INTRODUCTION
In this paper I explore how different forms of selection within the English education system can contribute towards creating school cultures of inclusion and exclusion. I begin by describing my experience of being a grammar school girl in the 1960s and 70s. I do so for two reasons. First, it provides an illustration of selection with which to compare the present. Second, it offers some insight into who I am as a researcher. This, I hope, will inform the following section in which I outline some of my work at Bowden School, a city comprehensive. Here I deliberately set out to explore the cultures of the school by working as a voluntary learning support assistant (LSA) for a period of six months. I wanted to find out who participates in, and who is excluded from, different aspects of school life, and why this is so.
Since no school exists in a cultural vacuum, I consider the interaction of both these schools with their outside worlds. I look at the public domain of national educational legislation as well as the private lives which students bring into schools with them: families, friends and neighbourhoods. I focus on forms of selection between schools well as within a school. I conclude that these processes are exclusionary since they create school cultures in which students identify themselves, and are identified by others, as either successes or failures.
EXPERIENCING A GRAMMAR SCHOOL AS A STUDENT
In 1968 I sat my 11+ exam (so called because this was the age at which children were entered for it) knowing, some how, that my life depended upon its results. After over six years of being at school, my future was to be determined by two one hour exams, which purported to test literacy and numeracy skills. You either passed and gained a place at the local girls' or boys' grammar schools, where nearly everyone stayed on to take O' Level exams at age 16, and A' Levels at 18, with the majority then going on to Higher Education; or you failed and went to the local co-educational secondary modern school, where most of the students left at age 15 with no formal qualifications. It was as simple as that. I passed.
However, my experiences of this new school were not so straightforward. For the first time on a regular basis I was taken out of my home environment. From my house the secondary modern school would have been a quick walk through south London streets; the grammar school entailed a bus ride to a leafy Surrey village. It was a different world and, to begin with, one I was thrilled to join. I longed to be a part of this school, with its beautiful grounds, science laboratories, huge library and grown-up girls. And yet somehow I did not fit in. At my primary school I had felt valued and welcomed: teachers were kind and I could, I thought, do no wrong. I continued to behave as I had done there, but to my bewilderment, this no longer seemed appropriate. I chatted to the teachers as if I were their equal. I enjoyed challenging their ideas and did so loudly and enthusiastically in lessons. At primary school these characteristics had been encouraged but now I reprimanded for being over-familiar and impertinent. I was constantly in trouble. Old school reports suggest that my work, at least to begin with, was acceptable; however, as a person, I felt I wasn't. I realise now that going to a grammar school was not the same as belonging there.
I knew I was different from most of the other students. My uniform was not new; I did not speak quite properly (and my parents could not afford - nor would have seen the point of - the lunch time elocution lessons to correct this); I was one of the few girls who did not learn a musical instrument. I was aware for the first time that my home and family were unlike others: that having a car, a telephone, holidays, a mother who did not work (or one who only worked because she chose to), were considered commonplace by staff and students. "Describe your favourite holiday place," the English teacher would say. "If you want to help with the play tonight you may use the school 'phone so your mother won't wonder where you are." "Ask your father to pick you up from the netball match."
Thompson (1978) suggests that one way of understanding a culture is to think of it as being like a "complex game" which is "unintelligible until we understand the rules. People appear to run around, and to start and stop, in arbitrary and confused ways" (p.345). He goes on to explain that the game - (like any school, of course) - has two types of rules: some that are "visible" and others that are "invisible … which the players know so deeply that they are never spoken". It was these invisible rules that I broke at grammar school. By the time I began to know what was expected of me I was no longer willing to play the game.
Whilst feeling excluded from the prevalent middle-class culture of the school, my experiences there also began to separate me from my family. Bhabha (1994) uses the metaphor of cultural "in-between" or "interstitial" spaces to describe how a person may become excluded through trying to operate in two cultures and not feeling comfortable in either. He describes this as being "unhomely" (p.9); of being displaced into an uneasy border world. Certainly for me as a teenager I was no longer sure where I did belong. For example, in the sixth form I was told I must give up my Saturday job if I wanted to go to university. However, as far as my father was concerned no Saturday job, no school; it was a condition of staying on post-16. I did not even discuss this with him. No teacher seemed interested in asking me why I worked at the weekends and, as a obstinate seventeen year old, I had no intention of telling them. Consequently, the school refused to help me with my university applications. I started to truant, studying for my A' Level exams in the local library rather than bothering with school. I was the first member of my family to go to university - however, my parents seemed more bewildered than proud by this turn of events.
This part of my private history coincided approximately with growing political concern nationally about the selective school system, leading in time to it being largely dismantled. Both the Crowther Report (Central Advisory Committee for Education, 1959) and the Newson Report (Central Advisory Committee for Education, 1963) were influential in highlighting its damaging inequalities. It was increasingly seen as simplistic to categorise students into two distinct 'types'. Studies also began to emerge which suggested that, even from the age of 11, students at secondary moderns schools considered themselves to be failures in terms of education, whilst those at grammar schools usually saw themselves as successful. Members of staff, in both types of schools, often made assumptions too about the abilities of those they taught. (See, for example, Hargreaves (1967) and Lacey (1976).) During this period successive governments encouraged Local Education Authorities (LEAs) to introduce non-selective comprehensive schools. This was reinforced by the 1976 Education Act which intended to compel all LEAs to change, although some still chose not to do so. However, by the mid-1980s, 90% of students who attended state secondary schools went to comprehensive schools (Benn and Chitty, 1996). My old school responded to the 1976 Act by changing its name from "grammar" to "high" school but it did not, and even now has not, modified its selection of students.
EXPERIENCING A COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL AS A LSA AND RESEARCHER
Bowden School was built in 1939 as a mixed secondary modern school for students aged 11 to 14, later expanding to 15 then 16 year olds. At the same time three grammar schools were established: one for girls and two for boys, aged 11 to 18. In 1976 the LEA decided that these three grammar and its eight secondary modern schools should all become non-selective comprehensives. As part of this development a programme of building works took place at Bowden so it could, for the first time, include students in the sixth form. It reopened in 1978 as a comprehensive school for 11 to 18 year olds. Theoretically, all the city schools now had equal status and their intake comprised of students with the full range of attainments. They were open to all students and parents were expected to want to choose for their children the school nearest to where they lived.
However, the reality of local comprehensive schools for local communities was as unlikely to be successful for all students as the earlier system of grammar and secondary modern schools. There are three main reasons why schools such as Bowden School could not (and still can not) be accurately described as comprehensives. First, they exist as part of a system in which some students do not attend any mainstream secondary school because of their perceived difficulties in learning. This city still supports five special schools. At the same time some parents are able to chose and afford the 'privilege' of private education for their children and thereby opt out of state schools entirely. Second, changing the name of Bowden from secondary modern to comprehensive does not necessarily alter how it is regarded locally by students and their families. Notions of success often still cling to what were once grammar schools and failure to the secondary moderns (Booth, et al, 1998).
Finally, changes in the national political culture in the 1980s and 90s have, through government legislation, reinforced some of these local perceptions. The government document Choice and Diversity (DfEE, 1992), for example, outlined "five great themes": "quality, parental choice, school autonomy and accountability" and argued that together they would bring about a diversity in types of schools which would be responsive to the different needs of local communities. However, as Whitty (1997) argues, such developments have not benefited all schools because they have increased "the difference between popular and less popular schools on a linear scale" by … "reinforcing a vertical hierarchy of schooling types rather than producing horizontal diversity" (p.91). So those schools least able to compete in the market place have been further disadvantaged. This seems particularly important in the context of a city where a number of schools are in close proximity and are therefore vying to attract students. For certain schools to be seen as successful, others must be seen as failing in some way.
So in this historical/political context how has Bowden School fared? Where on that "vertical hierarchy" is it perceived to be by students, parents and staff? And how do their perceptions impact on, and interact with, the culture of the school? It became apparent to me that, within the city, two or three schools were considered, in particular by parents and students, to be far better than others. Bowden was not one of these. The main criterion used to judge this was exam results at GCSE and A' Level. Members of staff were, perhaps naturally, more ambivalent in their judgement; whilst accepting that academic success varied between schools they argued that it was largely determined by the ability of student intake rather than the quality of the educational experiences provided. Staff particularly argued that Bowden was excellent at supporting less academic students. It seems to me that whilst this is to be applauded, it is in itself reinforcing the old split between secondary modern and grammar schools; that is, the selection of students based on notions of ability. Below are some extracts from interviews that explore these views.
Sandra Stephens: teacher at Bowden School for 26 years
Sandra was born in the school's catchment area and, apart from her years at teacher training college, has lived there all her life. Her sister attended the school as a student but Sandra did not because she passed the 11+ exam and went to what was then the local girls' grammar school. She began her teaching career at Bowden School when it was a secondary modern and she is still there twenty-six years later.
KBH: How did staff feel about the school going comprehensive?
SS: We all had to write and apply for our jobs… But I don't know anyone who didn't get them… It seemed just like a name change really… I don't remember the school changing much at all. We still did the same exam courses. I think what should of happened is that we should have had a lot more brighter children coming. The ones that had gone to the grammar schools.
KBH: So it took time for the intake to change?
SS: I'm not aware that it's made an awful lot of difference.
KBH: Do you think now, after 20 years, that you have got a fully comprehensive intake?
SS: We do tend to get a lot of children who are average and below because the catchment areas are poor. And we've got such a good learning support system, so some parents choose us because they think that their children will get a lot of help. When I go to the primary schools there are some children who are considered to be very bright, but they tend to go to other schools.
KBH: Where do they go?
SS: Well, there's Bradley Grammar School in Othershire, across the border. And the old grammar schools … the Manor and the Cathedral, they're still going. They're all supposed to be comprehensives now, but, oh, some people think they're superior. Of course, the Cathedral School is a church school and they have boarders as well, which goes towards helping this image. I know of some people who deliberately start going to Church on purpose just to get their children in… But there are some parents who realise that there are good facilities here and it's up to their children to make the most of them… The ones who go to places like Bradley Grammar are those who have learnt that Bowden is in a poor catchment area and think it's going to have a lot of rough kids. But we've got some lovely children here.
KBH: Do you think that it's right that parents should have that choice in a community like this, or do you think it would be better if everyone just sent their child to the local school?
SS: Well, not being a parent but being a teacher who deals with the children, I think they should come here. Also, having been a house head and seeing children who come here when all their friends have gone to other schools … It doesn't help them. And I think if they've got it in their heads to do well, then they'll do well. Yes, I think they should be here.
Jane Lee: a member of staff who sent her children to the Cathedral School
Jane Lee is an LSA at the school. She moved to the school's catchment area about twenty years ago, when her children were at primary school. She did not send them to Bowden: she chose the Cathedral School. I asked her why.
JL: Bowden was our local school but two years before our son was due to go we went round all of the schools. When we came here we felt the staff were very, very friendly. But looking at the results, well, I got all the education stuff about how to work out what was a good school and what was a bad school, and Bowden wasn't doing very well at that time. Also, there were discipline things that you'd hear rumbling through the neighbourhood so I didn't want him to come here. He'd got grade 5 music so we decided to go for the Cathedral School [which operates a number of musical scholarships] and he got in. And because he did, the younger one got in as well. The older one was academic and it suited him. The younger one not so much so - more sporty - but he still got all the GCSEs he needed which perhaps he might not have got here.
KBH: If your elder son were eleven now, what would you do?
JL: I don't know. I've got a different view now. I think if your kid's bright and they are willing to work, they are going to get on anywhere, providing they've got motivation and drive. And I've seen some really good stuff come out of here. We've got some dedicated teachers, some really hard-working staff. I think if a child's prepared to work and they've got family backup, they can make it now.
KBH: So do you think you would have sent your son here now?
JL: That's really difficult. I think if I was perfectly honest - no - I wouldn't.
KBH: But if you had no choice - say he hadn't got grade 5 music - and he had to come here, do you think you would be more satisfied for him to come here now than you would have been fifteen years ago?
JL: [sounds doubtful] I suppose he'd have to make the most of it. But I would keep a good eye on him.
KBH: You've given me a view as a parent - but also living here - how do you think the school is viewed by the local community - perhaps by those who don't have children here?
JL: Because both my children are now working I don't actually discuss the schools with anyone. Probably the only people who come to me are those who want to know what facilities we've got for learning support, people with children who've got learning difficulties.
KBH: So has the school got a particularly good reputation for that? Do some parents choose Bowden because of that?
JL: Yes, and I actually think that we are the best for testing the children, sorting out their weaknesses. I believe that, I really do. And often when I see things in the newspaper I want to write to them and say, 'Come and have a look round here'.
Jan Marina: a member of staff who sent her children to Bowden School
Jan Marina has two daughters: one in year 9 at Bowden School and another who is about to start that September. She began working as an LSA when her elder daughter was already at the school. I asked her how she set about choosing a school for them.
JM: Well, Isabel chose Bowden because all her friends were coming here. Initially I didn't want her to because I used to pass by when there were crowds of children coming out. But when I saw the facilities I was more impressed than with the other schools and so was my husband. So we didn't have any qualms about her wanting to come here.
KBH: So do you think you've made the right choice?
JM: [long pause and sigh] It's a bit of a Hobson's choice. I can't afford to send her to private school. We all want the best for our children. And we knew we wouldn't get them in the best schools in the city.
KBH: Which are…?
JM: The Cathedral School, for instance. That is the one state school that everyone wants their children to go to. But we're not particularly churchy people, which you have to be. And you have to have been for a number of years.
KBH: So you can't do a few quick trips to church to get in?
JM: [laughs] No, no. You have to have your vicar saying you've been attending for the last couple of years at least. Or be extremely musical - church choir - which we're not.
KBH: So are you pleased now that Isabel is here?
JM: Um… I am. I think I would like to see her at a different type of school. I would like it to be more of a disciplined school. But for the area that we live in and the choices that we had, I am pleased that this is the one we have chosen. This is the best, from the choices that I had. Or I think it is.
KBH: And what does Isabel think of the school?
JM: She loves it. Yes, she loves it.
KBH: So in many ways this school has been success.
JM: Oh yes.
KBH: How do you think the school is viewed locally? Perhaps by neighbours who don't have children here?
JM: Well, before I came to look at it - I didn't have a good view of it. I didn't have a particular reason.
KBH: So a reputation existed whether deserved or not?
JM: When I was a girl and went to the grammar school, Bowden wasn't viewed as a good school and I think that's tended to stick... And the area that it's in there's a lot of council housing… I lived in a council house as a child so I'm not going against that. But I'm just saying because of the area it was in, it just seemed to have that name when I was at school, and it's stuck even now.
The Cathedral School
So why does the Cathedral School seem to appeal to parents in the city? And why did Bowden staff make reference to it when talking about their school? Last year over 90% of the Cathedral students achieved at least five A to C grades at GCSE exams. The figure at Bowden School was 35%. Student intake at the Cathedral School is clearly still heavily skewed towards the more academic. Students at Bowden described it to me as being "a posh school" for "rich children" and for "clever kids". One told me:
"It's like being in a glass house. I've got some friends who go there and they find they get pushed too hard, they can't cope, quite a lot of pressure. Because they were doing so well the teachers were pushing them harder and harder to get good grades."
It is still described by some as being one of the "grammar schools" even though it is nearly twenty-five years since it became, theoretically, a comprehensive. It benefits from its association with the Cathedral and its choir as well as its own long history. The tone is carefully set in the school's prospectus, in which it is described as a:
"… Church of England comprehensive secondary school, with a large academic Sixth Form… founded by Henry VIII in 1541 as the Cathedral School to educate the Cathedral choristers … this close link with the Cathedral is still valued and maintained today".
The school has also made use of changes in national legislation, which have encouraged a culture of greater selection and competition amongst schools, and so-called choice for parents. For example, the publication of league tables help to perpetuate the concept of 'better' schools and encourage some parents to seek a place for their child in a school where they believe they will have a greater chance of academic success. The figures of 90% and 35% for GCSEs, quoted above, illustrate this. Another legislative example is the changes to the admissions criteria that are permissible for schools. In the case of the Cathedral School these allow, not only parents to choose the school, but more importantly for the school to choose its students. Its first seven admissions criteria are:
All of these seem likely to support the maintenance of its predominantly middle-class academic intake. Only its eighth criterion refers to "proximity to the school". It is not therefore a local school for local families. In this way it is able to select students from a wide area right across the city and presumably including some who live in Bowden's catchment area. This seems remarkably like a grammar school system. The current government do not seem to want to halt this trend. In their report Excellence in Schools (DfEE, 1997) they state, "We are deeply committed to equal opportunities for all pupils". But this is followed by:
This does not mean a single model of schooling. We want to encourage diversity, with schools developing their own distinctive identity and expertise" (p.40).
However, "diversity" will inevitably encourage selection and it is difficult to equate that with "equal opportunities".
David Roberts: headteacher of Bowden School
The reputation of the Cathedral School as a quasi grammar school, and its damaging effect on other schools, was also referred to by the headteacher.
KBH: How is Bowden perceived of in the local community? And compared with other city schools?
DR: The Cathedral School - grammar school factor is always going to be there. It's a comprehensive school - in name anyway. But it's not perceived as that because people will see that its selection process lends itself to a higher ability intake. Parents with aspirations…
KBH: So do you think Bowden loses out in that way - middle class families, or families with middle class aspirations?
DR: Yes, certainly. Some also go to Bradley Grammar School which is 20 miles away… And then there are those who we just can't detect, we just never see them. I mean they could go out to independent schools.
At the other end of the hierarchy of the city's schools there are a small number with severely falling rolls. League tables and so-called parental choice have exacerbated differences at both extremes. One school in particular was under threat of closure. If this were to happen there would be no local school for that community. Inevitably the possibility of this school closing contributed to its numbers falling even further. Whilst Bowden's student numbers were fairly static the importance of maintaining them was evident during my time at the school. For example, open evenings were taken very seriously indeed, as was any opportunity to promote the school in local papers. Although the headteacher seemed unwilling to acknowledge there was any pressure on him because of this competition, its influence was apparent. Below is an extract from an interview with him. The language he uses is, in itself suggestive of the market place: "product", "sell", "recruit". Selection by attainment may no longer operate in the school but David Roberts seems keen to encourage as many parents as possible to select Bowden School as the first choice for their children.
DR: I suppose in the end you become immune [to competition]. And my view is, if you have a good product it sells itself. I still think one of the key influences is the recommendation of other parents. So the better job you do the more likely you are to recruit.
Later he says:
DR: The one thing I did work hard on is our primary schools. Our named schools tend to be in the south and east, but our nearest ones are actually Willingden, and Southton. It's important for us to be quite central in our catchment area, because they give us our top end. So for me, the recruitment issue is not just about getting our 240 but it's been about getting the right spread of 240.
He describes the school's natural catchment area as being "a fully comprehensive range" but "significantly skewed below average". But his actions in the primary schools suggest that he does not want the intake to mirror this: hence his aim to include the "top end", which entails attracting some students away from their named secondary schools. Such students are valued by the headteacher presumably because they will in time enhance the school's exam results, which in turn will attract more parents. It seems Bowden would like to have some influence over their intake in the same way at the Cathedral School. Such attitudes seem to be at odds with earlier statements in our interview, when David Roberts articulated strongly his commitment to all students, as individuals, regardless of notions of attainment. Both appear to be genuine. He seems to be trying to operate within two different sets of cultural values: on the one hand those which are driven by external government pressures of competition and 'choice' and on the other his own deeply held personal belief that all students are of equal worth. His ideals seem to reflect a culture of inclusion but, as in this example, they were often compromised for pragmatic reasons.
Selection within the school
Even if Bowden School is considered to be a comprehensive, which it is not fully, like many other schools it operates a policy of selection within. Although some classes are taught in mixed ability groups others are not. There has been a gradual shift towards more setting, partly again because of the pressure of publishing exam results to attract parents to the school. The current government support this development. In the report referred to above (DfEE, 1997) they state:
"We are not going back to the days of the 11+; but we are not prepared to stand still and defend the failings of across-the-board mixed ability teaching… We intend to modernise comprehensive schooling…" (p.38)
The reference to the 11+, although superficially critical, implies that selection by ability within a school, even if not between schools, is necessary. However, like the hierarchy of schools in this city, setting produces a hierarchy of students within individual schools: for some to be in top sets, others necessarily have to be in lower ones. As an LSA these were often the groups with whom I worked. Many students in the lower sets inevitably described themselves in terms such as "thick", "stupid" and "dumbos". Some students in years 10 and 11 believed that staff were over-concerned about pushing those in middle sets to ensure that they achieved as many C grades in their GCSEs. They thought this was not to do with their own personal success but so as to improve the published league table results. In contrast, perhaps unsurprisingly, some students who were more academically successful thought there should have been more setting because they considered themselves to be held back by others. These examples illustrate how such forms of selection can encourage a culture in which some students believe themselves to be more or less valued by the school than others.
REFLECTING ON THESE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES
When I look back at my own grammar school it is difficult not to equate it with the Cathedral School. I wonder how far we can argue that England has many genuinely comprehensive schools, particularly in highly populated cities where a number of schools are in close proximity to each other. I hope that the students at the Cathedral School feel more at home in its prevailing culture than I did in my school. I suspect that they do because of the uneasy advantage of the school selecting the families rather than the students simply passing an entrance exam. Middle-class cultural values still predominate in such schools. I now think I have a greater insight into what it might have meant to have been a part of the culture of a secondary modern school. Staff at Bowden School were frustrated that their efforts were measured against those who taught in schools with such a different intake of students. Their league table results will never match those of the Cathedral and others like it. And even if staff reassure themselves that the context of any school must be taken into account when comparisons are made, it can not be satisfying or comfortable to know that your school will not be considered as successful as some others. For example, in the two extracts from parents related here there was the sense that however well Bowden did as a school it would never have been the first choice for their children. Competition amongst schools also impacts upon how students are valued by staff and therefore by themselves. Although Bowden School will never be in the premier league, maintaining its place in the second division requires great efforts.
The current comprehensive system in England is not about equal opportunities for all. It is not concerned with celebrating diversity of attainment and backgrounds. It is divisive, selective and exclusive. Recent governments, both past Conservative and present Labour, argue that the needs of children and young people are best met within a culture of market forces, where the success of some is at the expense of others' failure and where teachers are valued for producing academic results. In cities this creates a local culture in which schools are clearly pitched against each other and the ideal of belonging to a wider community of education is lost.
REFERENCES
Benn, C. and Chitty, C. (1996) Thirty Years On: Is Comprehensive Education Alive and Well or Struggling to Survive? London: Fulton.
Bhabha, H. K. (1994) The Location of Culture, London: Routledge.
Booth, T., Ainscow, M. and Dyson, A (1998) England: Inclusion and exclusion in a Competitive System, in Booth, T. and Ainscow, M (eds) 1998 From Them to Us, London: Routledge.
Central Advisory Committee for Education (England) (1962) Fifteen to Eighteen: Volume 1, (The Crowther Report) London: HMSO.
Central Advisory Committee for Education (England) (1963) Half Our Future, (The Newson Report) London: HMSO.
DfEE (1992) Choice and Diversity: A New Framework for Schools, London: HMSO.
DfEE (1997) Excellence in Schools, London: HMSO.
Hargreaves, D. (1967) Social Relations in a Secondary School, London: Routledge Kegan Paul
Lacey, C. (1976) Hightown Grammar: The School as a Social System, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Thompson, E. P. (1978) The Poverty of Theory and Other Essays, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Whitty, Geoff (1997) School autonomy and parental choice: consumer rights versus citizen rights in education policy in Britain, in David Bridges (ed) Education, Autonomy and Democratic Citizenship: Philosophy in a Changing World, London: Routledge.
Contact: Kristine Black-Hawkins
School of Education
The Open University
Walton Hall
Milton
Keynes
MK7 6AA
 |
 |