been thought and said‘. But who decides what constitutes ‘the best’ in this context? By definition, that’s a subjective value choice.
We should think more carefully about who decides what knowledge we teach, as well as when and why. We should also consider how representative that knowledge is of our school communities; of how effectively it talks to pupils’ lived experiences and their family traditions and cultures.
Having selected knowledge that does more to reflect our school communities, we should then identify curriculum content that celebrates diversity beyond those communities. This is so that we can broaden our pupils’ horizons.
Problem 2: curriculum assessment
Our current assessment system starts with a home advantage. We expect pupils to complete schoolwork at home – be that homework, coursework or revision. Those lacking a home life conducive to independent study are therefore immediately placed at a disadvantage.
This may be further compounded for those who don’t have parents or carers with the capacity to support them in terms of time, ability or finances.
However much a working-class pupil may want to learn and grow, the lack of a suitable place to study at home will present a serious handicap to their learning.
Funding cuts have resulted in closures of public libraries across the UK, and dramatic cuts to the opening hours of those that remain. This development has hit working-class people especially hard.
Then there’s the way in which the content of tests often betrays a middle class bias. For example, they might assume personal experience of foreign travel or theatre visits on the part of those answering the questions.
Finally, there’s the structure of the GCSE assessment system. This is currently designed to fail a third of all pupils each year. It’s the working-classes who suffer from this the most.
Problem 3: the hidden curriculum
All schools have a ‘hidden curriculum’ that exists within its rules and routines, including:
- behaviour policies
- rewards and sanctions systems
- the learning environment
- the manner in which the adults interact with pupils and with each other
Pupils at private schools will encounter a further hidden curriculum – albeit one hidden in plain sight. We teach them that they’re part of the elite, and that their role in society is to rule over others. It’s their destiny and birthright, because that’s the way we do things in this country. And it works.
“All schools have a ‘hidden curriculum’ that exists within its rules and routines”
We might tell working-class pupils in state schools that we live in a meritocracy. However, they soon realise that any notions of ‘merit’ are largely smoke and mirrors.
After all, it’s harder to develop a growth mindset if you live in a cold, damp and overcrowded rented flat. It’s harder to attend an after-school drama club if your parents expect you to collect a younger sibling from school. And it’s certainly harder to succeed in exams if you’ve nowhere to study and limited access to internet-enabled devices.
The idea that you compete on the same level playing field irrespective of social background is deeply flawed, since it’s much more difficult for working-class people to enter and thrive in various professions.
Even leaving aside the typical cost of entry and importance of prior connections and work experience in the relevant field, a person’s intelligence and ability will often be conflated with their cultural tastes, mannerisms and confidence.
So what can we do?
In our book, The Working Classroom, Andy Griffith and I explain how there is a trio of things we can do to make the classroom work for working class pupils:
1. The core curriculum and extracurricular activities
The core curriculum comprises those programmes of study we teach all pupils, typically via timetabled lessons. These are traditionally academic and will include, at a minimum, the foundation subjects stipulated in the National Curriculum. Participation in extracurricular activities provides pupils with opportunities to develop new skills, make new friends and build self-confidence.
2. Curriculum adaptations and interventions
These might include one-to-one and small group tuition intended to help lower-attaining working class pupils access the same experiences as their peers. This is potentially by converting the causes of disadvantage into tangible classroom consequences, so that we can overcome barriers. The most effective curriculum interventions will be short-term, intensive, tailored and focused.
3. Curriculum extras and enhancements
This refers to enrichment activities targeted at high-attaining working class pupils. These help them to acquire ‘secret’ knowledge and skills otherwise denied to them because of their social background. They can help to develop behaviours, attitudes and values that allow students to compete alongside their more advantaged peers.
Matt Bromley is a teacher, education journalist, author and advisor. He has 25 years of teaching and leadership experience across the secondary and FE phases. Follow him at @mj_bromley.
As well as contributing to various magazines, Matt co-hosts the SecEd podcast. He is the co-author, with Andy Griffith, of The Working Classroom: How to make school work for working class students (£18.99, Crown House Publishing). Find out more at theworkingclassroom.co.uk.
