Hoc Tap

Education in England: a brief history
Derek Gillard first published January 2000 revised and updated May 2004, April 2007, January 2011 http://www.educationengland.org.uk/history/ © copyright Derek Gillard 2011
Education in England: a brief history is my copyright. You are welcome to download it and print it for your own personal use, or for use in a school or other educational establishment, provided my name as the author is attached. But you may not publish it, upload it onto any other website, or sell it, without my permission.
Citations
You are welcome to cite this piece. If you do so, please acknowledge it thus:
Gillard D (2011) Education in England: a brief historywww.educationengland.org.uk/history
References
In references in the text, the number after the colon is always the page number (even where a document has numbered paragraphs or sections).
Documents
Where a document is shown as a link, the full text is available online. Most of the Acts of Parliament and Official Papers have been downloaded from the National Archives website: these are text files and are therefore searchable. Acts and White Papers which are not available on the National Archives website have been photocopied and scanned: the resulting files are shown as 'pdf image '.
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen 's Printer for Scotland.
Introduction
Education in England: a brief history explores the development of education in England from the earliest schools in the sixth century, through the establishment of the state education system in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, to current concerns about government policies. It aims to explain how we got where we are now.
As its name indicates, it covers England rather than the whole of the UK, though I have included occasional references, where relevant, to educational policy and provision in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Similarly, while it deals mainly with education in schools, some information about higher education is given where it is relevant to the development of education generally.
In addition to the twelve chapters there 's also a timeline of major education acts, reports and other key events; a glossary of commonly used abbreviations and terms which I hope will be especially useful for non-UK readers; and a bibliography (which is a compilation of all the quoted sources listed at the end of each chapter).
Each web page includes chapter links (as in the left hand column on this page) and at the end of each page there are links to the previous and next chapters. The left hand column also displays the organisation of each chapter with links to the main headings, as shown in the Contents list below.
Finally, if you spot any errors - anything from factual inaccuracies to missing punctuation or broken links - I 'd be very grateful if you 'd let me know. Contact details are here.
Chapter 1 : 600-1800
Beginnings

600-1100 The earliest schools
There were almost certainly schools in Britain during the Roman occupation, because towards the end of the first century Juvenal relates that eloquent Gauls were teaching Britons to plead causes and Thule was discussing the establishment of a Rhetoric School. But when the Romans left Britain, so did civilisation - at least for the next couple of centuries. As AF Leach (1915:1) puts it, 'whatever other institutions of Britain, if any, survived its conversion into England, churches and schools did not '.
St Augustine
So when St Augustine arrived in England in 597, schools were unknown. He needed priests to conduct church services and boys to sing in the choir. 'As there were no schools any more than there were churches in England, Augustine had to create both ' (Leach 1915:3). He and his successors established two types of school: the grammar school to teach Latin to English priests, and the song school (which some cathedrals still have today) where the 'sons of gentlefolk ' were trained to sing in cathedral choirs.
Thus the earliest schools in England - at least, those we know anything about - date from the arrival of St Augustine and Christianity around the end of the sixth century. It seems likely that the very first grammar school was established at Canterbury in 598, endowed - along with Augustine 's church - by King Ethelbert, who was baptised in June 597:
It may be safely asserted then, that in this year, 598, as an adjunct to Christ Church Cathedral, or rather as part of it, and under the tuition of himself and the clerks who came with him and whom Ethelbert endowed, Augustine established the Grammar School which still flourishes under the name of the King 's School, not from its original founder, Ethelbert, but from its re-founder, Henry VIII. (Leach 1915:3)
Similar schools began to be established in other parts of England. In hisEcclesiastical History the Venerable Bede, the eighth century Northumbrian monk, writes that in 604 Augustine ordained two bishops - Mellitus at St Paul 's in London and Justus at Rochester in Kent. Leach (1915:6) argues that it is a 'perfectly fair inference ' that associated schools were founded at the same time. Bede suggests that another school was founded in East Anglia - probably at Dunwich - in 631 by Sigberct, who presided over the kingdom of the East English, and Bishop Felix, a Burgundian who had come to England and been consecrated by Archbishop Honorius, one of the last survivors of Augustine 's original band of missionaries.
Bede also records that in 634 a Song School was established at York, where James, the deacon who 'though an ecclesiastic, was also a saint ... acted as master to many in church chanting after the Roman or Canterbury fashion ' (quoted in Leach 1915:6).
Grammar schools and song schools
Leach (1915:6-7) notes that grammar schools and song schools 'have often been confounded as if they were one school ' but he argues that they were 'distinct foundations, completely differentiated in function as they were in their teaching, and generally in their government ', though 'In small places they were sometimes united under one master '.
Song schools 'were in essence special or professional schools for those engaged in the actual performance of the services ', whereas grammar schools 'gave a general education, as much needed by the statesman, the lawyer, the civil servant, and the clerk as by the priest or cleric ' (Leach 1915:7).
Augustine 's concept of education derived from the Roman and Hellenistic schools of rhetoric. It comprised the seven liberal arts and sciences - grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy - which were regarded as a preparation for the study of theology, law and medicine.
However, the only subject taught systematically in the grammar schools was Latin grammar and literature, because the aim of the schools was strictly vocational: to prepare pupils for entry to the Church. 'The conscious object of these early schools, attached to cathedrals and to monasteries, was to train intending priests and monks to conduct and understand the services of the Church, and to read the Bible and the writings of the Christian Fathers ' (Williams 1961:128).
Thus 'grammar ' at this time did not mean learning about the structure of language - that meaning did not develop until the middle ages. Rather, it was 'a preparation for reading, especially reading aloud, and was taken to involve comprehension and commentary, so that content was inseparable ' (Williams 1961:129). This caused problems for the church because, while it was essential that Latin should be understood, there were concerns that students would read a wide range of Latin literature and 'pagan ' philosophy. Thus it was that Pope Gregory wrote to Bishop Desiderius in Gaul (France):
A circumstance came to our notice, which cannot be mentioned without shame, namely that you, our brother, give lessons in grammar. This news caused us such annoyance and disgust that all our joy at the good we had heard earlier was turned to sorrow and distress, since the same lips cannot sing the praises of Jove and the praises of Christ. Consider yourself how serious and shocking it is that a bishop should pursue an activity unsuitable even for a pious layman. (quoted in Williams 1961:128)
Some idea of the curriculum of these early schools can be found in Bede 'sEcclesiastical History. He notes that at Canterbury Theodore and Hadrian taught 'the rules of metric, astronomy and the computus as well as the works of the saints ' (quoted in Williams 1961:129) and speaks of Tobias, Bishop of Rochester, who died in 726, as being 'a most learned man, for he was a pupil of Theodore and Hadrian, and so together with a knowledge of literature, ecclesiastical and general, Greek and Latin were as familiar to him as his native tongue ' (quoted in Leach 1915:33).
Many schools were founded in the century after Augustine 's arrival, including those at Dorchester in Oxfordshire (around 634), Winchester (648), Hexham (probably 678), Malmesbury in Wiltshire (possibly founded by Aldhelm, who died Bishop of Sherborne in 709), Lichfield, Hereford and Worcester.
Alcuin
In the eighth century the focus of development in English schools moved from Theodore and Aldhelm in the south to Bede and Alcuin in the north.
Alcuin, a Northumbrian, was the schoolmaster in York from 776. Under his leadership the school 'set a new standard of culture ' (Fisher 1936:161). Indeed, Fisher argues that:
To the influence of this robust, studious and convivial Englishman we may fairly trace the legislation which defines the educational responsibilities of the church and the episcopal and monastic schools which resulted from it. (Fisher 1936:161)
Alcuin 's school taught 'grammar, rhetoric, law, poetry, astronomy, natural history, arithmetic, geometry, music, and the Scriptures ' (Williams 1961:129). On the face of it, this seems a pretty broad curriculum, but it should be remembered that everything was centred on the church:
Scripture was the central subject, and rhetoric teaching was mainly a study of verbal forms in the Bible. Grammar was the teaching of Latin, and versification was in the same context, though at times it extended to relate to poetry in the vernacular. Mathematics, including astronomy, was centred on the intricacies of the Church calendar, simple general exercises being an introduction to the all important 'computus ' centred on the controversy about the date of Easter. Music and law were vocational studies for the services and administration of the Church, and the natural history, by contrast with the Aristotelians, was literary and anecdotal. (Williams 1961:129)
Alcuin himself described the curriculum of the York school under Ethelbert, his successor as schoolmaster:
There he ... moistened thirsty hearts with divers streams of teaching and varied dews of study; busily giving to some the arts of the science of grammar (grammaticae rationis artes), pouring into others the streams of the tongues of orators; these he polished on the whet-stone of law, those he taught to sing in Æonian chant, making others play on the flute of Castaly, and run with the lyre over the hills of Parnassus. But others, the said master made to know the harmony of heaven and the sun, the labours of the moon, the five belts of the sky, the seven planets, the laws of the fixed stars, their rising and setting, the movements of the air and the sun, the earth 's quake, the nature of men, cattle, birds, and beasts, the different kinds of number and various (geometrical) figures: and he gave sure return to the festival of Easter; above all, revealing the mysteries of holy writ, for he opened the abysses of the old and rude law. (quoted in Leach 1915:58-59)
Alcuin left York in 782 when Charlemagne persuaded him to work for the Frankish court - to 'prescribe for the intellectual wants of a great empire fallen from civilisation to barbarism ' (Fisher 1936:161).
The Vikings and King Alfred
The development of schools in England was interrupted by the long series of Viking invasions which began around 866. The Norsemen were pagans who 'loved war and women, wassail and song, pillage and slaughter ' (Fisher 1936:177) and their raids caused 'immense havoc ' (Fisher 1936:180).
The one part of England which successfully resisted Viking control was Wessex, where Alfred became king in 871 at the age of twenty-three.
A gloomy interval in the history of English education ensued after the death of Offa and the widespread devastation caused by the Viking invasions. When the curtain rises again, the scene has shifted from the North and the Midlands to the South, and centres in the great figure of Alfred. (Leach 1915:67)
There are many stories about Alfred (the burning of the cakes being the most famous) and it is difficult to separate fact from myth. He may have been educated by St Swithun at Winchester, or at Sherborne (Leach argues that the latter is more likely). He appears to have spent several years in Rome, where he learnt Latin. He translated Pope Gregory the Great 's Pastoral Care from Latin into English and sent a copy to every cathedral in his kingdom. In the preface to this book, written around 893, he laments the decline of learning in England which he blames on the Danish invaders. The churches which had once been 'filled with treasures and books ' had been 'all ravaged and burnt ' (quoted in Leach 1915:73).
Alfred took 'delight in the songs and literature of his people ' and showed 'concern for education ' (Fisher 1936:183). His own children were taught English literature and Latin, and it was under his influence that England 's system of schools began to be reconstructed. 'The influence and the example of Alfred in his insistence on the importance of education continued to be felt and followed in the reigns of his son and grandson, Edward the Elder and Athelstan ' (Leach 1915:76).
Alfred drove the Norsemen out of Winchester, Southampton, London, Oxford, and Chichester, but the invasions continued for another century or so. In 1011 the Danes besieged Canterbury and captured Archbishop Elphege (or Alphege). He - and the monks who came out of the burning cathedral with him - were all murdered.
But the invaders weren 't all bad. In 1016 Canute, who had previously become a Christian and married the widow of his predecessor Ethelred the Unready, became king of England. According to Herman, the historian of Bury St. Edmunds who wrote towards the end of the eleventh century, Canute was concerned about the education of poor boys: whenever he went to any famous monastery or borough he sent there at his own expense boys to be taught for the clerical or monastic order, not only those whom he found among freemen but also the cleverer of the poor, and with his own hand in kingly munificence he also in his progress made some free. (quoted in Leach 1915:91-92)
Under Canute, England became part of a great Scandinavian empire until 1042.
Two other notable figures in English education during this period were Dunstan, born in 925, who abhorred the widespread practice of flogging and sought to protect the boy monks at Canterbury 'from excessive chastisement ' (Leach 1915:81), and his pupil Ælfric, who wrote three educational works: the Anglo-Latin Grammar, Glossary and Colloquy(Dialogue).
The Normans
The next invasion was that of William the Conqueror and the Normans in 1066. According to Leach (1915:96), one of the worst effects of the Conquest was 'the foisting of the Italian adventurer Lanfranc into the See of Canterbury ':
It was a misfortune for the school at Canterbury and elsewhere that this late converted monk became archbishop. For a determined effort to expel the monks from Canterbury and the other monastic cathedrals in England and to reinstate the seculars was frustrated by the now monkish Lanfranc. So the school, instead of being restored to its position as a part of the cathedral foundation, as at York and St. Paul 's, where it was taught and governed by a resident member of the Chapter, was left to the care, necessarily intermittent, of the generally non-resident and roving archbishop, who was more often than not a busy statesman. (Leach 1915:98)
Indeed, Lanfranc seems to have been remarkably uninterested in schools or schoolboys. Of the 107 pages in his 'Constitutions ', which were apparently accepted as a Rule for the whole order of Benedictine monks in England, just two and a half pages were about the boys, and even these 'imply no learning whatever beyond knowing the psalms and services by heart ' (Leach 1915:100).
However, following the Norman conquest secular schools began to flourish and French replaced English as the vernacular medium for teaching Latin:
The main difference caused by the Conquest was the gradual substitution of Norman for English schoolmasters and the translation by the schoolboys of Latin no longer into English but into Norman-French, which, till the reign of Edward III, was the vernacular of the upper classes in the country, of the middle classes in the towns, and of the whole cultured and clerkly class. (Leach 1915:103)
Education was still largely about vocational training and most pupils were still intending monks or priests, though 'there was probably an occasional extension, and there are certainly some recorded cases of the education of young members of royal and noble families ' (Williams 1961:129-130).

1100-1500 Expansion and development
Church control of education
By about 1100 all the cathedrals and collegiate churches had schools: the schoolmaster was one of their most important officers and teaching was one of their most important functions.
But new schools were springing up, not all of them provided by the churches: 'On the contrary, in every town of considerable population there was a demand for, and consequently a supply of schools ' (Leach 1915:115).
Some schools - like those at Bedford, Christchurch and Waltham - were removed from monastic control and handed over to secular canons. Bury St. Edmund 's School, for example, which had probably been founded as part of a collegiate church before Canute 's time, was given an endowment at the end of the twelfth century to convert it into a 'free or partially free grammar school ' (Leach 1915:119).
The monasteries fought back and tried to regain control of the schools. In Bristol, for example, the city grammar school was transferred from the governance of the seculars to the regulars on the foundation of Keynsham Abbey in 1171 (Leach 1915:128).
And what of the teaching in medieval England 's schools? Leach (1915:136) says they 'gave no education fit to be called a liberal education '. And in his 1895 book Social England, Cambridge University historian Bass Mullinger, wrote:
We hear but little concerning schoolboy life in medieval times, but that little is generally unfavourable. ... The average attainments were limited to reading and writing, to which in the cathedral schools there were added chanting and an elementary knowledge of Latin. (quoted in Leach 1915:136)
However, the school curriculum was beginning to change. For younger pupils rhetoric became as important as grammar, while for older students the increasing availability of Aristotle 's works led to a greater emphasis on logic.
Perhaps most importantly, while education was still seen as a Christian enterprise, the concept of a liberal education - a preparation for the specialised study of law, medicine, or theology - began to develop:
The concept of the Seven Liberal Arts (the trivium of grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic, the quadrivium of music, arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy) goes back to at least the fifth century, but it was only now that it began to be realised with any adequacy, as new material from classical learning, and new attitudes towards it, flowed in. (Williams 1961:130)
And change was not limited to the schools: by the beginning of the 13th century universities were beginning to develop.
Universities
Oxford
There is evidence of some teaching in Oxford as early as 1096. This developed rapidly after 1167, when Henry II banned English students from attending the University of Paris. In 1188 the historian Gerald of Wales visited Oxford to speak to the dons and two years later Emo of Friesland became the university 's first overseas student.
By 1201, the university was led by a 'magister scolarum Oxonie ' and in 1214 he was given the title of Chancellor. The masters were recognised as a universitas or corporation in 1231.
Rioting between 'town and gown ' (the townspeople and the students) resulted in the establishment of primitive halls of residence which became the first Oxford colleges - University College was established in 1249, Balliol in 1260 and Merton in 1264. These early colleges were founded by bishops and catered exclusively for wealthy graduates.
Less than a century later, Oxford had achieved eminence above every other seat of learning, and won the praises of popes, kings and sages by virtue of its antiquity, curriculum, doctrine and privileges. In 1355, Edward III paid tribute to the University for its invaluable contribution to learning; he also commented on the services rendered to the state by distinguished Oxford graduates. (Oxford: A brief history of the University)
Cambridge
Some Oxford scholars, however, became tired of the hostility of the townspeople and in 1209 they moved to Cambridge. At first they lived in lodgings, then houses were hired as hostels with a Master in charge of the students. By 1226 the scholars had formed themselves into an organisation, represented by an official called a Chancellor.
They studied what we might now describe as an 'arts foundation course ' in grammar, logic and rhetoric. Further studies - in arithmetic, music, geometry and astronomy - led to the degrees of bachelor and master. There were no professors: the teaching was conducted by masters who had themselves undertaken the course and who had been approved or 'licensed ' by their colleagues (the universitas). Thus the role of teachers began to be formalised: they were licensed rather than simply appointed, and university degrees were licences to teach. Some of the masters went on to advanced studies in divinity and law, and a few studied medicine.
In order to avoid abuse of the royal privileges which were conferred on scholars, steps were taken to identify and authenticate those who had gained degrees. The first step was enrolment with a licensed master - called 'matriculation ' because the scholar 's name had to appear on the master 's 'matricula ' or roll. The university itself later assumed this duty. Stages in a scholar 's progress were marked by 'graduation ' ceremonies, with the grades differentiated by variations in the gown, hood and cap. Reminders of these terms and practices survive to this day (University of Cambridge: a brief history).
Expansion
The establishment of these university colleges was quickly copied around the country. New colleges or collegiate churches of secular canons, each with its schools of grammar and song, sprang up. Among the earliest were those of Howden in Yorkshire (1266), Glasney, now part of Penryn in Cornwall (1267), Lanchester (1283) and Chester-le-Street (1286).
From this time to the dissolution of colleges in 1548 scarcely a year passed without witnessing the foundation of a college at the university, or a collegiate church with its grammar school attached, generally in the native place of its founder. The only difference between the university college, with its church attached, and the collegiate church, with its schools of grammar and song attached, was that the latter were primarily for religious services and secondarily for education, and the former were primarily for education and secondarily for religious services. The collegiate church wasad orandum et studendum, the house of scholars at the university ad studendum et orandum. Both were indifferently spoken of as colleges. (Leach 1915:167)
The Black Death of 1349 and the two further plagues which followed in 1361 and 1367 profoundly affected the universities and schools. At Oxford no colleges were founded between Queen 's in 1340 and New College in 1379. At Cambridge no new colleges were created between 1352, when Corpus Christi College was founded 'expressly to repair the ravages created by the plague of 1349 ' (Leach 1915:201), and 1439, when God 's House (now Christ 's College) was founded to restore the supply of grammar masters, the shortage of which had caused dozens of schools to close. The epidemics also severely reduced the number of scholars.

Independent schools
As we have seen, the control of the church over education was beginning to diminish during this period. (It was, of course, never removed entirely: indeed, religious provision of schools is still a significant - and growing - feature of education in England today).
There were a number of challenges for the church: * first, the development of philosophy, medicine and law, together with the needs of a developing secular society, removed parts of the curriculum from church supervision; * second, the new universities were determined to be independent 'corporate learned bodies deciding their own conditions for granting degrees and hence licences to teach ' (Williams 1961:131); * and third, by the end of the 15th century the network of grammar and song schools had been joined by a number of 'independent ' schools.
Benefactions to monasteries dwindled in the late 14th century, so wealthy benefactors or guilds began to establish 'chantries ', each with its own priest, to celebrate masses for the repose of the benefactors ' souls, and, in many cases, to conduct a school. The first of these chantry schools was probably the grammar school at Wotton-under-Edge in Gloucestershire, founded in 1384 by Katharine Lady Berkeley (Taylor 1977:142). Chantry schools were effectively independent of the church. (Nowadays the term 'independent school ' indicates independence from the state).
More independent schools began to open, for 'ruling class boys ' who paid fees, and to 'poor and needy scholars, of good character and well-conditioned, of gentlemanly habits, able for school, completely learned in reading, plain-song and old Donatus [Latin Grammar] ' (unknown source quoted in Williams 1961:132).
Because they were independent, admission to these new schools was not restricted to one locality but was on a national basis. They drew increasingly on a single social class, combining the educational methods of the grammar schools and the social training of the chivalric system (of which more below). They developed into the 'public schools ' (ie private or non-state schools) which still exist today. In view of their close connection with the colleges of the new universities, their development had a profound effect on the educational system as a whole.
Two of the earliest independent schools were Winchester and Eton.
Winchester
Winchester College was founded by William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester and Chancellor to Richard II. The charter of foundation was granted in 1382, the buildings were begun in 1387, and the first scholars entered the school in 1394. At the same time, William of Wykeham also founded New College Oxford, to provide for the further education of his seventy Winchester pupils (Winchester College: History).
Winchester 's special significance was that, though connected with New College, it was a separate and distinct foundation for boys, 'a sovereign and independent corporation existing by and for itself, self-centred and self-governed ' (Leach 1915:208).

Eton
Henry VI founded Eton College (pictured) in 1440, followed a year later by King 's College Cambridge, which was to be supplied with scholars from Eton. The school was to be part of a large foundation which included a community of secular priests, ten of whom were Fellows, a pilgrimage church, and an almshouse. Provision was made for seventy scholars to receive free education (Eton College website).
Growing public interest
The growing interest of the laity in education at this time can be seen in the licences granted to two Trinity gilds in Oxfordshire to maintain schoolmasters, one at Deddington in 1446, and the other at Chipping Norton in 1451.
And the great schoolmaster William Wayneflete founded Magdalen College, 'and attached to it not one but two schools, one at his native place, Wainfleet, in Lincolnshire, in 1459, the other Magdalen College School, by the gates of the college at Oxford ' (Leach 1915:270). At the latter he provided for a master to be paid £10 a year and an usher (his deputy) £5, 'to teach all comers freely and gratis without exaction of anything ' (quoted in Leach 1915:270).

1500-1600 Renaissance and Reformation
Two forces reshaped Europe during this period.
The Renaissance (literally 'rebirth ') was a cultural movement which began in Italy in the 14th century and spread across the continent during the following three hundred years. It is mainly thought of in relation to artistic - the development of endeavours linear perspective in painting, for example - but it also encompassed a resurgence of learning from classical sources and more general 'humanist ' educational reform based on reasoning and empirical evidence. Pico della Mirandola 's famous public discourse of 1486, De hominis dignitate (Oration on the Dignity of Man), has been seen as the 'Manifesto of the Renaissance '.
The Reformation, which established Protestantism as a branch of Christianity, was prompted by discontent at the perceived worldliness of the Papacy and the financial demands it made. As early as the 14th century the Lollards, led by John Wycliffe, and the Hussites, followers of the Czech reformer Jan Hus, began to attack the hierarchical and legalistic structure of the church. But the Reformation is usually reckoned as beginning in 1517, when Martin Luther famously protested at church corruption and the selling of indulgences. The movement against Rome spread across Europe over the next two centuries.
The English Reformation
In England, the Reformation was a much more localised affair, which centred on King Henry VIII 's disputes with Rome over the status of his various marriages.
In fact, at first Henry (pictured - from the portrait by Hans Holbein) opposed the reforming movement and dedicated his book Assertio Septum Sacramentorum(Defence of the Seven Sacraments) to Pope Leo X, who rewarded him in 1521 with the title Fidei Defensor(Defender of the Faith).
But by 1527 Henry wanted his marriage to Catherine of Aragon ended so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. He was also anxious to extend the sovereignty of central government. So for both political and personal reasons he overthrew Papal power and dissolved the monasteries.
Henry was born in 1491. Under the direction of John Skelton, Bernard Andre and others, he received the best grammar school, song school and university education of the day. He studied Latin, literature, rhetoric, dialectic, music, French, Italian and Spanish. He became king at the age of 19 in 1509.
He was undoubtedly a remarkable man. Leach could hardly be more fulsome in praise of him:
Henry VIII was, perhaps, the most highly educated person for his time who ever sat on the throne of England. ... Hence his zeal for learning and for education. No king ever showed more desire to promote learning and learned men, and none was more impressed and desirous of impressing on others the advantages, or did more for the advancement of education. Whether in the statutes of the realm or in the ordinances and statutes of the many foundations of his time, he was never tired of expatiating on the necessity of education and the benefit that educated men were to church and commonwealth. (Leach 1915:277)
Leach estimates that at the start of Henry 's reign England probably had about 400 schools for a population of 2.25 million, or one school for every 5,625 people (Leach 1915:331). He does, however, warn that 'It is difficult to arrive at a precise estimate of the proportion of schools to population, because, while it is hard to ascertain the exact number of schools, it is even harder, and perhaps impossible, to ascertain the population of England at any given date in the Middle Ages ' (Leach 1915:329).
Under Henry 's leadership, the English Reformation affected education in a number of ways. Some of the old foundation schools were closed and an equal number of new ones were opened. Many older schools were revived, expanded, or converted into free schools. The grammar school remained central to the system, but there was an important change in its sponsorship. Whereas the typical medieval grammar school had belonged to the church, the new grammar schools were mostly private foundations 'supervised in variable degree by Church and State ' (Williams 1961:132).
The abolition of the greater monasteries in 1540 resulted in the refoundation of twelve grammar schools as part of the 'new foundation ' cathedrals. Here the monks, who had turned out the canons 600 years earlier, were now turned out to make room for canons. 'In all the new cathedrals established in 1541 ... a grammar school, with a master and usher paid on the highest scale of the day, was included ' (Leach 1915:312).
In the Statutes of the refounded school at Canterbury, the last chapter concerned 'The Method of Teaching '. It provided for six classes, three under the usher and three under the head master:
The lower books were Cato, Æsop and Familiar Colloquies. In Form III, Terence and Mantuanus ' Eclogues; in the Fourth Form, they began to practise writing Latin letters; not until the Fifth Form did they begin to write Latin verses, and polished themes and translated poets and historians. In the Sixth Form, they read Erasmus 's Copia Verborum and made 'varyings ', that is, turned sentences of Latin from the oratio obliqua to the oratio directa, and from one tense and mood to another, 'so as to acquire the faculty of speaking Latin as well as is possible for boys '. (Leach 1915:316)
These refounded schools would provide 'the greater part of the education of England till the eighteenth century ' (Leach 1915:316).
Another significant outcome of the Reformation was the translation of the Latin Bible into the vernacular. In 1535 Henry VIII 's Vicar-General and chief adviser Thomas Cromwell ordered that copies of William Tyndale 's new English Bible were to be placed in every parish church.
Parliament was clearly unhappy with this decision, because in 1543 (three years after Cromwell had fallen from grace and been executed) it passed an Act which banned artisans, husbandmen, labourers, servants and almost all women from reading or discussing the Bible.
The prohibition proved impossible to enforce. Indeed, the brief availability of the English Bible had already encouraged many to learn to read and had made them think about the nature of society and the church. 'This was indeed a cultural revolution of unprecedented proportions, and one whose consequences stretched far beyond the period of the Reformation and the English Revolution ' (Chitty 2007:14).
The English Renaissance
The Renaissance came relatively late to England. It is generally viewed as being a feature of the Elizabethan period in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, with writers like William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe, Edmund Spenser, Sir Thomas More, Francis Bacon, Sir Philip Sidney and John Milton, architects such as Inigo Jones, and composers Thomas Tallis, John Taverner and William Byrd.
However, while the Reformation resulted in changes to the structure of the English school system, the Renaissance appears to have had little effect on the curriculum. As Williams (1961:132) puts it, 'while the schools were reorganised by the Reformation their teaching was not redirected by the Renaissance '.
Greek and sometimes Hebrew were added to the main Latin curriculum (to assist correct understanding of the scriptures), and there was more study of literature. But the education provided by the grammar schools - and by the universities - remained 'rigid and narrow ' (Williams 1961:132). Thus:
The major achievements of the Renaissance, in the vernacular literatures, in geographical discovery, in new painting and music, in the new spirit in philosophy and physical inquiry, in changing attitudes to the individual, had little effect on the standard forms of general education. (Williams 1961:133)
However, the Renaissance did have the effect of extending education to the laity, while Henry 's reforms reduced the control of the monks:
... as long as the clergy was sterilized, and yet monopolized a large and ever-increasing proportion of the territory and wealth of the world, progress was checked. The quiet thinker was lured into the cloister, the progressive thinker was under a ban, originality was a crime, and repression prevailed especially in the region, in which it is most dangerous, of religion and philosophy. In Italy, Spain, Portugal, Flanders, the most populous and naturally the richest countries, the Renaissance was strangled almost in its cradle by monasticism in its most formidable development, the Inquisition: while its growth was stunted in France and Germany by the prolonged series of wars and massacres between the upholders of monasticism and the friends of free thought. Its full development was reserved for England and Scotland, where the monasteries, and with them clerical celibacy, were suddenly and wholly swept away. (Leach 1915:331-2)
Williams (1961:133) argues that the period was a complex one, but with three clear trends: 'the increase in vernacular teaching, the failure of the traditional institutions to adapt either to a changing economy or to an expanding culture, and the passing of most of the leading schools from sponsorship by a national institution to private benefaction.
The main educational theories of the Renaissance - especially the ideal of the scholar-courtier - had little effect on English schools. In fact, Williams argues that they had 'the paradoxical effect of reducing the status of schools ' in favour of an alternative pattern, 'drawing in part on the chivalric tradition, of education at home through a private tutor ' (Williams 1961:133), a preference which, for many families, would last well into the nineteenth century.
Apprenticeships and chivalry
As early as the 16th century - and more so in the 17th - there was much criticism of the limited curriculum of the grammar schools, based as it was on the requirements of the universities and the learned professions. In particular, it no longer suited the needs of the upper classes, who wanted their sons trained for posts at Court, for diplomacy and for higher appointments in the army.
As a result, two other types of educational provision became popular with the upper classes: apprenticeships in crafts and trades, which were standardised in the Elizabethan Statute of Artificers in 1562; and the chivalry system, which enabled noble families to send their young sons to be pages at great houses and undergo a course of training for knighthood. Williams (1961:131) points out that:
The existence of these two systems, alongside the academic system, reminds us of the determining effect on education of the actual social structure. The labouring poor were largely left out of account, although there are notable cases of individual boys getting a complete education, through school and university, by outstanding promise and merit. For the rest, education was organised in general relation to a firm structure of inherited and destined status and condition: the craft apprentices, the future knights, the future clerisy.
Elsewhere in Europe - in France and in the German and Scandinavian states - knightly or courtly academies were being founded to give instruction to young nobles, not only in horsemanship and the use of arms, but also in modern languages, history and geography, and in the application of mathematics to military and civil engineering.
A proposal for the establishment of a school on these lines in England was made by Sir Humphrey Gilbert in 1572, and in the following century Cowley, Locke, Defoe and other writers urged the setting up of such schools. In the 17th century England 's upper classes sent their sons to private tutors, and then to the continental knightly or courtly academies. The development of this type of school designed for the governing class 'was one of a number of movements which reflected the maladjustment between the classical grammar schools and the needs of contemporary life ' (Spens 1938:10).
New types of school
Although the traditional grammar school changed little, there were significant developments in the education of younger children. The number of schools increased and there was 'a bewildering variety of forms, ranging from instruction by priests to private adventure schools, often as a sideline to shopkeeping and trade ' (Williams 1961:133).
Many of the 'petties ' or 'ABCs ' were proper schools, with links to grammar schools. Indeed, in a few cases, they virtually took over the running of grammar schools whose old endowments had shrunk.
Another type of school which began to develop was the 'writing school '. The aim of these schools was to meet the secular needs of a society in which trade was now expanding rapidly and whose administration was becoming more complex. They taught 'scrivener 's English and the casting of accounts ' (Williams 1961:133) and in some cases this teaching was adopted by the grammar schools.
Elizabethan England
Elizabeth I ruled from 1558 to 1603. It was a period of extraordinary expansion: Elizabethan England 'took the world by surprise ' - in navigation, commerce, colonisation, poetry, drama, philosophy and science. Much of this was due to 'the immense extension of lay initiative and effort ' in every area of national life - 'not least in the sphere of education and the schools ' (Leach 1915:332).
One of the most notable educationists of the period was Roger Ascham (1515-1568), the teacher of Queen Elizabeth. He bemoaned the lack of status accorded to education:
It is pitie, that commonlie, more care is had, yea and that emonges verie wise men, to finde out rather a cunnynge man for their horse, than a cunnyng man for their children. To the one they will gladlie giue a stipend of 200 crounes by yeare, and loth to offer to the other 200 shillinges. God suffereth them, to haue, tame, and well ordered horse, but wilde and vnfortunate children. (The Scholemaster, quoted in Nunes, undated)
Ascham stressed the importance of play in education. 'The Scholehouse should be in deede, as it is called by name, the house of playe and pleasure, and not of feare and bondage. ' He set up his own school, funded by Richard Sackville.

1600-1800 The concept of universal education
In the 17th and 18th centuries there were important developments in educational theory and the school curriculum began to take on a form we would recognise today.
The modern concept of a common education emerged in Europe after the Reformation amid quarrels between learned groups of Protestants, and between the Protestants and the established monastic orders.
Comenius
Comenius (1592-1670) (pictured: painting by Rembrandt), a Czech teacher, scientist, educator and writer, was one of the earliest champions of universal education, a concept he developed in his 1632 bookDidactica magna. He argued that teachers and learners should leave the divisive sects and unite in common institutions of learning.
He went on to develop the idea of human learning as a progression from youth to maturity and from elementary to advanced knowledge. 'Nothing should be taught to the young ', he wrote, 'unless it is not only permitted, but actually demanded by their age and mental strength ' (Comenius 1632, quoted in Nunes, undated). 'These three elements of commonality, community and progression have characterised most education systems developed since ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:1).
Comenius stressed the educational importance of the first six years of a child 's life and developed the idea of teaching children of five or six 'without any tediousnesse to reade and write, as it were in a continuall course of play and pastime ' (Informatorium der Mutterschul, Leszno, 1633, quoted in Hadow 1933:24).
In 1640, the House of Commons invited Comenius to England to establish and participate in an agency for the promotion of learning. It was intended that by-products of this would be the publication of 'universal ' books and the setting up of schools for boys and girls. At the start of the Civil War in 1642 Comenius left England, but the plan was furthered by Samuel Hartlib with the backing of Oliver Cromwell.
There was much lively debate about the nature and purpose of education at this time. In his Ephemerides (miscellaneous jottings written between 1634 and 1660), Hartlib frequently mentions Comenius and other philosophers:
These 3 (Pell, Fundanius, Comenius) are very fit to bee imploied about the Reformation of Learning. The one urges mainly a perfect enumeration of all things. The other is all for that which hase an evident use in vita humana. The third is all for methodizing and contracting cutting of all verbosities and impertinencies whatsoever. These three being all reduced into one must needes make up a compleat direction. (Hartlib 1639)
Hartlib was fascinated with the idea of developing a 'pansophy ' - an encyclopaedia embracing the whole of human knowledge - and promulgated some surprisingly modern ideas: 'A great fault in teaching [is] that children are not made to learne themselves but are always taught ' (Hartlib 1639).
The ideas of Ascham and Comenius regarding the importance of a suitable education for young children - especially the use of play - were gaining ground. In 1647 William Petty, Physician-General in Cromwell 's army in Ireland, wrote:
We see Children do delight in Drums, Pipes, Fiddles, Guns made of Elder sticks, and bellowes noses, piped Keys, etc., painting Flags and Ensigns with Elder-berries and Corn poppy, making ships with Paper, and setting even Nut-shells a swimming, handling the tooles of workmen as soon as they turne their backs, and trying to worke themselves. (quoted in Nunes, undated) 'This seems to be one of the first descriptions of children playing, a topic previously not thought worthy of description ' (Nunes, undated).
Grammar schools
Meanwhile, the grammar schools, with their narrow curriculum consisting of little more than Greek and Latin, were unable (or unwilling) to meet the new demands for courses of training and education fitting boys for the life of the period.
After the execution of Charles I in 1649, the period of the Commonwealth (1649-1660) saw many proposals made for modifying the traditional courses in schools and universities. Unfortunately, following the Restoration of Charles II in 1660 there was 'a virtual abandonment of the interventionist role of the state in education provision ' (Chitty 2007:9). The liberal movement was checked and the endowed grammar schools tended to become even more conservative than before.
The policy of ecclesiastical uniformity adopted after 1660 further reinforced the inertia of the grammar schools. As a result, many youths were forced to travel to the continent for 'a training foreign both in aims and in means ' (Spens 1938:11).
The growing dissatisfaction with the traditional curriculum was well expressed in Locke 's Some Thoughts concerning Education (1693) in which he stressed the importance of a broader intellectual training, moral development and physical hardening (Spens 1938:13).
The grammar schools of the period can be categorised in three groups: * the nine leading schools, seven of them boarding institutions, maintained the traditional curriculum of the classics and mostly served 'the aristocracy and the squirearchy ' (Williams 1961:134) on a national basis; * most of the endowed grammar schools served their immediate localities and had a reasonably broad social base, but they, too, stuck mainly to the old curriculum; * the grammar schools which changed most significantly were those situated in the larger cities, serving the families of merchants and tradesmen. During the 18th century their social base widened and their curriculum developed, particularly in mathematics and the natural sciences.

Dissenting Academies
In the universities - notably at Oxford and Cambridge - there was a scandalous decline in teaching standards in the 17th century, though there was some 'serious development in mathematics and the sciences ' (Williams 1961:134). The proportion of students from poorer families - sons of farmers, craftsmen, small tradesmen - fell, though it was still quite substantial.
The most significant change in this period, however, was that the universities began to lose their monopoly over professional training. They still educated most of the clergy, but after the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 they began to discriminate against Nonconformists.
As a result, new vocational academies began to open at a remarkable rate, preparing students for the law and medicine, commerce, engineering, the arts and the armed services. These 'Dissenting ' or 'Nonconformist ' Academies, serving 'a different class ' (Williams 1961:133) and offering teaching at a higher secondary or university level, varied considerably in quality, but in the best 'a new definition of the content of a general education was worked out and put into practice ' (Williams 1961:134).
The Academies were established in considerable numbers from 1670 onwards, and while at first they were intended for the education of ministers of religion, they began to take in many lay pupils. They often provided a wide curriculum, including (in addition to the traditional Greek and Latin), English, modern languages, mathematics and a certain amount of natural science, principally physics. They were far less insular than the grammar schools and were influenced indirectly by educational developments in Scotland, Holland, Germany and the Protestant cantons of Switzerland (Spens 1938:12).
By the end of the 17th century there was much argument between the 'ancients ' and 'moderns ' over the changes that were gradually taking place in the curriculum, and an increasing demand for 'useful studies ' (Spens 1938:12).
Urbanisation
By the beginning of the 18th century, then, the curriculum was beginning to take on its modern form, with the addition of mathematics, geography, modern languages, and, crucially, the physical sciences.
For most children, however, education in England continued to be a 'haphazard system of parish and private adventure schools ' (Williams 1961:134), with preparatory schools serving the academies and older foundations.
But increasing urbanisation now began to create new problems which few seemed very keen to to do anything about.
The first significant attempt to meet the needs of children in the growing towns and cities was that of the Charity School movement, which began to develop around the end of the 17th century. This proved to be something of a mixed blessing, however, because the main aim of the Charity Schools was 'the moral rescue as opposed to the moral instruction of the poor ' (Williams 1961:135) and because they established the notion that elementary education was that appropriate to a particular social class.
There were many who didn 't approve of the idea of educating the masses at all: 'proponents of liberal political economy objected to all forms of education for the poor - and particularly Charity Schools - as dangerous and misconceived prototypes of benevolence ' (Chitty 2007:14). Too much schooling, they believed, 'would simply make the working poor discontented with their lot ' (Chitty 2004:4).
It was the Industrial Revolution, which gathered pace in the last quarter of the 18th century, which finally spurred the state into providing a national education system, because industry 'required much more than limited reading skills acquired through moral catechism ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:1). However, progress in establishing a public education system would prove to be painfully slow.

Chapter 2 : 1800-1860
Towards a state system of education

Industrialisation: the need for mass education
The industrial revolution
In 1751 the population of the British mainland stood at seven million. By 1821 - after seventy years of industrial revolution - it had reached fourteen million, and by 1871 it would reach twenty-six million. The rapid expansion in the overall population was matched by increases in the proportion of people who lived in towns and cities, and in the proportion of the population who were children.
England 's industrial revolution began in the second half of the 18th century. At first, new agricultural techniques freed workers from the land and made it possible to feed a large non-agricultural population.
In the 19th century, relative world peace, the availability of money, coal and iron ore, and the invention of the steam engine, all combined to facilitate the construction of factories for the mass production of goods. The factory system increased the division and specialisation of labour and resulted in large numbers of people moving to the new industrial cities, especially in the midlands and the north. It also resulted in low wages, slum housing and the use of child labour.
Thus the industrial revolution exacerbated the problems of a society 'divided into those with land or capital or profession and those with no wealth, no possessions and no privileges ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:2).
Perhaps the first sign that the state was beginning to acknowledge some responsibility for the conditions in which the poor - and particularly poor children - lived, was Peel 's Factory Act of 1802: 'An Act for the preservation of the health and morals of apprentices and others employed in cotton and other mills and cotton and other factories '. The Act required an employer to provide instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic during at least the first four years of the seven years of apprenticeship. Such secular instruction was to be part of the twelve hours of daily occupation beginning not earlier than 6am and ending not later than 9pm. Many of the apprentices were young pauper children who were frequently brought from distant workhouses to labour in the cotton mills.
Alongside the upheaval of industrialisation, the process of democratisation got under way with the Representation of the People Act 1832 (commonly known as the Reform Act), which gave a million people the right to vote.
This dramatic social, political and economic transformation served to reveal the utter inadequacy of England 's educational provision. A number of reports highlighted the deficiencies and called for more and better schools. One such report looked at 12,000 parishes in 1816, and found that 3,500 had no school, 3,000 had endowed schools of varying quality, and 5,500 had unendowed schools of even more variable quality.

New types of school
To fill the gaps, and to provide for England 's newly-industrialised and (partly) enfranchised society, various types of school began to be established to offer some basic education to the masses.
Sunday schools
The Sunday schools taught the poor - both children and adults - to read the Bible, but not to do writing or arithmetic or any of the 'more dangerous subjects ' which were 'less necessary or even harmful ' (Williams 1961:136).
Schools of industry 'Schools of industry ' were set up to provide the poor with manual training and elementary instruction. Such a school opened at Kendal in the Lake District in 1799. According to the Records of the Society for Bettering the Conditions of the Poor (III. 300-312): the children were taught reading and writing, geography and religion. Thirty of the older girls were employed in knitting, sewing, spinning and housework, and 36 younger girls were employed in knitting only. The older boys were taught shoemaking, and the younger boys prepared machinery for carding wool. The older girls assisted in preparing breakfast, which was provided in the school at a small weekly charge. They were also taught laundry work. The staff consisted of one schoolmaster, two teachers of spinning and knitting, and one teacher for shoemaking. (Hadow 1926:3-4)
In 1846 the Committee of Council on Education, under Sir James Kay-Shuttleworth, its Secretary from 1839 to 1849, began making grants to day schools of industry towards the provision of gardens, trade workshops, kitchens and wash-houses, and for gratuities to the masters who taught boys gardening and crafts and to the mistresses who gave 'satisfactory instruction in domestic economy ' (Hadow 1926:9).
Monitorial schools
In the rival systems of Lancaster and Bell, as in the Sunday schools, the teaching was based on the Bible, but using a new method which Bell called 'the steam engine of the moral world ' (quoted in Williams 1961:136). (Incidentally, Young and Hancock (1956:830) ascribe this quotation to Brougham, of whom more below).
Bell 's method involved the use of monitors and standard repetitive exercises so that one master could teach hundreds of children at the same time in one room. It was the industrialisation of the teaching process.
The curriculum in these monitorial schools was at first largely similar to that of the schools of industry - the 'three Rs ' (reading, writing and 'rithmetic) plus practical activities such as cobbling, tailoring, gardening, simple agricultural operations for boys, and spinning, sewing, knitting, lace-making and baking for girls.
A small group of thinkers led by Bentham and Place, impressed by developments in Scotland, Prussia, France and Holland, sought to establish higher grade elementary schools and monitorial secondary schools to meet the needs of the class immediately above the very poor. Unfortunately, Bentham 's 'Chrestomathic Scheme ' for the education of 7 to 14 year olds, devised around 1816, proved too encyclopaedic a course of studies, and the proposal met with little support.
Kay-Shuttleworth recognised the shortcomings of the monitorial schools and made an important contribution to the general development of primary education by introducing a modified form of the pupil teacher system, so preparing the way for a large supply of adult teachers (see Hadow 1931:7).
Infant schools
The first infant school was established by Robert Owen (1771-1858) in New Lanark, Scotland, in 1816. Children were admitted at the age of two and cared for while their parents were at work in the local cotton mills. The instruction of children under six was to consist of 'whatever might be supposed useful that they could understand, and much attention was devoted to singing, dancing, and playing ' (Hadow 1931:3).
Infant schools were thus at first partly 'minding schools ' for young children in industrial areas; but they also sought to promote the children 's physical well-being and to offer opportunities for their moral and social training and to provide some elementary instruction in the 3Rs, so that the children could make more rapid progress when they entered the monitorial school.
In 1818 a group led by the radical Whig politician Henry Brougham and the historian and philosopher James Mill (both Scots) established an infant school on Owen 's lines in London, and imported a teacher from New Lanark.
Owen 's ideas were developed by Samuel Wilderspin (1792-1866), who worked out a system of infant education which left its mark for many years on the curriculum and buildings of elementary schools. He had 'a mistaken zeal for the initiation of children at too early an age to formal instruction ' (Hadow 1931:3).
The Home and Colonial Institution (later known as the Home and Colonial Society) was founded in 1836 to establish infant schools and to train teachers for them. The principal promoter of the Society, Revd Charles Mayo (1792-1846), was much influenced by the work of Pestalozzi, the Swiss educational reformer.
Elementary schools
The question of how to organise children above the age of six in elementary schools was first addressed in Great Britain by David Stow (1793-1864), who began his work in Glasgow around 1824. He founded the Glasgow Normal School and became a significant figure in the development of educational theory and practice. He believed that in primary education the living voice was more important than the printed page, so he laid great stress on oral class teaching.
He also conceived a graded system of elementary education, with an initiatory department for children of two or three to six years of age, and a juvenile department for children between the ages of six and 14, itself divided into junior and senior divisions. He described this scheme in his 1836 book Training System of Education for the Moral and Intellectual Elevation of Youth, especially in large Towns and Manufacturing Villages.
There were several practical objections to his system in the first half of the 19th century: it was costly; the school life of most children was short; and teachers could not be obtained in sufficient numbers. As a result, few schools were established using Stow 's system, and the usual arrangement was an infant department for children up to the age of six, and a senior department for 6-12 year olds.
The small 'all-age ' school for children between 6 and 12 often developed into a school with three or more classes, in which one teacher took a section for an oral lesson, while assistant teachers took other sections for written work in arithmetic and for exercises in reading, dictation and composition. This system became common after about 1856 (see Hadow 1931:7).
Impressed by the practical work he had seen in Swiss schools, Kay-Shuttleworth attempted to introduce more practical instruction into England 's elementary schools. In the Regulations for the education of pupil teachers and stipendiary monitors, which he submitted to the Privy Council in December 1846, it was provided that pupil teachers at the end of their fourth year should be examined by the Inspector 'in the first steps in mensuration with practical illustrations, and in the elements of land surveying and levelling '. The women pupil-teachers in every year of their course were expected 'to show increased skill as seamstresses, and teachers of sewing, knitting, etc ' (see Hadow 1926:8-9).
However, Kay-Shuttleworth 's efforts had little effect on the great mass of elementary schools, most of which were set up and run by university graduates with literary and scientific interests. They wanted more culture in the schools, and there was a noticeable tendency to emphasise the superiority of a general non-manual education over any sort of vocational training such as that given in the schools of industry.
There was another reason why vocational training took second place to academic studies: it was soon discovered that any effective form of practical instruction cost much more than the teaching of the three Rs. Moreover, it was almost impossible to arrange for such instruction in large classes taught by monitors. Owing to the growth of commerce and sea-borne trade in the mid 19th century there was a great demand for clerks, and in schools where advanced work for older pupils was attempted it was found that it was much easier to train them for clerical work than for manual occupations. Matthew Arnold, writing about 1858, considered that the humane studies in the upper classes of the best elementary schools were by far the most interesting part of the curriculum.
Technical education
Because the industrial revolution had given Britain a head start in world trade, the government saw no reason why the state should be involved in the training of industrial recruits. So modernisation of the old apprenticeship system was left to voluntary agencies. Several Mechanics ' Institutes opened in the mid 1820s and by 1850 there were 610 such Institutes in England and 12 in Wales, with a total membership of over 600,000.
The state did establish a 'Normal School of Design ' in London in 1837 and made some annual grants for the maintenance of some provincial schools of design from 1841 onwards, but otherwise it did nothing until the Great Exhibition of 1851 drew public attention to the lack of facilities for technical education in England compared with those provided in various continental countries.
So in 1852 a Department of Practical Art was created under the Board of Trade. In 1856 this was moved into the Education Department as the Department of Science and Art, and in 1859 it began setting examinations - for both teachers and students - in branches of science related to industrial occupations (see Spens 1938:51).

Hostility to mass education
All the schools described above were established by individuals and groups who believed in - and campaigned for - mass education. But they found themselves up against vicious hostility to the very idea of educating the poor. One Justice of the Peace, for example, opined in 1807 that:
It is doubtless desirable that the poor should be generally instructed in reading, if it were only for the best of purposes - that they may read the Scriptures. As to writing and arithmetic, it may be apprehended that such a degree of knowledge would produce in them a disrelish for the laborious occupations of life. (quoted in Williams 1961:135)
And when the Parochial Schools Bill of 1807 was debated in the Commons, Tory MP Davies Giddy warned the House that:
However specious in theory the project might be of giving education to the labouring classes of the poor, it would, in effect, be found to be prejudicial to their morals and happiness; it would teach them to despise their lot in life, instead of making them good servants in agriculture and other laborious employments to which their rank in society had destined them; instead of teaching them the virtue of subordination, it would render them factious and refractory, as is evident in the manufacturing counties; it would enable them to read seditious pamphlets, vicious books and publications against Christianity; it would render them insolent to their superiors; and, in a few years, the result would be that the legislature would find it necessary to direct the strong arm of power towards them and to furnish the executive magistrates with more vigorous powers than are now in force. Besides, if this Bill were to pass into law, it would go to burthen the country with a most enormous and incalculable expense, and to load the industrious orders with still heavier imposts. (Hansard, House of Commons, Vol. 9, Col. 798, 13 July 1807, quoted in Chitty 2007:15-16)
In some respects things were even worse than in previous centuries. Although the poor had never been educated en masse, there had been parishes where exceptional provision was made, and a few able boys from poor homes had even been offered university places. But by the start of the 19th century, education was organised, like English society as a whole, on a more rigid class basis. The result was a new kind of class-determined education. Higher education became a virtual monopoly, excluding the new working class, and the idea of universal education, except within the narrow limits of 'moral rescue ', was widely opposed as a matter of principle. (Williams 1961:136)
But the calls for more and better education were increasing in number and volume. They were endorsed by school inspectors. In reports for 1847 (quoted in Hadow 1926:8), for example, two inspectors commented:
I adhere, however, to the opinion which I formerly expressed, and which I now repeat, having had the advantage of conversing with many of the most experienced supporters of education upon the subject, that in most country districts it would be advisable to have a preparatory school in each village, and a completely organised school, under the charge of able teachers, in a central locality. (Rev FC Cook) and I think it very desirable that district schools should be formed for three, four, or five parishes, wherein, under an efficient master with apprentices, a superior education may be provided not only for the elder children of labourers, but also for such of the farmers, small tradesmen, and mechanics, as may choose to avail themselves of it. (Rev HW Bellairs)

Parliamentary grants for school buildings
Some financial assistance to schools from the local rates had been permitted in a few places in the 18th century. Now, from around 1830, national funds began to be made available for school building.
Five School Sites Acts were passed between 1841 and 1852, designed to facilitate the purchase of land for school buildings and to make 'Parliamentary Grants for the Education of the Poor '.
Downloads:
* School Sites Act 1841 (pdf text 324kb) * School Sites Act 1844 (pdf text 136kb) * School Sites Act 1849 (pdf text 128kb) * School Sites Act 1851 (pdf text 60kb) * School Sites Act 1852 (pdf text 72kb)
These were followed by the 1855 School Grants Act (14 August 1855) which sought 'to render more secure the Conditions upon which Money is advanced out of the Parliamentary Grant for the Purposes of Education '. It stated that, where Parliament had made grants for land, or for the construction, enlargement or repair of school buildings, they were not to be sold, exchanged or mortgaged without the written consent of the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
 Download the School Grants Act 1855 (pdf text 76kb).
Thus, despite the hostility to universal education, new schools were being built and school attendance was rising. In 1816, 875,000 of the country 's 1.5m children 'attended a school of some kind for some period ' (Williams 1961:136). By 1835 the figure was 1.45m out of 1.75m. If this sounds fairly impressive, it should be noted that by 1835 the average duration of school attendance was just one year.
By 1851 the average length of school attendance had risen to two years, and in 1861 an estimated 2.5m children out of 2.75m received some form of schooling, 'though still of very mixed quality and with the majority leaving before they were eleven ' (Williams 1961:137).
Proportion of children in school 1816 - 1861

Figures from Williams 1961:136-137

The involvement of the churches
The Church of England regarded education for all children as desirable. This was not a unanimously held view, however - influential taxpayers and those who benefited from employing children were less enthusiastic. But despite the doubters, the National Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor in the Principles of the Established Church (which, for obvious reasons, became generally known as the National Society) was founded in 1811. Its aim was to provide a school in every parish. Local clergy 'often took on this initiative wholeheartedly ' (Gates 2005:16), with or without the benefit of special donations. 'The inclusion of the fourth "R" of religion, alongside the other three (reading, writing and 'rithmetic), was simply assumed as right. It took the form of the Bible, catechism and prayer book services ' (Gates 2005:16).
Other Christians, along with liberal Anglicans and some Roman Catholics and Jews, preferred a less denominational approach and in 1814 founded the British and Foreign School Society for the Education of the Labouring and Manufacturing Classes of Society of Every Religious Persuasion (the British and Foreign School Society). Its schools drew on the pioneering work of the Quaker Joseph Lancaster. They taught Scripture and general Christian principles in a non-denominational form.
A third group, who wanted religion kept out of schools altogether, formed a third organisation, the Central Society of Education, in 1836. Unfortunately, they represented a tiny minority, and 'it was the tussling between the other two [the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society] that delayed the introduction of a fully comprehensive school system funded by public taxation ' (Gates 2005:16).
The government was unwilling to intervene or take the lead for fear of appearing to promote one group over the other, so in 1833 it began giving annual grants towards school provision to both the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society. From 1846 similar grants were given to Baptists and Congregationalists (subject to an agreement about the reading of Scripture), from 1847 to Wesleyan Methodists and the Catholic Poor School Committee, and in 1853 to the Manchester Jewish community (subject to an agreement about the reading of at least part of the Bible).
The Church of England resisted the introduction of a 'conscience clause ' which would have allowed children of Dissenters to attend its schools without fear of religious offence, and a ruling that only the Authorised Version of the Bible was acceptable delayed the granting of aid to RC schools. The 1861 Newcastle Report (of which more in the next chapter) noted the problems these rulings caused in areas where there was only one school.

The education of the upper classes
Preparatory schools
The upper classes did not, of course, send their sons to elementary schools, but to private preparatory schools, where they were prepared for education at the great English public schools.
The term 'preparatory ' was never legally established but has been invested by tradition with a very precise and important meaning which is still current and influential. In one sense indeed it is nearer to the developmental than to the elementary tradition, for it does at least take some account of sequence rather than of social status as a principle of differentiation. But at the same time it implies in name what 'junior elementary ' often implied in fact, that the education of younger children is mainly to be conceived in terms of preparation for the later stages of education rather than as a stage in its own right. (Blyth 1965:30)
The preparatory tradition became embedded in the upper and middle classes of English society. Its aim was (and still is) the education of younger children for what follows. 'For prep-school boys indeed, the next phase in the life cycle was often regarded as its zenith, with regrettable results ' (Blyth 1965:34).

Resistance to change
Just as there was resistance to the very idea of educating England 's lower classes, there was resistance, too, to the notion that the curriculum in schools for the middle and upper classes should be modernised. Protests at the restricted curriculum offered in these schools were mostly ignored or defeated.
In 1805, for example, Lord Eldon accepted Dr Johnson 's definition of a grammar school as a school in which the learned languages were grammatically taught, and ruled in the Court of Chancery that it was illegal for the governors of Leeds Grammar School to spend endowment funds on teaching modern and commercial subjects. His judgement was upheld by subsequent decisions, and this state of affairs continued until the passing of the 1840 Grammar School Act (7 August 1840).
The 'great ' public schools were the least willing to adapt and modernise. The following description of attitudes to the curriculum at these schools in the 1820s was given by James Pillans (1778-1864), Professor of Humanity at Edinburgh University, who was for some time a private tutor at Eton. In Contributions to the Cause of Education (1856:271) he wrote:
In the great schools of England - Eton, Westminster, Winchester and Harrow, where the majority of English youth who receive a liberal and high professional education are brought up - the course of instruction has for ages been confined so exclusively to Greek and Latin that most of the pupils quit them not only ignorant of, but with a considerable disrelish and contempt for, every branch of literature and scientific equipment, except the dead languages. It may be said that there are in the immediate neighbourhood of the College, teachers of Mathematics, Writing, French and other accomplishments to whom parents have the option of sending their sons. But as these masters are extra-scholastic - mere appendages, not an integral part of the establishment - and as neither they nor the branches of knowledge they proffer to teach are recognised in the scheme of school business, it requires but little acquaintance with the nature of boys to be aware, that the disrespect in which teachers so situated are uniformly held extends, in young minds, to the subjects taught and is apt to create a rooted dislike to a kind of instruction which they look upon as a work of supererogation. And this, we venture to say, is all but the universal feeling at Eton. (quoted in Spens 1938:18)
Pressure of public opinion persuaded some of the old local foundations to find ways of enlarging the curriculum, sometimes by charging fees for the non-classical subjects. For example, a report by the head master of Newcastle-on-Tyne Free Grammar School in 1838 shows that the school was teaching, in addition to Classics, 'French, Writing, English Grammar and Composition, History and Chronology, Geography and the use of the globes, practical and mental Arithmetic, Euclid, Algebra, Trigonometry, Analytical Geometry and Mechanics, etc. ' French was taught without extra charge; the fees for instruction in the other subjects were £1 a quarter.
Concerns about the traditional curriculum were reflected in the publications of the Central Society of Education. In Education Reform, published in 1837, Thomas Wyse (1791-1862) gave a vivid picture of the state of secondary education at the time:
In no country is the strife between the new and the old educations more vehement - the education which deals with mind as spirit and that which deals with it as matter. In no country are there greater anomalies - greater differences not merely in the means, but in the ends of education ... it runs through the entire system. (quoted in Spens 1938:18-19)
He went on:
If we find in the country and town schools little preparation for occupations, still less for the future agriculturalist or mechanic, we find in the Grammar Schools much greater defects. The middle class in all its sections, except the more learned professions, finds no instruction which can suit its special middle class wants. They are fed with the dry husks of ancient learning when they should be taking sound and substantial food from the great treasury of modern discovery. The applications of chemical and mechanical science to everyday wants - such a study of history as will show the progress of civilisation - and such a knowledge of public economy in the large sense of the term as will guard them against the delusions of political fanatics and knaves, and lead to a due understanding of their position in society, are all subjects worth as much labour and enquiry to that great body, as a little Latin learnt in a very imperfect manner, with some scraps of Greek to boot - the usual stunted course of most of our Grammar Schools. (quoted in Spens 1938:19)

The beginnings of change
But changes began to be made, led by head masters like Samuel Butler at Shrewsbury from 1798 to 1836 and Thomas Arnold at Rugby from 1828 to 1841.
At Shrewsbury, English, geography, algebra, Euclid and English history formed part of the ordinary work of the Fifth and Sixth Forms. Butler attached much importance to private reading, and he also introduced promotion by merit and periodical school examinations for the upper forms.
Arnold 's main aim was 'the re-establishment of social purpose, the education of Christian gentlemen ' (Williams 1961:137). In the Sixth Form, the Classics were still the foundation of the curriculum, but French and mathematics (including arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and trigonometry), English, German, ancient history and modern European history were also taught.
Arnold 's work at Rugby (which was featured in Thomas Hughes ' 1857 novel Tom Brown 's Schooldays) restored the prestige of the large boarding schools among the middle class, who welcomed the social and moral training which they offered. The demand for more boarding schools of the public school type coincided with the rapid increase in the wealth of the middle classes and the construction of the railways.
As a result, a considerable number of new boarding schools were established, the most famous of which were Cheltenham College (1841), Marlborough College (1843), Rossall School (1844), Radley College (1847), Wellington College (1853), Epsom College (1855), Bradfield College, (1859), Haileybury (1862), Clifton College (1862), Malvern School (1863) and Bath College (1867). These institutions, described in the Report of the Public Schools Commission (1864) as proprietary schools, were designed to make boarding education accessible to those sections of the middle class who found difficulty in paying the fees of the older and more expensive public schools.
To the same end, in 1848 Canon Nathaniel Woodard (1811-1891) founded the Woodard Society to provide Anglican boarding schools for the various sections of the middle class: Lancing for the gentry, Hurstpierpoint for the upper middle class and Ardingly for the lower middle class.
This resurgence of interest in boarding schools slowed the development of proprietary day schools, which had begun to be established in the 1820s. Among the most important day schools of this type were the Liverpool Institute (1825), King 's College School (1829), University College School (1830), Blackheath Proprietary School (1831), the City of London School (1837) and Liverpool College (1840).
Nonconformists had been admitted to the teaching profession since 1779 but were still excluded from the universities and the public schools. So in 1807 Congregationalists founded Mill Hill School, organised on public school lines but with a broader curriculum. In addition to classics, the school course comprised mathematics, including algebra, Euclid and trigonometry; French, taught by a Frenchman; lectures on natural and experimental philosophy; drawing, taught by 'an artist of respectability '; and history, English reading, elocution and ancient and modern geography.
The Society of Friends (Quakers) also established a number of schools in the first half of the 19th century. In these, special attention was paid to the study of English and particularly to oral reading and composition, and the pupils were frequently required to write descriptions of excursions, lectures and other incidents of school life. Considerable attention was also given to natural history, elementary natural science, geography and manual work of various kinds (see Spens 1938:20).
These new schools were not restricted by the statutes of founders and in most cases had no endowments, so they were obliged - and were able - to respond to popular needs and offer an education which was partly liberal but also vocational (see Spens 1938:24).

A broader curriculum
By the 1840s England had around 700 private grammar schools and more than 2,000 endowed schools. The old grammar schools still largely served the upper classes and obtained their pupils from the preparatory schools. Both they and the endowed schools had, as we have seen, successfully resisted attempts to reform their curricula, despite the great advances that had been made in science and the development of rich vernacular literatures in the countries of western Europe.
But change was now being forced upon them in a variety of ways, including the establishment of the Civil Service Commission and the Board of Military Education, which compelled the schools to give greater priority to mathematics and modern languages.
Cheltenham College, for example, had from its opening in 1841 a Modern (or Military and Civil) Department intended primarily to prepare boys for the entrance examinations for Woolwich and Sandhurst, for appointments in government offices, for engineering, or for commercial life. The main study was mathematics, there was some Latin but no Greek, natural science was introduced, and greater stress was laid on modern languages. The curriculum, even for the lower forms, was surprisingly broad, and included mathematics, Latin, English, history, geography, French, German, Hindustani, physical science, drawing, fortification and surveying.
A recognition of the importance of English and aesthetic subjects, especially music and art, was a feature of the curriculum at Uppingham School, where Edward Thring was head master from 1853 to 1887. Classics, English composition and grammar, Scripture, history and geography were taught in the morning; in the afternoon the boys studied music and one or two optional subjects such as French, German, chemistry, carpentry, turning and drawing. Thring was one of the first heads to give music a prominent place in the curriculum. He made attendance at singing classes and music lessons compulsory and subject to the same discipline as any regular school subject. He also attached great importance to systematic physical exercises and to hobbies; the Uppingham gymnasium, opened in 1859, was the first of its kind in any English public school, as were also the workshops, laboratories, school garden, and aviary.
By the 1850s, then, the curriculum - in both private and endowed schools - was changing, partly because of parental pressure and partly in response to the requirements of various external examinations, such as the London Matriculation Examination, the examinations for the Indian Civil Service (first held in 1855), the Oxford Local Examinations (from 1857), the Cambridge Local Examinations (from 1858), and the Examinations of the College of Preceptors, which was established in 1846 for the promotion of middle class education and for the training and certification of teachers.
A number of writers were also urging curriculum reform.
In a series of articles written between 1854 and 1859 (and issued in book form in 1859) Herbert Spencer attacked the existing curriculum. He argued that natural science should form the basis of formal education and strongly advocated systematic physical training.
A volume of Essays on a Liberal Education, published in 1867 under the editorship of Dean Farrar, then assistant master at Harrow, also reflected the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional curriculum. Among the contributors, Professor Henry Sidgwick and Canon JM Wilson (science master at Rugby) stressed the importance of science.
And in his Essays, published in the 1860s and 70s, Professor TH Huxley advocated a curriculum consisting of natural science, the theory of morals and of political and social life, history and geography, English literature and translations of the greatest foreign writers, English composition, drawing, and either music or painting.

Girls ' education
For many centuries, a girl 's education - if she was lucky enough to have one at all - consisted of religious instruction, reading, writing and grammar, and the occasional homecraft such as spinning. In the 18th century French, Italian, music and drawing were sometimes added in the few boarding schools open to girls.
Early in the 19th century, Sydney Smith wrote:
The system of female education as it now stands aims only at embellishing a few years of life which are, in themselves, so full of grace and happiness that they hardly want it, and then leaves the rest a miserable prey to idle insignificance. (quoted in Hadow 1923:22)
At the beginning of the Victorian era, then, the education of women was scanty, superficial and incoherent. Many girls were instructed by ill-trained private governesses; and the numerous private schools for girls, which were mostly boarding schools, were probably even worse than those described in 1868 in the report of the Schools Inquiry Commission, where the ordinary course of instruction for girls was characterised as being very narrow and unscientific.
In her autobiography, Miss Cobbe described one of the fashionable girls ' schools in Brighton in about 1850, where the fees were £500 a year. The girls worked all day: during the one hour 's walk in the open air they recited French, German and Italian verbs, and for the remainder of the day they were reading or reciting one of these languages or practising accomplishments. Music, dancing and 'calisthenics ' (strengthening and beautifying exercises) were highly valued subjects; writing and arithmetic were not. The main aim was social display.
In Macmillan 's Magazine for October 1866, Anne Clough described the curriculum in ordinary girls ' schools for the lower middle class: 'A few dry facts are taught, but the life and spirit are too often left out and there is a monotony in girls ' education which is very dulling to the intellect ' (quoted in Hadow 1923:23). 'In general it may safely be said that the traditional education for girls up to about 1845 accentuated the differences between the sexes ' (Hadow 1923:23).
A movement for better education for girls and women began in 1843 with the foundation of the Governesses ' Benevolent Institution, which aimed to provide a system of examinations and certificates for governesses.
This led to the foundation of Queen 's College in Harley Street in 1848, where the leaders of the movement, such as the Revd FD Maurice, adopted the traditional boys ' curriculum and endeavoured to hand it on to the women they taught. In a volume of introductory lectures delivered at Queen 's College and published in 1849, the list of subjects is given as English, French, German, Latin, Italian, History, Geography, Natural Philosophy, Methods of Teaching, Theology, Vocal Music, Harmony, Fine Arts, and Mathematics. Each subject was taught by a specialist, who explained its purpose and principles. Another women 's college was founded at Bedford in 1849.
Two notable pioneers in the campaign for girls ' education were Miss Beale and Miss Buss, both of whom studied at Queen 's College. Miss Beale was appointed as mistress in the Clergy Daughters ' School at Casterton in 1857, where she was expected to teach Scripture, mathematics, geography, English literature and composition, French, German, Latin, and Italian. A year later she moved to Cheltenham Ladies ' College (which had opened in 1853), where she reorganised the school. Miss Buss founded North London Collegiate School in 1850. Both gave evidence to the Schools Inquiry Commission. Miss Buss told the Commissioners: 'I am sure girls can learn anything they are taught in an interesting manner and for which they have a motive to work ' (quoted in Hadow 1923:24-5).

Special educational needs
Note: The information in this section is taken from chapter 2 (pages 8-9) of the 1978 Warnock Report Special Educational Needs, which itself was largely based on DG Pritchard 's 1963 book Education and the Handicapped 1760-1960.
Provision for the blind
The first school for the blind in Great Britain was the 'School of Instruction for the Indigent Blind ' established by Henry Dannett in Liverpool in 1791. It offered training in music and manual crafts for children and adults of both sexes. There was no education as such: child labour was the rule and pupils were taught to earn a living.
The Liverpool foundation was quickly followed by other private ventures: the Asylum for the Industrious Blind at Edinburgh (1793), the Asylum for the Blind at Bristol (1793), the School for the Indigent Blind in London (1800) and the Asylum and School for the Indigent Blind at Norwich (1805). As at Liverpool, these institutions were solely concerned to provide vocational training for future employment and relied on the profits from their workshops.
Schools whose courses included a genuinely educational element began to be established in the 1830s. The Yorkshire School for the Blind (1835) taught arithmetic, reading and writing as part of vocational training; while at the school established by the London Society for Teaching the Blind to Read (1838) a general education was seen as the foundation for subsequent training in manual skills. The Society later opened branches in Exeter and Nottingham.
The General Institution for the Blind at Birmingham (1847) combined industrial training with a broad curriculum in general subjects; and after at first concentrating on training, Henshaw 's Blind Asylum at Manchester (1838) eventually developed a thriving school with educational objectives.
The first senior school for the blind was the College for the Blind Sons of Gentlemen founded at Worcester in 1866.
Despite these developments, by 1870 there were still only a dozen or so institutions for the blind: most of these were training centres and only a small proportion of the blind benefited from them.

Provision for the deaf
Thomas Braidwood 's Academy for the Deaf and Dumb, opened in Edinburgh in the early 1760s, was the first school for the deaf in Great Britain. It taught a handful of selected paying pupils to speak and read.
In 1783 the Academy moved to London, where in 1792 the first English school for the deaf opened with six children under the direction of Braidwood 's nephew. This Asylum for the Support and Education of the Deaf and Dumb Children of the Poor flourished: in 1809 it moved to larger buildings and later opened a branch at Margate.
In 1814 an Institution for the Instruction of the Deaf and Dumb opened in Edgbaston with Thomas Braidwood 's grandson (also Thomas) as the teacher.
More schools for the deaf followed: at Liverpool, Manchester, Exeter and Doncaster in the 1820s; at Aberystwyth in 1847; and in Edinburgh (Donaldson 's Hospital) in 1851.
These early institutions for the deaf - like those for the blind - were protective places: there was little or no contact with the outside world. The education they provided was limited, and despite the training they offered, many of their inmates subsequently failed to find employment and ended up begging.
 For more on the history of the education of the deaf, see the British Deaf History Society website.

Provision for the physically handicapped
The first separate educational provision for physically handicapped children was the Cripples Home and Industrial School for Girls, founded at Marylebone in 1851. A Home for Crippled Boys followed at Kensington in 1865.
Like the schools for the blind and deaf, the priority of these institutions was to teach a trade: any education provided was rudimentary. The children came mainly from poor homes and contributed to their own support by making goods for sale. Little further was done for the physically handicapped until 1890.

Provision for the mentally defective
Before the middle of the 19th century so-called mentally defective children who required custodial care were placed in workhouses and infirmaries. The first specific provision made for them was the Asylum for Idiots established at Highgate in 1847. Like the institutions for the blind and deaf, the Asylum took adults as well as children.
By 1870 there were five asylums, only three of which claimed to provide education. Admission was generally by election or payment. In the same year the newly created Metropolitan Asylum Board established all-age asylums at Caterham, Leavesden and Hampstead. The children were later separated from the adults, and those who were considered to be educable followed a programme of simple manual work and formal teaching. The staff were untrained and classes were very large.
In Scotland, the first establishment for the education of 'imbeciles ' was set up at Baldovan in Dundee in 1852 and later became Strathmartine Hospital. An institution for 'defectives ' was founded later in Edinburgh: it transferred to a site in Larbert in 1863 and later became the Royal Scottish National Hospital. The Lunacy (Scotland) Act of 1862 recognised the needs of the mentally handicapped and authorised the granting of licences to charitable institutions established for the care and training of imbecile children.

Higher education
The institution of public examinations, in Cambridge from the 18th century and in Oxford from the early 19th, forced the two universities to improve the quality of their teaching and, as a result, they began to recover their prestige.
By the 1830s the exam system for university entrance was firmly established. While this had the effect of raising academic standards within the institutions, it also further restricted university entrance to those from a narrow social class.

1825 Universities Act
But it wasn 't just the quality of their teaching they needed to improve, it was also, apparently, the behaviour of their students. Thus the 1825 Universities Act (5 July 1825) authorised the Chancellors of Oxford and Cambridge to appoint Constables to help maintain 'peace and good order ' in the university precincts.
In Oxford, prostitution was apparently also a problem. Section III of the Act declared that: every common Prostitute and Night-walker, found wandering in any Public Walk, Street, or Highway, within the Precincts of the said University of Oxford, and not giving a satisfactory Account of herself, shall be deemed an idle and disorderly Person ... and shall and may be apprehended and dealt with accordingly.

Chapter 3 : 1860-1900
Class divisions

Three classes - three commissions
Unlike the United States, which by the 1830s was establishing a public school system based on a common education for all its citizens, England, as we have seen, had allowed a divided school system to develop in line with its class structure.
Regrettably, this class-based system was further exacerbated by three national education commissions, whose reports - and the Acts which followed them - each related to provision for a particular social class: * the Clarendon Report (1864) focused on the nine 'great ' public (ie private) schools and led to the 1868 Public Schools Act; * the Taunton Report (1868) (produced by the Schools Inquiry Commission) and the Endowed Schools Act of 1869 dealt with separate institutions for the middle classes; * the Newcastle Report (1861) and the 1870 Elementary Education Act made provision for schools for the masses.

1864 Clarendon Report
The Royal Commission on the Public Schools was set up in 1861 'to inquire into the Revenue and Management of Certain Colleges and Schools and the studies pursued and instruction given there '. Its report made recommendations relating to the government, management and curriculum of the nine ancient foundations - Eton, Winchester, Westminster, Charterhouse, St Paul 's, Merchant Taylors ', Harrow, Rugby and Shrewsbury. It effectively established these as a separate class of 'public schools ' and recommended that the curriculum should consist of classics, mathematics, a modern language, two natural sciences, history, geography, drawing, and music.
The Commission set out the powers and responsibilities of the governing bodies and head masters of the schools.
The governors ' powers were to include:
The management of the property of the school and of its revenues, from whatever source derived, the control of its expenditure, the appointment and dismissal of the Head Master, the regulation of the boarding houses, of fees and charges, of Masters ' stipends, of the terms of admission to the school, and of the times and length of the vacations; the supervision of the general treatment of the boys, and all arrangements bearing on the sanitary condition of the school. (Clarendon page 6, quoted in Taylor 1977:147)
Regarding the head masters ' responsibility for discipline and teaching, the Commission said: the Head Master should be as far as possible unfettered. Details ... such as the division of classes, the school hours and school books, the holidays and half-holidays during the school terms, belong properly to him ... and the appointment and dismissal of Assistant Masters, the measures necessary for maintaining discipline, and the general direction of the course and methods, which it is his duty to conduct and his business to understand thoroughly, had better be left in his hands. (Clarendon page 6, quoted in Taylor 1977:147)
However, the Commission added an important qualification: 'The introduction of a new branch of study, or the suppression of one already established, and the relative degrees of weight to be assigned to different branches, are matters respecting which a better judgement is likely to be formed by such a body of Governors as we have suggested, men conversant with the requirements of public and professional life and acquainted with the general progress of science and literature, than by a single person, however able and accomplished, whose views may be more circumscribed and whose mind is liable to be unduly pressed by difficulties of detail. What should be taught, and what importance should be given to each subject are therefore questions for the Governing Body; how to teach is a question for the Head Master. (Clarendon page 6, quoted in Taylor 1977:147)

1868 Public Schools Act
The Clarendon Report 's proposals formed the basis for the Public Schools Act 1868 (31 July 1868), which did away with many of the old foundation statutes and instituted new governing bodies for the schools, 'with a view to promote their greater Efficiency, and to carry into effect the main Objects of the Founders thereof '. (Incidentally, the Act applied only to seven of the nine schools named above - St Paul 's and Merchant Taylors ' are not mentioned).
Section 12 of the Act empowered the new governors to make decisions relating to: * admissions to the school; * provision of board and lodging; * fees and charges; * chapel services and attendance; * term and holiday dates; * sanitary conditions; * new branches of study; * employment of masters; * facilities for boys whose parents wished to withdraw them from religious instruction; * provision of places for non-boarders; and * the powers of the head master.
It provided for the appointment of a number of named 'Special Commissioners ' (15-19) who were empowered to oversee the work of the schools and to make statutes and regulations if the governing bodies failed to do so.
 Download the Public Schools Act 1868 (pdf image 2.8mb).
1868 Taunton Report
In 1864 the Schools Inquiry Commission, under the chairmanship of Lord Taunton, was appointed to inquire into the education in secondary schools as a whole: that is, all those schools which lay between the nine great public schools covered by the Clarendon Commission and 'the education of boys and girls of the labouring class ' which had been dealt with by the Newcastle Commission (of which more below). Its brief was 'to consider and report what measures (if any) are required for the improvement of such education, having especial regard to all endowments applicable or which can rightly be made applicable thereto '.
The Commissioners investigated 782 grammar schools, plus some proprietary and private schools. They found that provision of secondary education was poor and unevenly distributed. Two thirds of English towns had no secondary schools of any kind and in the remaining third 'there were marked differences of quality ' (Williams 1961:138). There seemed to be no clear conception of the purpose of secondary education, nor was there any appropriate differentiation of courses adapted to the needs of pupils who left school at different ages.
The Commissioners recommended the establishment of a national system of secondary education based on the existing endowed schools. Their report clearly illustrated the accepted class divisions in English society at the time. It envisaged three grades of secondary education in separate schools: * first-grade schools with a leaving age of 18 or 19 would provide a 'liberal education ' - including Latin and Greek - to prepare upper and upper-middle class boys for the universities and the older professions; * second-grade schools with a leaving age of 16 or 17 would teach two modern languages besides Latin to prepare middle class boys for the army, the newer professions and departments of the Civil Service; and * third-grade schools with a leaving age of 14 or 15 would teach the elements of French and Latin to lower middle class boys, who would be expected to become 'small tenant farmers, small tradesmen, and superior artisans '. (The Commissioners treated these schools as secondary schools because the Elementary School Code of 1860 had fixed the leaving age for elementary schools at 12).
Movement up a grade might be possible for a few, and if links could be established between third grade secondary schools and elementary schools, some sons of labourers might be able to go on to secondary education.
It is clear from these recommendations that secondary schools were still regarded as designed primarily for the middle class, and that public opinion had not yet come to realise the value of physical and chemical science for the working classes nor the possibility that farmers ' sons could profit by a scientific education with an agricultural bias. (Hadow 1923:20)
The Commissioners argued that no curriculum could be complete without natural science, and they recommended that a start should be made with the outlines of physical geography, 'which requires no apparatus but good maps ' (Schools Inquiry Commission Report page 35, quoted in Hadow 1923:20).
The Commissioners were also profoundly concerned about the provision of education for girls - there were only thirteen girls ' secondary schools in the whole of England - and they dealt with the matter in Volume 1 Chapter 6 of their Report. They were not impressed by what they found: 'It cannot be denied that the picture brought before us of the state of Middle Class Female Education is, on the whole, unfavourable. '
Want of thoroughness and foundation; want of system; slovenliness and showy superficiality; inattention to rudiments; undue time given to accomplishments, and those not taught intelligently or in any scientific manner; want of organisation - these may sufficiently indicate the character of the complaints we have received, in their most general aspect.
 Read the Schools Inquiry Commission 's report on Girls ' Schools.
1869 Endowed Schools Act
The resulting 1869 Endowed Schools Act (2 August 1869) made clear that its provisions did not apply to the seven schools named in the 1868 Public Schools Act, but to all other schools 'wholly or partly maintained by means of any endowment ' (Section 6).
It created the Endowed Schools Commission and gave its members considerable powers and duties. They were to draw up new schemes of government for the endowed schools and were to extend the benefits of endowments to girls 'as far as conveniently may be ' (12). Parents were to be given the right to withdraw their children from religious worship or instruction and to make a complaint in the case of a teacher who 'teaches systematically and persistently any particular religious doctrine ' in other lessons of the curriculum (15).
The Endowed Schools Commission was merged into the Charity Commission in 1874.
(See also the 1868 Endowed Schools Act: details below in Other legislation).
1861 Newcastle Report
The Royal Commission on the state of popular education in England, under the chairmanship of the Duke of Newcastle, was appointed in 1858 'To inquire into the state of public education in England and to consider and report what measures, if any, are required for the extension of sound and cheap elementary instruction to all classes of the people. '
The Commission published its six volume report in 1861. The following extracts are from The Royal Commission on the state of popular education in England, Parliamentary Papers, 1861, XXI. p. 293-328; as reprinted in Young and Hancock 1956 p. 891-97.
The Commission noted that
The whole population of England and Wales, as estimated by the Registrar-General in the summer of 1858, amounted to 19,523,103. The number of children whose names ought, at the same date, to have been on the school books, in order that all might receive some education, was 2,655,767. The number we found to be actually on the books was 2,535,462, thus leaving 120,305 children without any school instruction whatever. The proportion, therefore, of scholars in week-day schools of all kinds to the entire population was 1 in 7.7 or 12.99 per cent. Of these 321,768 are estimated to have been above the condition of such as are commonly comprehended in the expression 'poorer classes ', and hence are beyond the range of our present inquiry. Deducting these from the whole number of children on the books of some school, we find that 2,213,694 children belonging to the poorer classes were, when our statistics were collected and compiled, receiving elementary instruction in day schools. Looking, therefore, at mere numbers as indicating the state of popular education in England and Wales, the proportion of children receiving instruction to the whole population is, in our opinion, nearly as high as can be reasonably expected. In Prussia, where it is compulsory, 1 in 6.27; in England and Wales it is, as we have seen, 1 in 7.7; in Holland it is 1 in 8.11; in France it is 1 in 9.0. (Young and Hancock 1956:892)
But it went on to warn:
We are bound to observe, however, that a very delusive estimate of the state of education must result from confining attention to the mere amount of numbers under day school instruction. We have seen that less than three years ago there were in elementary day schools 2,213,694 children of the poorer classes. But of this number, 573,536 were attending private schools, which, as our evidence uniformly shows, are, for the most part, inferior as schools for the poor, and ill-calculated to give to the children an education which shall be serviceable to them in after-life. Of the 1,549,312 children whose names are on the books of public elementary day schools belonging to the religious denominations, only 19.3 per cent were in their 12th year or upwards, and only that proportion, therefore, can be regarded as educated up to the standard suited to their stations. As many as 786,202 attend for less than 100 days in the year and can therefore hardly receive a serviceable amount of education, while our evidence goes to prove that a large proportion, even of those whose attendance is more regular, fail in obtaining it on account of inefficient teaching. Much, therefore, still remains to be done to bring up the state of elementary education in England and Wales to the degree of usefulness which we all regard as attainable and desirable. (Young and Hancock 1956:892-3)
The Report was also critical of the quality of education provided:
We have seen overwhelming evidence from Her Majesty 's Inspectors, to the effect that not more than one fourth of the children receive a good education. So great a failure in the teaching demanded the closest investigation; and as the result of it we have been obliged to come to the conclusion that the instruction given is commonly both too ambitious and too superficial in its character, that (except in the very best schools) it has been too exclusively adapted to the elder scholars to the neglect of the younger ones, and that it often omits to secure a thorough grounding in the simplest but most essential parts of instruction. We have shown that the present system has never completely met this serious difficulty in elementary teaching; that inspection looks chiefly to the upper classes and to the general condition of the school, and cannot profess to examine carefully individual scholars; and that a main object of the schools is defeated in respect of every child who, having attended for a considerable time, leaves without the power of reading, writing, and cyphering in an intelligent manner. (Young and Hancock 1956:893)
There was considerable disagreement between the Commissioners over the funding of education, with some believing that 'the interference of Government with education is objectionable on political and religious grounds ' (Young and Hancock 1956:894). However, they noted that 'all the principal nations of Europe, and the United States of America, as well as British North America, have felt it necessary to provide for the education of the people by public taxation ' (Young and Hancock 1956:894-5), and they proceeded to: propose means by which, in the first place, the present system may be made applicable to the poorer no less than the richer districts throughout the whole country; secondly, by which the present expenditure may be controlled and regulated; thirdly, by which the complication of business in the office may be checked; fourthly, by which greater local activity and interest in education may be encouraged; fifthly, by which the general attainment of a greater degree of elementary knowledge may be secured than is acquired at present ... (Young and Hancock 1956:897)
The Commissioners commented that infant schools for children up to the age of seven were 'of great utility ': they were places of security as well as of education, since they were the only means of keeping children of poor families off the streets in town, or out of the roads and fields in the country. They distinguished two types of infant schools: the public infant schools, which often formed a department of the ordinary day school; and the private or 'dame ' schools, which were very common in both town and country but were frequently little more than nurseries in which 'the nurse collected the children of many families into her own house instead of attending upon the children of some one family ' (quoted in Hadow 1933:17).
1870 Elementary Education Act
As a result of the Newcastle Commission 's findings, the 1870 Elementary Education Act (9 August 1870) (drafted by Liberal MP William Forster and therefore sometimes referred to as 'the Forster Act ') made provision for the elementary education of all children aged 5-13 and established school boards to oversee and complete the network of schools and to bring them all under some form of supervision. Such a strategy, it said, would have to be affordable and acceptable to the many sectional religious interests.
Summary of the Act
Part I Local Provision for Schools (sections 4-95)
The Act began by requiring that every school district should have sufficient public schools:
There shall be provided for every school district a sufficient amount of accommodation in public elementary schools (as herein-after defined) available for all the children resident in such district for whose elementary education efficient and suitable provision is not otherwise made, and where there is an insufficient amount of such accommodation, in this Act referred to as 'public school accommodation, ' the deficiency shall be supplied in manner provided by this Act (Section 5).
School boards were to be formed for areas where there was currently insufficient provision (6).
Regulations for the conduct of public elementary schools were set out in section 7. These included the right of parents to withdraw their children from religious instruction.
Sections 8-13 set out the Education Department 's powers to determine whether additional school places were required, to require the formation of school boards and to requisition them to provide the extra schools.
Sections 14-36 listed the powers and duties of school boards for the management and maintenance of their schools. These included: * the requirement that 'No religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught in the school ' (14); * the power of school boards to appoint managers (15); * the duty of school boards to 'keep efficient ' every school provided by them, and to provide 'additional school accommodation as is, in their opinion, necessary ' (18); * the powers of school boards to purchase land compulsorily (20); * paying for new schools out of the local school fund or Treasury loans to be repaid within five years (21); and * legal matters relating to the transfer of a school to a school board (23) and the re-transfer of a school by a school board to the managers (24).
School boards were empowered to support the education of the poor:
The school board may, if they think fit, from time to time, for a renewable period not exceeding six months, pay the whole or any part of the school fees payable at any public elementary school by any child resident in their district whose parent is in their opinion unable from poverty to pay the same; but no such payment shall be made or refused on condition of the child attending any public elementary school other than such as may be selected by the parent; and such payment shall not be deemed to be parochial relief given to such parent. (25) and If a school board satisfy the Education Department that, on the ground of the poverty of the inhabitants of any place in their district, it is expedient for the interests of education to provide a school at which no fees shall be required from the scholars, the board may, subject to such rules and conditions as the Education Department may prescribe, provide such school, and may admit scholars to such school without requiring any fee. (26)
School boards were also empowered to contribute to or establish industrial schools (27-8).
Matters relating to the operation of school boards were set out in sections 29-36. These included: * their constitutions (30); * elections (31); * disqualification from membership (34); * the appointment of officers (35); and * the appointment of an officer to enforce attendance at school (36).
Corresponding arrangements for the school board for London were set out in sections 37-39.
Sections 40-73 dealt with a range of administrative and financial matters including: * the Education Department 's powers to form united school districts, other than in London (40-8); * the Department 's powers to require a school district to contribute to the costs of another (49-52); * the management of school funds (53-56); * borrowing by school boards (57-58); * accounting and auditing of school funds (59-62); * provisions relating to school boards in default (63-66); * the duty of local authorities to make returns to the Education Department (67-72); and * the power of the Education Department to hold public inquiries (73).
In relation to school attendance (74), the Act empowered school boards to make byelaws 'Requiring the parents of children of such age, not less than five years nor more than thirteen years, as may be fixed by the byelaws, to cause such children (unless there is some reasonable excuse) to attend school '. Boards were also empowered to determine the time during which children were to attend school (with exceptions for religious observance); and to pay all or part of the school fees of any child whose parents were in poverty.
The remainder of Part I of the Act (75-95) covered various technical and administrative matters.
Part II of the Act, Parliamentary grant, stated that:
After the thirty-first day of March one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one no parliamentary grant shall be made to any elementary school which is not a public elementary school within the meaning of this Act.
No parliamentary grant shall be made in aid of building, enlarging, improving, or fitting up any elementary school, except in pursuance of a memorial duly signed, and containing the information required by the Education Department for enabling them to decide on the application, and sent to the Education Department on or before the thirty-first day of December one thousand eight hundred and seventy. (96)
Conditions for such grants - totalling not more than 'seven shillings and sixpence per child ' (37½p) were laid out in sections 97-99, and included the stipulation that 'Such grant shall not be made in respect of any instruction in religious subjects '.
Finally, section 100 required the Education Department to provide an annual report to Parliament.
There were five Schedules to the Act, dealing with various administrative matters.
Commentary on the Act
While 1870 can, with some justification, be described as the year in which the government finally began to take the education of the nation 's children seriously, it must be acknowledged that the 1870 Elementary Education Act was only the start of a process which would take more than twenty years to complete.
As a result of the Act, 2500 new school boards were created. They were directly elected and independent of existing forms of local government. They varied in size from that of London, which had 55 members and controlled almost 400 schools, to the rural boards, many of which controlled just one school (see Chitty 2007:17).
The Act did not provide free education (except in proven cases of poverty), and while it empowered school boards to frame byelaws making attendance at school compulsory for children between the ages of five and thirteen, it did not require them to do so. By the end of 1871, 117 school boards had instituted byelaws requiring some degree of compulsory attendance, but these byelaws were often subject to numerous exemptions.
Moreover, the elementary education offered by the Act was limited and inferior. Blyth (1965:21) argues that elementary schools were 'a whole educational process in themselves and one which is by definition limited and by implication inferior; a low plateau, rather than the foothills of a complete education '.
The elementary schools * catered for children up to 14; * were for the working class; * provided a restricted curriculum with the emphasis almost exclusively on the '3Rs ' (reading, writing and 'rithmetic); * pursued other, less clearly defined, aims including social-disciplinary objectives (acceptance of the teacher 's authority, the need for punctuality, obedience, conformity etc); * operated the 'monitorial ' system, whereby a teacher supervised a large class with assistance from a team of monitors (usually older pupils).
By 1900, nearly half the children who attended public elementary schools were in board schools: in large urban areas the proportion was often much higher.
The church problem
The 'Cowper-Temple clause ' in section 14 of the Act ( 'No religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught in the school ') was named after its proposer, Liberal MP William Cowper-Temple (pronounced 'Cooper-Temple '). It banned denominational teaching in the new board schools.
But in other respects, the 1870 Act failed to resolve the problem of the involvement of the churches in state educational provision. It could have begun to separate church and state, as was happening in other countries. 'That this did not happen was based on a combination of economic realism, institutional convenience and a political predisposition to enjoy religious company in spite of its irks ' (Gates 2005:18).
The churches had not been able to make universal provision, so the state would now fund schools managed by locally elected and interdenominationally representative school boards. Church schools would continue to receive a maintenance grant of up to 50 per cent, but once the system was in place they would get no money for new buildings.
Some people assumed that the 1870 Act would result in a gradual decline in the number of church schools and their replacement by board schools. The churches, however, were determined to strengthen and consolidate their position, so they took full advantage of the generous offer of government funds for new buildings. In the six months allowed, the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church 'moved with great alacrity to plan as many as they could ' (Gates 2005:19). 2,000 requests for building grants were made by the National Society, 500 by the Catholics and Free Churches. Within 15 years, the number of Church of England schools rose from 6,382 to 11,864, and Catholic schools from 350 to 892. In the same period, the number of children attending church schools doubled to two million.
The cost of sustaining this expanded provision was huge. 'Knowingly or not the churches had overreached themselves ' (Gates 2005:19). So in 1884 a newly formed interdenominational Voluntary Schools Associationbegan lobbying against what it regarded as the unfair financial advantages enjoyed by the board schools, which had local rates and central government taxes to draw on. In 1888, the Cross Commission (details below) reviewed the working of the 1870 Act and recommended public funding for the secular curriculum in church schools, a proposal which was eventually included in the 1902 Education Act (details in the next chapter).

Further progress
The remaining years of the 19th century saw a raft of legislation which added detail to the state education system which the 1870 Act had begun.
In this respect, the two most significant Acts were the Elementary Education Act of 1880, which made school attendance compulsory, and that of 1891, which made elementary education free.
And finally, the 1899 Board of Education Act created a new government department to oversee education.
(Other Acts passed during this period are listed later in this chapter).
1880 Elementary Education Act
The 1880 Elementary Education Act (26 August 1880) obliged local authorities (as designated by the 1876 Elementary Education Act) to make byelaws requiring school attendance, and provided for penalties in cases where 10-13 year olds were illegally employed. It thus effectively established in practice the universal education which the 1870 Act had declared in principle.
(The 1880 Act is sometimes referred to as 'the Mundella Act ' after Liberal MP Anthony Mundella, Vice-President of the Board of Education from 1880 to 1885).
 Download the Elementary Education Act 1880 (pdf image 496kb).
1891 Elementary Education Act
The 1891 Elementary Education Act (5 August 1891) was another significant step in the process which the 1870 Act had begun, as it decreed that elementary education was to be provided free.
The Act provided for ten shillings (50p) a year to be paid as a 'fee grant ' by Parliament for each child over three and under fifteen attending a public elementary school (Section 1). The schools were forbidden to charge additional fees (3) except in certain circumstances (4).
 Download the Elementary Education Act 1891 (pdf image 520kb).
1899 Board of Education Act
This Act (9 August 1899) established the Board of Education as the government department responsible for education (Section 1), replacing the Education Department and the Department of Science and Art (2).
It provided for the inspection of secondary schools (3) and for the establishment of a Consultative Committee to frame regulations for a register of teachers and to advise the Board on educational matters (4).
 Download the Board of Education Act 1899 (pdf image 540kb).
The school leaving age was raised to 11 in 1893 and to 12 in 1899.
So by the end of the 19th century, England had a national system of elementary education, though it was 'still largely confined to the provision of a minimum standard ' (Williams 1961:137).

Content and structures
The Revised Code of 1862 ( 'Lowe 's Code ')
The Newcastle Commission recommended that a grant should be paid in respect of every child who, having attended an elementary school, passed an examination in reading, writing and arithmetic. (Report of Royal Commission on the state of popular education in England (1861), Vol. I., p. 545, Recommendation 6)
As a result, a provision was introduced by the Committee of Council on Education into the Revised Code for 1862 (often called 'Lowe 's Code ' after the Committee 's vice-president who devised it), stipulating that every scholar for whom grants were claimed must be examined according to one of six 'standards ' in reading, writing and arithmetic - 'reading a short paragraph in a newspaper; writing similar matter from dictation; working sums in practice and fractions ' (Williams 1961:137).
The result of this regulation was the organisation of elementary schools on the basis of annual promotion. Classes in the senior department were named standards I to VI, roughly corresponding to ages 7 to 12.
Right from the start there was much opposition to these arrangements. Teachers objected partly to the method of testing, but mainly to the principle of 'payment by results ' because it linked money for schools with the criterion of a minimum standard. Thus the higher primary work which was beginning to appear before 1861 in the best elementary schools was seriously discouraged by Lowe 's Code. The curriculum became largely restricted to the three Rs, and the only form of practical instruction that survived was needlework.
Furthermore, the standards themselves were defective because they were based not on an experimental enquiry into what children of a given age actually knew, but on an a priori notion of what they ought to know. They largely ignored the wide range of individual capacity, and the detailed formulations for the several ages were not always precise or appropriate.
Relaxing the Code
Over the following thirty years the initial strict conditions were gradually relaxed: more freedom of classification was allowed, the tests were made more elastic and the exams were taken by sample only. From about 1892 the standards system began to fall into disuse and it was finally abandoned by the Board of Education around the turn of the century, except for a few special purposes such as examining candidates for Labour certificates.
Meanwhile, the growth of public interest in education, fostered by the writings of Spencer, Huxley and others, persuaded the Education Department to expand the curriculum of elementary schools.
The Code of 1871, for example, provided for a special grant for each individual scholar who passed a satisfactory examination in not more than two 'specific ' subjects of secular instruction beyond the three Rs. At the same time the list of specific subjects was extended to include foreign languages, various branches of pure and applied science, or any definite subject of instruction extending over the classes to be examined in Standards IV, V, and VI.
In 1875, a further step was taken by the introduction of 'class ' subjects - grammar, geography, history and plain needlework - for which additional grant was paid. Later Codes, especially that of 1880, extended the list of these class subjects which, if taught at all, had to be taught throughout the whole school above Standard I.
The curriculum of an elementary school from 1875 to the later 1890s thus consisted of three main parts:
Obligatory subjects: the three Rs ( 'the elementary subjects ') with needlework for girls;
Optional subjects: class subjects (for the whole school above Standard I); and specific subjects for individual scholars in Standards IV to VI.
The 1876 Education Act provided for a system of Honour Certificates, which gave free education for three years to pupils who had passed the Standard IV examination at 10 years of age and held a Certificate of regular attendance for five years. This arrangement lasted only for five years, but several leading witnesses who gave evidence to the Cross Commission in 1888 (see below) spoke of the useful results of the system while it was in operation, and it seems to have helped considerably in the development of 'tops ' to many elementary schools.
The provisions in the 1876 and 1880 Education Acts regarding attendance byelaws had the indirect effect of producing a very considerable increase in the number of children who remained at school up to and beyond the age of 13. To meet the needs of these pupils a seventh standard was added in 1882.
Infant schools
One important effect of the 1870 Act was to make infant schools or departments a permanent part of the new public elementary schools. As a consequence, most of the dame schools, which had survived in large numbers up to 1870, disappeared in the following decade.
Up to the 1860s, the main objective in separating the infants had been to ensure that the teaching of the older children should not be 'unduly disturbed ' by what Matthew Arnold described as 'the babies ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:31).
But by the 1870s the education of the under-sevens was beginning to be taken more seriously. The Code of Regulations of 1871 created an infant stage below Standard 1 for the 5-7 age range, so seven became the age of transfer from the infant school or department to the elementary school. (Even as late as 1930 only half of 5-7 year olds were in infant schools).
In 1871 the first London School Board appointed a committee chaired by Professor TH Huxley to review the system of school organisation. The Committee suggested that public elementary day schools might conveniently be classified into Infants ' Schools for children below 7 years of age; Junior Schools for children between 7 and 10 years of age; and Senior Schools for older children. It recommended that infant schools should be mixed, but laid down no general rule with respect to junior schools. Senior Schools in the London area should be separate, and each board school should contain, under one management, an infant school or schools, a junior school, a senior boys ' school, and a senior girls ' school (Minutes of School Board for London Vol. I, pp. 155-61, referred to in Hadow 1931:11). These recommendations appear to have had little effect in practice.
The Huxley Committee was convinced of the importance of infant schools, arguing that they protected children from evil and corrupt influences and disciplined them in proper habits, and that they greatly facilitated children 's progress in the more advanced schools (see Hadow 1931:11).
Several of the newly established school boards began introducing Froebel 's kindergarten methods into their infant schools. Thus in 1871 the London School Board included in its regulations for infant schools a provision that instruction should be given in object lessons of a simple character, with some such exercise of the hands and eyes as is given in the 'Kindergarten system '. Two years later the London Board appointed an instructor in kindergarten exercises, who began training teachers. In 1875 she was authorised to issue a certificate to each teacher whose personal application of her kindergarten knowledge reached the standard required by the instructor. In 1878 the instructor reported that she had experienced difficulty in trying to secure that the principles of the kindergarten system should underpin the general instruction in infant schools, and that the teachers too frequently looked on kindergarten as a subject of instruction rather than as a principle to be applied, wherever possible, in every lesson. In 1878 her title was changed to 'Superintendent of Method in Infant Schools ' (see Hadow 1933:25).
In 1882 the Education Department issued a Circular to HM Inspectors, pointing out that 'it is of little service to adopt the gifts and mechanical occupations of the Kindergarten, unless they are so used as to furnish real training in accuracy of hand and eye, in intelligence and in obedience ' (quoted in Hadow 1933:26).
Another Circular to Inspectors (6 August 1883) referred to the provision of 'appropriate and varied occupations ' for infants as a requirement for the receipt of merit grant, and stated that the exercises usually known as those of the kindergarten might be used to fulfil the purpose of this requirement, but were not indispensable.
Article 108 of the Code of 1885 stated that infants should be instructed suitably for their age, and in the Code of 1889 this phrase was expanded to read 'suitably to their age and capacity ' (quoted in Hadow 1933:26).
In 1888 the London School Board asked the Froebel Society to suggest an examiner for their training classes and in the same year, the National Froebel Union was founded as an examining body.
An even more important advance was made in 1893, when the Education Department issued a special circular to HM Inspectors on the Training and Teaching of Infants (Circular No. 322, 6 February 1893), which declared that the Department wanted to see kindergarten methods used more widely. It also noted that the number of children in the lower classes of schools had increased, so a full four years ' attendance at infant schools was now the rule rather than the exception. The Circular stated that:
Two leading principles should be regarded as a sound basis for the education of early childhood:
(1) The recognition of the child 's spontaneous activity, and the stimulation of this activity in certain well-defined directions by the teachers.
(2) The harmonious and complete development of the whole of the child 's faculties. The teacher should pay especial regard to the love of movement, which can alone secure healthy physical conditions; to the observant use of the organs of sense, especially those of sight and touch; and to that eager desire of questioning which intelligent children exhibit. All these should be encouraged under due limitations, and should be developed simultaneously, so that each stage of development may be complete in itself. (quoted in Hadow 1933:27)
The Circular was re-issued in successive years and was finally incorporated almost verbatim into the first edition of Suggestions for the Consideration of Teachers, issued by the Board of Education in 1905.
Higher Grade Schools
A number of children remained at school after passing the new seventh standard, and eventually central 'higher grade schools ' were created for these children. Most of these higher grade schools had an upper portion arranged as an 'organised science course or school ' under the Science and Art Department. A number of school boards, especially those in large urban areas, devoted much attention to the development of these higher grade schools.

Wolverhampton Higher Grade School, opened 1894 (from an old postcard).
The exterior remains essentially the same today.
The building is now part of Wolverhampton College.
Picture and information from Wolverhampton 's Locally Listed Buildings
The following descriptions of the work done in two higher grade schools, given by persons who were pupils in the early 1870s, throw some light on the general character and aim of the curriculum:
Lancaster National School. The 'head class ' was composed of boys drawn from miles around. Admission was chiefly determined by an oral examination intended to reject all but the most promising candidates. This class supplied a number of intending teachers and from it boys, usually between 15 and 16 years of age, were appointed to vacant clerkships at industrial works which frequently led to partnership in the firms later on in life. The curriculum beyond the three R 's included a little Latin, and a great deal of mathematics, drawing and science.
Oswestry National School. The 'higher top ' was largely composed of farmers ' sons who came, after attending small country schools, particularly to acquire clear and accurate English speech. Entrance was not difficult; but pupils were expected to stay to the age of 16 or even later. Many went afterwards into merchants ' offices in Liverpool and elsewhere. (quoted in Hadow 1926:15)
The importance of science in secondary schools was underlined in the sixth report of the Royal Commission on Scientific Instruction and the Advancement of Science (the Devonshire Commission), published in 1875, which advocated that not less than six hours a week should be devoted to its study and that it should form an important element in any leaving examination.
Royal Commission on Technical Instruction
The two reports of the Royal Commission on Technical Instruction (1881-1884) marked an important stage in the development of public opinion on the subject of technical and secondary education. The Commissioners stated that 'the best preparation for technical study is a good modern secondary school of the types of the Manchester Grammar School, the Bedford Modern School, and the Allan Glen 's Institution at Glasgow ' (Second Report (1884) Volume I page 516, quoted in Spens 1938:52). The Commissioners warned that the middle classes in England were at a great disadvantage compared with those of continental Europe because there was a severe shortage of such schools. They pointed out that 'the existing endowments are very unevenly distributed over the country; in many of the large manufacturing centres no resources of the kind exist; private enterprise is clearly inadequate to do all that is required in establishing such schools, and we must look to some public measure to supply this, the greatest defect of our educational system ' (quoted in Spens 1938:52).
The Reports of the Royal Commission on Technical Instruction had a considerable indirect effect in strengthening the position of higher grade schools and in enriching the curriculum of elementary schools. The Commissioners also recommended that the state should recognise the distinction between elementary and secondary education to a greater extent than had as yet been attempted.
Two more Commissions examined the development of elementary and secondary education: * The Cross Commission (1886-1888) published its Final Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the Elementary Education Acts, England and Wales in 1888; and * The Bryce Commission, appointed in 1894, published its Report of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education in 1895.

Cross Commission on Elementary Education
In the last twenty years of the 19th century there was much debate about the extent to which the elementary schools could provide an adequate education for the more able children. Some witnesses to the Cross Commission argued that this role would be better filled by secondary schools, to which children might be promoted by means of exhibitions. Others argued that the 'higher grade schools ' had been successful and popular, and that the effect of removing the more able pupils from them would be 'to injure those schools educationally by destroying a source of interest to the teachers and of ambition for the scholars ' (Hadow 1926:21).
The Committee was divided on the issue, but recommended that the state should recognise the distinction between elementary and secondary education to a greater extent than had as yet been attempted.
During the next decade there was no great increase in the number of higher grade schools, but there was a distinct improvement in the general level of elementary education. Elementary schools began to be divided into junior, middle and senior departments, enabling improvements to be made in the courses of instruction for older pupils.
There was considerable public interest in the reports of the Cross Commission, and several of its recommendations were implemented from 1890 onwards: manual instruction was recognised (though no special grant was paid for it); physical exercises - swimming, gymnastics and 'Swedish drill ' - were included in the curriculum; shorthand, horticulture and hygiene were made 'specific ' subjects; and grants were paid in respect of laundry work, dairy work and housewifery.
A considerable extension of the curriculum took place when the system of individual examination and payment by results was gradually abandoned.
Bryce Commission on Secondary Education
The Royal Commission on Secondary Education reviewed the progress that had been made since the report of the Taunton Commission.
It found that over half of the 4,200 undergraduates of Oxford and Cambridge in 1894 came from the 89 schools represented on the Headmasters ' Conference, 17 per cent came from other schools in England and nearly as many from private study or home tuition. Only two per cent came from the ranks of pupil teachers, teacher training colleges or public elementary schools. The door was not closed on a poor boy of talent, but it was not open very far. 'Jude was still likely to remain obscure ' (Crowther 1959:11).
In their Historical Retrospect, the writers of the Crowther Report on the education of 15-18 year olds (1959) state that 'It would be wrong to picture the endowed grammar schools of England at that time as upper class or middle class preserves to which a mere handful of elementary school boys were admitted ' (Crowther 1959:11).
Surveys of the extent of secondary provision in seven counties were conducted on behalf of the Bryce Commission in 1894. These revealed that a quarter of the pupils in all the secondary schools (excluding only those schools in which the head master was the proprietor) had formerly attended elementary schools. The range of variation was very wide - some schools admitted none, while in others 'about all ', or 75 or 80 per cent, came from elementary schools.
With regard to the endowed grammar schools, Crowther (1959:11) argues that the justifiable complaint about them was not that they were socially exclusive, but that there were not nearly enough of them, so that only about four or five pupils per 1,000 in the elementary schools were able to pass on to the grammar schools. To some extent this shortage was offset by the growth of the higher grade elementary schools. They provided a way to secondary, and sometimes to higher, education for boys and girls who would otherwise have been deprived of it. (At least one Nobel Prizewinner was a pupil in a higher grade elementary school).
In the seven counties surveyed, only four per cent of all boys and girls aged 14 or 15 were still at school and just one per cent of those aged 16 and 17:
It is only necessary to remember that among the professional classes it was already the practice for boys and girls to stay at school at least until 16, and often to 18, to realise how small was the chance of a working man 's child, especially a daughter, learning at school more than the traditional 3R 's. It would appear that less than one-third of all pupils aged 14 or over were girls. (Crowther 1959:11)
The Bryce Commission 's report (1895) argued that the priority for secondary education should be greater unity of control: local authorities were required which should be responsible for all secondary (including technical) education within their respective areas.
With regard to the provision of secondary schools, the Commission recommended that for every 1,000 of the population secondary education should be made available to just ten children, of whom eight would be in the 'third grade '. This meant that, out of 4,000,000 children, 64,000 would be educated in the first and second grade schools, and 256,000 in the third grade. 'It is obvious ', the Commission commented, 'that these distinctions correspond roughly, but by no means exactly, to the gradations of society ' (quoted in Williams 1961:139).
It would be necessary to utilise every suitable existing school, including, for example, all those private schools (but only those) which accepted public tests of efficiency. First grade schools for boys already existed in sufficient numbers but there was a shortage of second and third grade schools at a cost which would be within the reach of parents of limited means. The rapid growth and success of the higher grade board schools, especially in larger towns, indicated the extent of the demand for third grade secondary education at a cheap rate. These higher grade elementary schools were doing much to meet the demand in many places; but there were not enough of them, and proprietary schools could not supply a similar education unless they received state aid.
The Commissioners stressed that a literary type of secondary education should be provided alongside the scientific and technical type, and that promising pupils should be able to transfer to higher schools.
They were also concerned about the training of secondary teachers, which they argued should be systematic and thorough: 'At present the absence of such training is one of the causes which injuriously affect secondary education ' (quoted in Spens 1938:62).
They went on:
In every phase of secondary teaching, the first aim should be to educate the mind, and not merely to convey information. It is a fundamental fault, which pervades many parts of the secondary teaching now given in England, that the subject (literary, scientific or technical) is too often taught in such a manner that it has little or no educational value. The largest of the problems which concern the future of secondary education is how to secure, as far as possible, that in all schools and in every branch of study the pupils shall be not only instructed but educated. (quoted in Spens 1938:62)
Discussions began on implementing the Report 's recommendations. In 1897 a series of conferences took place at the Education Department between the Incorporated Association of Headmasters and the Association of Headmasters of Higher Grade Schools and Schools of Science; and in August 1898 the Department issued a joint Memorandum on the relationship between primary and secondary schools in a national system of education.
Another important recommendation of the Bryce Commission was that there should be a central education authority which, while leaving freedom of action to the local bodies, could supervise the general interests of secondary education as a whole. This recommendation was effected by the Board of Education Act 1899, which drew together the powers of the Education Department, the Science and Art Department and the powers of the Charity Commissioners over educational charities, to create a new Board of Education (see Spens 1938:62).
Girls ' education
As we have already seen, the Schools Inquiry Commission found a lamentable lack of provision for the education of girls.
However, campaigns for girls ' secondary education began to have an impact and many advances were made during the last years of the century: * in 1865 a small committee, with Emily Davies as secretary, persuaded Cambridge to admit girls to its Local Examinations; * in 1869 London University established a general examination for women with more advanced special papers; * in 1870 girls were admitted to the Oxford Local Examination; * Newnham College Cambridge was founded in 1871 to prepare women for the new Cambridge Higher Local Examination; * in 1871 the National Union for the Improvement of the Education of Women of all Classes was founded: its aims were to promote the foundation of cheap day schools for girls and to raise the status of women teachers by giving them a liberal education and a good training in the art of teaching; * in 1872 the National Union formed the Girls ' Public Day School Company 'to supply for girls the best education possible, corresponding with the education given to boys in the great Public Schools '; * girls were admitted to the examinations of the Oxford and Cambridge Joint Board in 1876; * in 1878 the Maria Grey Training College for women teachers in secondary schools was founded; * London University opened all its examinations and degrees to women in 1878; * in 1881 Cambridge opened its Triposes to women; * in 1884 Oxford allowed women to sit for examinations in certain of its schools; * the new universities founded during this period made no distinction between men and women in respect of teaching, emoluments, or degrees; * in 1889 the Intermediate Education Act made provision for the establishment of an organised secondary system in Wales which provided for both boys and girls - many of the new schools opened in the wake of the Act rapidly evolved into co-educational day schools; and * the 1895 Royal Commission on Secondary Education (see above) was the first to include women among its members.

Special educational needs
Note: The information in this section is taken from chapter 2 (pages 9-14) of the 1978 Warnock Report Special Educational Needs, which itself was largely based on DG Pritchard 's 1963 book Education and the Handicapped 1760-1960.

Provision for the deaf and blind
Neither the 1870 Education Act nor the corresponding Education (Scotland) Act of 1872 specifically included disabled children among those for whom provision was to be made, but in 1874 the London School Board established a class for the deaf at a public elementary school and later began the training of teachers. By 1888 there were 14 centres attached to ordinary schools, catering for 373 children. A few other boards did the same, but most made no specific provision for the deaf.
It was much the same in respect of the blind. In 1874 fifty blind children were being taught in ordinary classes in Scottish schools, and in 1875 the London Board made the first arrangements for teaching blind children in its elementary schools. By 1888 there were 23 centres attached to ordinary schools, where 133 children were taught part-time by teachers who were themselves blind. The children received the rest of their education in ordinary classes. A handful of other boards made some arrangement for the blind.
These first efforts by a few school boards to cater for some handicapped children owed nothing to educational legislation. Concerns for the plight of the disabled, and especially of the blind, had first been expressed in the mid-19th century but these had been mainly about the relief of distress rather than about education.
But once the 1870 Act had established the principle of universal elementary education, the needs of handicapped children could no longer be ignored. The Charity Organisation Society began campaigning for the right of blind children to receive education and the duty of school boards to provide it, and later applied the same arguments to the education of the deaf. Other organisations, like the Society for the Training of the Deaf, joined the campaign.
As a result, the Royal Commission on the Blind and Deaf was constituted in 1886 and published its report in 1889. It recommended the introduction of compulsory education for the blind from five to 16. Pupils would receive elementary education to the age of 12 and then follow either a technical or an academic course. At the elementary stage, children would mostly be taught in ordinary classes by ordinary teachers, but there would need to be special boarding schools for pupils who were delicate, neglected or lived too far from the nearest day school.
The Commission also recommended compulsory education for deaf children aged 7 to 14 in separate schools or classes. Teachers of the deaf should be paid higher salaries than ordinary teachers, their training should be under government supervision, and they should have qualified as ordinary teachers before beginning their special training.
The Commission 's report was followed a year later by the 1890 Education of Blind and Deaf Mute Children (Scotland) Act, but England had to wait a further three years for the Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act (12 September 1893), which sought 'to make better Provision for the Elementary Education of Blind and Deaf Children in England and Wales '.
Its main provisions related to: * parents ' duty to ensure the appropriate education of their children (Section 1); * school authorities ' duty to provide appropriate education for blind and deaf children (2-8); * parents ' duty to contribute to the cost of such education (9-10); * the school leaving age for blind and deaf children to be 16 (11); and * the power of the Education Department to make grants to certified schools (12).
 Download the Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act 1893 (pdf image 820kb).
The Act required school authorities (boards, district councils or school attendance committees) to make provision for the education of blind and deaf children resident in their area who were not receiving suitable elementary education. As the Commission had recommended, blind children were to receive education between the ages of 5 and 16 and deaf children between 7 and 16. Parliamentary grants were available for certified institutions which were open to inspection. In most cases the extra places were provided by the extension of existing schools.
The larger school boards made real efforts to maintain good standards in their own schools, but many of the smaller boards struggled, and there was also the problem of the 20,000 voluntary schools over which the boards had no control. These difficulties persisted until the creation of local education authorities in 1902.

Provision for the physically and mentally handicapped
There was even less provision for the educational needs of physically and mentally handicapped children. Those who attended elementary schools profited as best they could from the ordinary teaching, while the more severely handicapped received care - and sometimes education - in institutions.
Before the 1870 Education Act the needs of mentally handicapped children were mostly ignored. The demands of everyday life in a largely uneducated and relatively uncomplicated world meant that mental disability was not seen as a substantial handicap, and there was institutional provision for those who needed looking after.
But as a result of the 1870 Act, large numbers of children of poor intellectual ability began entering the public elementary schools. This posed a range of problems: * many of the children made little progress and their presence hindered normal teaching; * there were no systematic means of assessing their capabilities and needs; * the range of disability was very wide and there were unresolved questions of definition; * instruction was based on the official Code for normal children; and * classes were large so there was little opportunity, even if teachers had the skills, to devise a differentiated curriculum.
Furthermore, unlike the blind and deaf, the physically and mentally handicapped had no organisations to plead their cause. Isolated examples of private provision existed in London, but across the country little had been achieved when the Royal Commission on the Blind and Deaf reported in 1889.
The Commission (whose remit covered special needs in general) had distinguished between the feeble-minded, imbeciles and idiots. It argued that the feeble-minded should receive special education separately from ordinary children in 'auxiliary ' schools; and that imbeciles should not be in asylums or workhouses but should attend institutions where they could, if possible, receive an education concentrating on sensory and physical development and the improvement of speech. The last group, having the greatest degree of intellectual deficiency, were considered to be ineducable.
Following the Commission 's report, the Charity Organisation Society campaigned for educational provision for the mentally handicapped and in 1896 sponsored the National Association for Promoting the Welfare of the Feeble-Minded.
The campaign was supported by the findings of Dr Francis Warner, who investigated 100,000 children in district poor law schools and the London Board Schools in the early 1890s and concluded that about one per cent of the children required special care and training in separate schools on the grounds of their mental and physical condition.
Further support came from the the Metropolitan Poor Law Schools Committee, whose Report in 1896 called for separate provision to be made for feeble-minded children.
In 1892 the Leicester School Board established a special class for selected 'feeble-minded ' pupils, and the London Board opened a school for the special instruction of physically and mentally detective children. The emphasis was on occupational activity rather than formal education.
By 1896 there were 24 special schools in London attended by 900 pupils and by the end of the century schools for defective children had been established by six other boards.

Provision for defective and epileptic children
A Committee on Defective and Epileptic Children, under the Chief Inspector of Schools, was established by the Education Department in 1896 and published its report in 1898. Like the earlier Royal Commission, the Committee had to grapple with definitions. It concluded that schools would need to exercise their own judgement as to whether an individual child was capable of receiving proper benefit from special instruction. Dr Warner 's study had suggested that the children could be assessed by physical examination, so the Committee recommended that a medical officer appointed by the school board would decide whether a particular child should be educated in an ordinary school, in a special school or not at all.
The Committee classed the feeble-minded with physically handicapped children under the general description of 'defective '. It recommended that, where possible, defective children of normal intelligence should attend ordinary schools and receive an ordinary education.
School authorities should be required to make special provision for defective children in their area who needed it, and should be empowered to compel attendance between the ages of 7 and 14 (16 in some cases). Classes in special schools should be small, all headteachers should be qualified, and the majority of assistant teachers should not only be qualified but should have additional training. There should be a varied programme of activities with an emphasis on manual and vocational training for senior pupils.
With regard to epileptic children, the Committee proposed that where attacks were relatively rare, children should attend ordinary classes; otherwise school authorities should be required to provide places in residential special schools or pay for places in voluntary institutions. Attendance should be compulsory.
The Committee 's proposals were far ahead of contemporary thinking, made heavy demands on the school boards and were costly.
Not surprisingly, therefore, the Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act of 1899 empowered - but did not require - school boards to provide for the education of mentally and physically defective and epileptic children. Although an enhanced rate of grant was payable for this special provision, ten years later only 133 out of 327 local education authorities had used their powers under the Act.
The Act (9 August 1899) empowered school authorities to make arrangements for identifying defective and epileptic children (Section 1) and to provide for their education:
(a) by classes in public elementary schools certified by the Education Department as special classes; or
(b) by boarding out ... any such child in a house conveniently near to a special class or school; or
(c) by establishing schools ... for defective children (2).
Parents were obliged to ensure that children over seven years of age attended such classes or schools (4).
 Download the Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act 1899 (pdf image 776kb).

Higher education
With the opening of new colleges and universities - in Manchester, Nottingham, Reading, Southampton, Leeds, Liverpool, Sheffield, Birmingham and Wales - the restricted curriculum of the older institutions was now becoming an embarrassment. So from the 1850s Oxford and Cambridge began to offer a broader range of subjects and to cater for a wider intake.
1862 Oxford University Act
This Act (30 June 1862) extended the powers of the university to make statutes setting out the regulations applying to: * The Professorship of Political Economy; * The Readership in Experimental Philosophy; * The Sherard Professorship of Botany; * The Aldrich Professorship of Chemistry; * The Readership in Geology; and * The Readership in Mineralogy.
 Download the Oxford University Act 1862 (pdf text 132kb).
1871 Universities Tests Act
The religious exclusiveness of Oxford, Cambridge and Durham was becoming as problematic as their restricted curriculum. The Universities Tests Act (16 June 1871) therefore altered the law respecting religious tests in these universities. It decreed that 'those taking lay academical degrees or holding lay academical or collegiate offices ' were not to be required: to subscribe any article or formulary of faith, or to make any declaration or take any oath respecting his religious belief or profession, or to conform to any religious observance, or to attend or abstain from attending any form of public worship, or to belong to any specified church, sect, or denomination; nor shall any person be compelled, in any of the said universities or any such college as aforesaid, to attend the public worship of any church, sect, or denomination to which he does not belong. (Section 3)
 Download the Universities Tests Act 1871 (pdf text 80kb).

Other legislation
1868 Endowed Schools Act
The 1868 Endowed Schools Act (25 June 1868) paved the way for the 1869 Endowed Schools Act (see above).
1873 Elementary Education Act
The 1873 Elementary Education Act (5 August 1873) made some amendments to the 1870 Act, mostly of a technical nature.
1873 Endowed Schools Act
The 1873 Endowed Schools Act (5 August 1873) made some amendments to the 1869 Endowed Schools Act, again mostly of a technical nature.
1874 Endowed Schools Act
The 1874 Endowed Schools Act (7 August 1874) made further amendments to the 1869 and 1873 Endowed Schools Acts.
1876 Elementary Education Act
This Act (15 August 1876) sought 'to make further provision for Elementary Education '. It made new laws relating to: * parental responsibility for the education of children (section 4); * the employment of children under 10 (5-9); * the payment of school fees for poor parents (10); * the care of neglected children (11); * penalties for non-compliance with a school attendance order (12); * industrial schools (13-17); * parliamentary grants (18-20); * byelaws requiring school attendance (21-23); and * various other administrative matters.
 Download the Elementary Education Act 1876 (pdf image 3.7mb).
1879 Elementary Education (Industrial Schools) Act
This Act (11 August 1879) extended the powers of school boards in relation to the establishment and extension of industrial schools.
 Download the Elementary Education (Industrial Schools) Act 1879(pdf image 348kb).
1888 Local Government Act
The Local Government Act (13 August 1888) provided for the establishment of elected councils for the counties and county boroughs (the larger towns and cities) in England and Wales. The counties took over the administrative functions of the magistrates of the Quarter Sessions courts, and there were also urban and rural district councils based on existing 'sanitary districts '. The Act set out the powers and duties of these new councils, which included levying rates; building and maintaining county halls, court houses and police stations; repair of roads and bridges; regulation of weights and measures etc.
The Act said little about education, but it was nonetheless an important step in the development of the state education system, since the local education authorities which would later be created by the 1902 Education Act would be based on the councils established by the 1888 Act.
The only references to schools in the Act were: * councils ' duties in respect of 'the establishment and maintenance of and the contribution to reformatory and industrial schools ' (Section 3); * council grants towards the remuneration of teachers in poor law schools (24); * the payment of school fees by councils 'for pauper children sent from a workhouse to a public elementary school outside the workhouse ' (24); * payments by councils to district schools to which a poor law union contributed (26), with a similar provision for county boroughs (34); and * councils ' responsibility for certain administrative matters relating to education (10).
 Download the Local Government Act 1888 (pdf text 2.6mb).
1889 Welsh Intermediate Education Act
The purpose of this Act (12 August 1889) was 'to make further provision for the intermediate and technical education of the inhabitants of Wales and the county of Monmouth ' (Section 2). Each county council was to appoint a joint education committee which was required to submit a scheme to the Charity Commissioners for such education (3). Up to half the cost of running the schools would be paid by the Treasury (8).
The Act defined 'intermediate education ' as meaning: a course of education which does not consist chiefly of elementary instruction in reading, writing, and arithmetic, but which includes instruction in Latin, Greek, the Welsh and English language and literature, modern languages, mathematics, natural and applied science, or in some of such studies, and generally in the higher branches of knowledge (17).
Technical education was to include instruction in:
(i) Any of the branches of science and art with respect to which grants are for the time being made by the Department of Science and Art;
(ii) The use of tools, and modelling in clay, wood, or other material;
(iii) Commercial arithmetic, commercial geography, book-keeping, and shorthand;
(iv) Any other subject applicable to the purposes of agriculture, industries, trade, or commercial life and practice, which may be specified in a scheme, or proposals for a scheme, of a joint education committee as a form of instruction suited to the needs of the district; but it shall not include teaching the practice of any trade, or industry, or employment (17).
 Download the Welsh Intermediate Education Act 1889 (pdf image 1.4mb).
1889 Technical Instruction Act
This Act (30 August 1889) sought to improve the provision of technical and industrial training.
 Download the Technical Instruction Act 1889 (pdf image 716kb).
1892 Technical and Industrial Institutions Act
This Act (27 June 1892) facilitated 'the Acquisition and Holding of land by Institutions for promoting Technical and Industrial Instruction and Training '.
 Download the Technical and Industrial Institutions Act 1892 (pdf text 60kb).

The purposes of education
The growth of industry and the widening of democracy during the 19th century necessitated a major reorganisation of elementary, secondary and university education, with changes in the types of institution and the styles of education they offered.
There was also 'a fundamental argument about the purposes of education ' (Williams 1961:140). Williams identifies two strands of this argument: 'the idea of education for all, and the definition of a liberal education ' (Williams 1961:140).
Utilitarianism
Education for all was, as we have seen, hotly contested, but it was essential, given the rise of an organised working class which demanded education, and the needs of an expanding and changing economy. Williams (1961:141) argues that the victory of the reformers rested on three elements: * a genuine response to the growth of democracy - seen in the writings of Mill, Carlyle, Ruskin and Arnold; * a protective response - a new version of 'moral rescue ', seen in the arguments for the 1870 Education Act in relation to the extension of the franchise in the 1867 Representation of the People Act: 'our future masters ... should at least learn their letters '; and * the practical response - seen in Forster 's principal argument for the 1870 Act: 'upon the speedy provision of elementary education depends our industrial prosperity '.
While the democratic and industrial arguments were both sound, the latter resulted in education being seen as preparation for future adult work and as a means of teaching the required social character - 'habits of regularity, "self-discipline", obedience, and trained effort ' (Williams 1961:141).
However, this utilitarian concept of education was challenged on two sides:
On the one hand it was argued, by men with widely differing attitudes to the rise of democracy and of working-class organisation, that men had a natural human right to be educated, and that any good society depended on governments accepting this principle as their duty. On the other hand, often by men deeply opposed to democracy, it was argued that man 's spiritual health depended on a kind of education which was more than a training for some specialised work, a kind variously described as 'liberal ', 'humane ', or 'cultural '. (Williams 1961:141)
It was a complicated debate in which, Williams argues, three groups participated: the 'public educators ', the 'industrial trainers ' (the powerful group which promoted education in terms of training and disciplining the poor as workers and citizens) and the 'old humanists '.
The old humanists argued against the public educators, fearing that a liberal education would be 'vulgarised by extension to the "masses" ' (Williams 1961:142), and against the industrial trainers because liberal education would be 'destroyed by being turned into a system of specialised and technical training ' (Williams 1961:142).
Meanwhile, the public educators drew on the arguments of the old humanists in the hope of preventing universal education becoming a narrow system of pre-industrial instruction. Williams argues that the influence of these three groups - the public educators, the industrial trainers, and the old humanists - continued to be felt well into the 20th century.
The curriculum which evolved during the 19th century was 'a compromise between all three groups, but with the industrial trainers predominant ' (Williams 1961:142). This was 'damaging both to general education and to the new kinds of vocational training ' (Williams 1961:143).
Social class
Equally damaging was the class thinking which cast its shadow over educational developments in the 19th century. 'The continued relegation of trade and industry to lower social classes, and the desire of successful industrialists that their sons should move into the now largely irrelevant class of gentry, were alike extremely damaging to English education and English life ' (Williams 1961:143).
As at the Reformation, the reconstruction of institutions proceeded largely without reference to the best learning of the age, and without a successful redefinition of the purposes of education and of the content of a contemporary liberal culture:
The beginnings of technical instruction in the Mechanics ' Institutes might have developed into a successful redefinition, but again it was the training of a specific class, whereas in fact the new sciences were radical elements in the society as a whole: a society which had changed its economy, which under pressure was changing its institutions, but which, at the centres of power, was refusing to change its ways of thinking. (Williams 1961:143)
The new working class was offered science and technical instruction but no opportunity to discuss the interaction between these techniques and their lives:
It was only very slowly, and then only in the sphere of adult education, that the working class, drawing indeed on very old intellectual traditions and on important dissenting elements in the English educational tradition, made its contribution to the modern educational debate. This contribution - the students ' choice of subject, the relation of disciplines to actual contemporary living, and the parity of general discussion with expert instruction - remains important, but made little headway in the general educational organisation. Like the individual public educators, their time was not yet. (Williams 1961:144)

A common education for all
It was only at the very end of the 19th century, as radical political movements were being formed, that a common education for all was seriously debated in Britain - 250 years after it had been advocated by Comenius.
At an international conference of socialists in 1896 delegates from Europe and the US argued that all working people should receive a full education. Britain 's Keir Hardie (pictured) argued that this meant an education that was 'free at all stages, open to everyone without any tests of prior attainment at any age - in effect, a comprehensive "broad highway" that all could travel ' (reported in the Westminster Gazette 1 August 1896, quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:3).
It is not surprising that Hardie wanted a better deal for the working class. He had been born in Lanarkshire, the illegitimate son of a servant, and had received no education at all. At the age of eight he had become the family 's sole wage earner when he was sent to work as a baker 's delivery boy. Three years later he was a coal miner. But by the time he was 17 he had taught himself to read and write and in 1893 he was one of the founders of the Independent Labour Party. By 1906 he was leader of the newly-formed Labour Party in the House of Commons.
Not all socialists agreed with Hardie about a common education for all, however. Some members of the Fabian Society favoured specialised and differentiated schooling. Sydney Webb, for example, approved of the 1902 Education Act 's provision for new fee-paying grammar schools offering a few free scholarship places.
Chapter 4 : 1900-1944
Taking shape

1900-1914 Laying the foundations
The Cockerton Judgement
The 1870 Elementary Education Act had created local school boards to be responsible for the provision of elementary education. Some of them, however, had 'significantly altered the legislators ' original concept of elementary schooling in terms of buildings, equipment, curricula and age range ' (Chitty 2007:19) by establishing higher classes, 'higher tops ' and even separate higher grade schools for older pupils who showed ability and commitment. A few had gone still further and created a new type of evening school for adults.
This had angered the churches, which were already suffering from a decline in the number of worshippers, and now found their schools being overtaken by board schools funded by ratepayers. It had also angered many of the older endowed grammar schools, whose finances were precarious.
Leading Conservatives, notably Sir John Gorst, began attacking the school boards for what they regarded as inappropriate use of the rates. An influential committee was formed to 'combat the School Boards ' and, in particular, to 'undermine the advanced work ' they were sponsoring.
In 1899, Gorst 's private secretary Sir Robert Morant (1863-1920) engineered a test case in which a School of Art in London complained of competition from evening classes run by the London School Board. The District Auditor - Cockerton - ruled that the London School Board could not use the rates to fund higher-grade classes in science and art. The famous 'Cockerton Judgement ', as it became known, was of profound importance, because it 'sealed the fate of advanced, or secondary, teaching fostered by the more radical and enterprising School Boards ' (Chitty 2007:19).
The London School Board appealed twice against the ruling, but it was upheld on both occasions. It was clear that a new education act was needed to regularise the situation.
As an interim measure, the Board of Education established, by Minute dated 6 April 1900, a new system of 'Higher Elementary Schools ' (more about these below).
In the Cockerton Judgement, Morant and Gorst had achieved their first objective: to prevent school boards from funding anything but elementary schools.
Their second objective - to create all-embracing local education authorities and provide much-needed public cash for the church schools - was achieved by the 1902 Education Act, which Morant drafted. (He went on to become Permanent Secretary of the Board of Education in April 1903).

1902 Education Act (The Balfour Act)
Across Europe and the USA systems of publicly financed elementary schools had been rapidly developed in the second half of 19th century, providing educated personnel for the new industries. Now, at the turn of the century, the USA was beginning to open common secondary high schools as well, and many European schools were giving priority to engineering and science, subjects 'conspicuously downgraded in England 's classical model of education, the one preferred by gentlemen ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:4).
So the development of a national public system of education in England and Wales was lagging behind much of Europe and the USA 'by a good half a century ' (Green 1990:6 quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:4), and it was against this background that the newly-elected Conservative government of Arthur Balfour presented its 1902 education bill to the Commons.
Balfour (pictured) warned the House that 'England is behind all continental rivals in education ' (quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:3).
Despite this, the bill caused dissent among both Conservative and Liberal politicians, who feared that the cost of popular education would lose them the support of the large landowners and industrialists who were the major taxpayers.
Most, however, accepted the argument that, with mass education developing fast elsewhere, Britain needed an educated workforce if it was to maintain its position in world trade. So Balfour got his bill.
Religion
But not before religion had once again reared its divisive head. The 1870 Act had taken 28 days to debate. The 1902 Act took 59, and most of that time was spent on the religious clauses.
Dissenters and Doubters objected to state funds being used to support denominational schools, including those of the Church of England but more especially those of the Catholic Church. 'Inside and outside Parliament there was outcry against "Rome on the rates" ' (Gates 2005:19).
The 1902 Education Act (18 December 1902) abolished the school boards and created local education authorities (LEAs), based on the county councils and county borough councils which the 1888 Local Government Act had established. The new LEAs had authority over the secular curriculum of voluntary (church) schools. They provided grants for school maintenance, but if a school wanted to provide denominational teaching the buildings had to be paid for by the church.
Church of England schools generally heeded the rule that no pupil or teacher should be required to conform to religious belief or ritual. Roman Catholic schools were less enthusiastic about obeying the rule. They enforced religious observance more strictly and in 1917 the church issued a canon expressly forbidding Catholic parents from sending their children to non-Catholic schools on pain of excommunication.
Secondary education
The Act laid the basis for a national system of secondary education into which the higher grade elementary schools and the fee-paying secondary schools were integrated - a move approved of by a few socialists, like Sydney Webb, but disapproved of by many others, like Keir Hardie.
Thus it had the effect of creating two types of state-aided secondary school: the endowed grammar schools, which now received grant-aid from LEAs; and the municipal or county secondary schools, maintained by LEAs. Many of the latter were established in the years following the Act, and others evolved out of the higher grade science schools or pupil teacher centres. 'These new Municipal Secondary Schools, influenced by the tradition of the Higher Grade Schools, attached more weight on the whole to scientific and modern studies than the older types of Secondary School, especially for girls ' (Hadow 1926:26). The new LEAs also began to establish first and second grade secondary schools, since the raising of the elementary school leaving age had rendered the 'third grade ' schools outmoded.
As a result of the Act, therefore, there was a massive expansion in the building of secondary schools in the years up to 1914.
Another important feature of the Act was its clear distinction between elementary and secondary education:
From now on there was to be no confusion: two systems, each with a distinct educational and social function, were to run parallel to each other; and there was to be no place for the higher-grade schools and classes which were deemed to have strayed into the preserves of secondary and higher education. The vast majority of children were to be educated in elementary schools where they would remain until they reached the statutory school-leaving age. (Chitty 2007:19)
Teacher training
The Act also empowered LEAs to support teacher training colleges. Most of the existing colleges were church owned, though new non-denominational colleges (eg Froebel, Edge Hill and Charlotte Mason) had opened in the last years of the 19th century, as had teacher training departments in the universities - 16 of them by 1900.
The expansion of LEA teacher training meant that by 1906 not all places at denominational colleges were being filled. The Board of Education therefore decreed that if the church colleges wished to receive grant aid, they must forfeit the right to use denominational criteria in offering places. The Church of England and the Catholic Church protested, the government backed down, and the churches were allowed to recruit up to half their students on the basis of their denominational allegiance.
 Download the Education Act 1902 (pdf image 3.7mb).
Summary of the Act
Part I Local Education Authority
County and county borough councils were to be the local education authorities for their areas (Section 1).
Part II Higher Education
LEAs were required to 'consider the educational needs of their area ' and 'supply or aid the supply of education other than elementary, and to promote the general co-ordination of all forms of education '. (2). Smaller councils were empowered to support 'education other than elementary ' (3).
The religious clauses of the Act stated that:
A council, in the application of money under this Part of the Act, shall not require that any particular form of religious instruction or worship or any religious catechism or formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall or shall not be taught, used or practised in any school, college or hostel aided but not provided by the council, and no pupil shall, on the ground of religious belief, be excluded from or placed in an inferior position in any school, college or hostel provided by the council, and no catechism or formulary distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught in any school, college or hostel so provided, except in cases where the council, at the request of parents of scholars, at such times and under such conditions as the council think desirable, allow any religious instruction to be given in the school, college or hostel otherwise than at the cost of the council: Provided that, in the exercise of this power, no unfair preference shall be shown to any religious denomination. (4(1))
A scholar ... shall not be required, as a condition of being admitted into or remaining in the school or college, to attend or abstain from attending any Sunday school, place of religious worship, religious observance or instruction in religious subjects in the school or college or elsewhere. ... The times for religious worship or for any lesson on a religious subject shall be conveniently arranged for the purpose of allowing the withdrawal of any such scholar therefrom ' (4(2)).
Part III Elementary Education
LEAs were to have the power and duties of the former school boards and attendance committees (5).
All public elementary schools provided by the LEA were to have a body of managers including up to 4 LEA representatives; managers of non-provided schools were to include 2 LEA representatives; schools could be grouped under one management body (6).
LEAs were required to 'maintain and keep efficient ' all public elementary schools in their areas. Non-provided schools must obey LEA directions relating to the 'secular instruction ' and the number and qualifications of the teachers of secular instruction; LEAs were also empowered to inspect the schools (7(1)). 'Religious instruction given in a public elementary school not provided by the local education authority shall, as regards its character, be in accordance with the provisions (if any) of the trust deed relating thereto, and shall be under the control of the managers (7(6)).
Managers of non-provided schools were to have 'exclusive power of appointing and dismissing teachers ', subject to the powers of the LEA (7(7)).
Other provisions relating to elementary education included: * the provision of new schools, enlargement or transfer of schools to or from an LEA (8) - in disputed cases the Board of Education would determine whether such new schools were necessary (9); * Parliament would pay LEAs four shillings per scholar per year (10); * foundation managers were to be appointed under the provisions of the trust deed of the school, as long as such provisions were consistent with the provisions of the Act (11); * LEAs were empowered to group provided and non-provided schools under one management body, with the consent of the managers in the case of the latter (12); * provisions relating to endowments (13); * non-provided schools which previously charged fees could continue to do so, but LEAs were empowered to pay a proportion of those fees (14); * provisions relating to schools attached to institutions (marine schools etc) (15); and * the Board of Education was empowered to hold an inquiry where an LEA did not fulfil its obligations in relation to elementary schools (16).
Part IV General
LEAs were required to appoint education committees which were to have a majority of council representatives, must include women, and might cover more than one council area (17).
The remaining provisions of the Act (18-27) related to various miscellaneous matters including council expenses (18), council borrowing (19), arrangements between councils (20), and the power of LEAs to make provision for teacher training (22(3)).
Schedules
1 Provision as to Education Committee and Managers
2 Provisions as to Transfers of Property and Officers, and Adjustment
3 Modification of Acts etc
4 Enactments Repealed

Further developments
Balfour 's Conservative government lost the general election of 1905 and was replaced by a Liberal administration. The Liberals were to remain in power until 1916 under prime ministers Henry Campbell-Bannerman (1905-08) and Herbert Asquith (1908-16) and then as part of a coalition government under David Lloyd George (1916-22).
1904 Regulations for Secondary Schools
In 1904 the Board of Education published the first of its annual Regulations for Secondary Schools, defining a four year subject-based course leading to a certificate in English language and literature, geography, history, a foreign language, mathematics, science, drawing, manual work, physical training, and, for girls, housewifery. The Regulations reinforced the tendency of the new secondary schools to adopt the academic bias of the established ones.
The object of these rules was 'to ensure a certain measure of breadth and richness in the curriculum of Secondary Schools, and to provide against Schools recognised under that name offering only an education which is stunted, illiberal, unpractical or over-specialised ' (Hadow 1923:39).
The Board explained that with the growth of educated public opinion it might be possible - and it was certainly highly desirable - 'to relax these requirements in schools of tested efficiency, and to leave them a larger freedom in devising and executing schemes of education of their own ' (Board 's Report for 1905-6 (Cd. 3270) page 46, quoted in Hadow 1923:39).
1906 and 1914 Education (Provision of Meals) Acts
The Education (Provision of Meals) Act 1906 (21 December 1906) empowered (but did not require) LEAs to provide meals for undernourished elementary school children.
The Education (Provision of Meals) Act 1914 (7 August 1914) extended this power.
One LEA which quickly took advantage of this new power was the City of Bradford. In an Education Committee Report, Medical Superintendent Ralph H Crowley reported on a 'Course of Meals given to Necessitous Children ' between April and July 1907:
The meals, consisting of breakfast and dinner were given in a School in one of the poorest quarters of the city, about 30 of the children coming from this school, and 10 from an adjacent one. The children were selected out of Standards I. to IV. by the Head Teacher and myself. ... Every effort was made to make the meals, as far as possible, educational. There were tablecloths and flowers on the tables; monitresses, whose duty it was to lay the tables and to wait on the other children, were appointed, one to each group of 10 children; they were provided with aprons and sleeves and had their meals together after the other children. ... The table cloths, it is true were very dirty at the end of the week, but this was chiefly due to the dirty clothing of the children, and owing to the very inadequate provision at the school for the children to wash themselves, it was difficult to ensure that even their hands were clean. (quoted in The National Archives: School Dinners)
1907 Education (Administrative Provisions) Act
This Act (28 August 1907) established the scholarship and free place system for secondary education (which already existed in some areas), designed to give promising children from elementary schools the opportunity to go to secondary schools (sections 11-12). It required LEAs to provide for the medical inspection of children in public elementary schools and the power (which became a duty in 1918) to attend to their health and physical condition (13). This was effectively the start of the school health service.
The Act 's main provisions related to: * the acquisition of land by LEAs (sections 1-2); * various financial matters (including the repayment of loans by county councils and their power to contribute to capital expenditure incurred in the provision of non-elementary education (3-9); * councils ' powers under Parts II and III of the 1902 Education Act (10); * councils ' power to 'aid by scholarships or bursaries the instruction in public elementary schools of scholars from the age of twelve up to the limit of age fixed for the provision of instruction in a public elementary school by subsection two of section twenty-two of that Act ' (11); * the extension of councils ' power to aid 'education other than elementary ' (12); * the extension of councils ' power to provide vacation schools and play centres, and their duty to provide medical inspections (13); * school attendance - distance was not to be an excuse where the LEA provided 'suitable means of conveyance ' (14); * the duty of councils to provide the Board of Education with information (15); and * changes in the registration of teachers (16).
 Download the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act 1907 (pdf image 960kb).
1907 Free Place Regulations
In 1903 the Board of Education adopted a new policy for the training of pupil teachers. The Regulations for the Instruction and Training of Pupil Teachers provided that from August 1905 intending pupil teachers should, as a rule, receive instruction in a secondary school up to the age of 16. The LEAs were faced with the urgent need for more generous provision of scholarships and bursaries so that able pupils from public elementary schools could go on to secondary schools (see Hadow 1931:16).
The system of scholarships - which had been in place since 1902 - was greatly advanced by the 1907 Education (Administrative Provisions) Act and the Free Place Regulations which followed. These made it easier for elementary school pupils to attend the new fee-charging secondary schools. Enhanced grants were offered to secondary schools in which 'free placers ' - who had to sit a competitive qualifying examination - formed at least a quarter of the pupils.
As a result of these arrangements for the education of pupil teachers and for the examination of candidates for free places, teachers began to devote more attention to the instruction of children under the age of 11. So, while primarily designed to further secondary education, the regulations indirectly fostered the improvement of education in the elementary schools, and strengthened the case for a break in education at the age of 11 or 12 (seeHadow 1931:17).
The Board of Education 's Elementary Code of 1907 sought to clarify the aims and improve the quality of elementary education.
Reports
The first half of the 20th century was a period of great activity in educational thinking and research. This is clearly demonstrated by the number of reports produced by the Board of Education 's newly-established Consultative Committee.
In this early part of the period (1900-1918) these were: * Examinations in secondary schools (exact title currently unknown) (1904) * Questions affecting higher elementary schools (1906); * School Attendance of Children Below the Age of Five (1908); * Attendance, Compulsory or Otherwise, at Continuation Schools(1909); * Examinations in secondary schools (1911); and * Practical work in secondary schools (1913).

A bewildering variety of schools
By the end of the 19th century the nomenclature of England 's schools was already bewildering: public, grammar, endowed, proprietary, elementary, first, second and third grade, board, voluntary, preparatory, monitorial, higher tops etc.
Now, in the early years of the 20th century, yet more categories of school were added.
Higher elementary schools
As we have seen, higher elementary schools were established in 1900 as an interim measure following the Cockerton Judgement. These schools received a higher rate of grant than the ordinary public elementary schools on condition that they provided a four-year course for promising children aged 10 to 15. The curriculum included drawing, theoretical and practical science, a foreign language and elementary mathematics.
In July 1905 the Board of Education asked the Consultative Committee to consider the curriculum of the higher elementary schools.
The Report of the Consultative Committee Questions affecting higher elementary schools was published in May 1906. It argued that a higher elementary school should continue the general education which a child had already received in the ordinary elementary school. The first need was 'to secure for each child as much humanity, as much accurate knowledge of general elementary fact and as much mental power and manual aptitude, as could be expected during a short course of instruction extending over three years at a comparatively early age. ' The course should consist of three strands: humanistic, scientific and manual, and, in the case of girls, domestic.
The Committee envisaged a comparatively small number of such schools and recognised that it was impossible to lay down general rules as to their distribution: different places would require different provision. It was essential that employers should be encouraged to take an interest in them. Pupils should not be allowed to sit external examinations, because this would unduly influence the character of the curriculum and result in their transformation into pseudo-secondary schools.
In fact, few schools of this type were ever recognised - just 31 in England and 14 in Wales - mainly because their science-based curriculum was expensive in terms of buildings, equipment and maintenance (see Spens 1938:63 and Hadow 1926:27-28, 30-31).
Central schools
The expansion of secondary education after 1902 enabled England to keep pace with its growing technical demands. By 1911, the national census and Board of Education surveys showed that about 8 per cent of 14 and 15 year olds and 2 per cent of 16 and 17 year olds were being educated in schools either publicly provided or recognised by the Board of Education, and fifty per cent of children were staying on at school until they were 14.
However, as more and more elementary school pupils wanted to stay at school beyond 14, the new secondary schools could not meet the demand. So new 'central schools ' were established to take up the work of the higher grade schools (see Crowther 1959:12).
Central schools provided an improved general education of a practical character, sometimes with a slight industrial or commercial bias, for pupils between the ages of 11 and 14 or 15. A considerable number of such schools, both selective and non-selective, were established in London, Manchester and elsewhere from 1911 onwards. They were 'another example of the general tendency of the national system of elementary education since 1870 to throw up experiments in post-primary education ' (Hadow 1931:17). The development of central schools, alongside the secondary schools, further accentuated the tendency in the larger urban areas to introduce a break in school life at the age of 11.
A number of higher elementary and higher grade schools, and some built originally as 'organised schools of science ', were absorbed into the central schools system. Chapter XV of London County Council Education Committee 's Elementary Schools Handbook (1923) explained that the schools were primarily to prepare girls and boys for employment and that they should have an industrial or commercial bias or both.
About 1912 Manchester Education Authority instituted six district central schools on similar lines, designed to give an improved general education to children up to the age of 15, and several other LEAs had established central schools by 1918 (see Hadow 1926:31-32).
Thus the position of the Central School was intermediate between that of the Secondary School on the one hand and that of the Junior Technical School or Trade School on the other, being distinguished from the former by its lower leaving age and less academic curriculum, and from the latter by its earlier age of admission and the fundamental fact that it did not in any sense aim at providing technical training for any particular trade or business. (Hadow 1926:32)
Day trade schools
Day trade schools, mainly for boys, were established, especially in the London area, from about 1900 onwards. The first of these was the Trade School for Furniture and Cabinet-making, founded at the Shoreditch Technical Institute in 1901. They were designed to take boys at or near the completion of their elementary school career for a period of one, two or three years, and to give a specialised training that would fit them to enter into workshop or factory life, at about the age of 16, with the prospect of becoming skilled workers or of rising ultimately to positions of responsibility as foremen, draughtsmen, or even managers.
Such trade schools received grant as 'Day Technical Classes ' from 1904-05 onwards under Article 42 of the Regulations for Evening Schools, Technical Institutions, etc. Many of these were organised as Courses within an existing Technical School or College (see Hadow 1926:32).
Junior technical schools
In 1913 the Board of Education issued Regulations for a new category of 'Junior Technical Schools '. These were day schools providing two or three year post-elementary courses for boys and girls. They combined a general education with preparation for industrial employment at the age of 15 or 16 (see Hadow 1926:33).
Infant schools
By the early 1900s the environmental conditions needed for the proper physical and mental development of young children were better understood than before, and the training of children below the age of five was discussed by both educationists and doctors.
Educationists argued that the elementary schools were not providing a suitable type of education for under-fives, while doctors suggested that attendance at school was actually prejudicial to health, since it deprived young children of sleep, fresh air, exercise and freedom of movement at a critical stage in their development (see Hadow 1933:30-31).
The new LEAs sought guidance on the issue, so the Board of Education asked five of its recently appointed Women Inspectors to conduct an inquiry regarding the admission of infants to public elementary schools and the curriculum suitable for under-fives.
In their reports, published in 1905, the inspectors were agreed that children between the ages of three and five did not benefit intellectually from school instruction, and that the mechanical teaching which they often received dulled their imagination and weakened their power of independent observation.
Kindergarten teachers were praised, but kindergarten 'occupations ' - when taught mechanically in large classes - were condemned as being contrary to the spirit of Froebel. One inspector wrote:
Kindergarten occupations are often distinguished by absence of occupation, for in effect it is not education that is offered, nor even instruction in anything but drill, the children being kept idle, silent and still for long intervals, while the teacher inspects the last little act that she has imposed upon the class by word of command. (Board of Education 1905, quoted in Hadow 1933:31)

1914-1918 World War I
It is almost impossible to exaggerate the effects of the first world war. Eight million soldiers died and more than twenty million were seriously injured. Diseases flourished in the chaos - especially typhus, malaria and flu. The political map of Europe was changed irrevocably, and the continent emerged from the turmoil facing social and economic devastation.
The war took an equally terrible toll on Britain: of the six million men who were conscripted to fight, 750,000 were killed and 1.7 million were wounded. Most of the casualties were young unmarried men, but 300,000 children lost their fathers.
David Lloyd George (pictured) replaced Asquith as Liberal prime minister in the middle of the war and became leader of a coalition government of Liberals and Conservatives. His own party was very divided over his decision to enter this coalition and he was frequently forced to rely on Conservative support.
Lloyd George was an able war leader and an important player in the reconstruction of both Europe as a whole and Britain in particular during the post-war period. In the 1918 election he declared that Britain must become a land 'fit for heroes '. His 'National Liberal ' coalition won a landslide victory, but the divisions within his own party were now even more pronounced: Asquith led a group of 'Independent Liberals ' who gained 33 seats in Commons and, once again, Lloyd George had to rely on Conservative support.
The world war spluttered to a halt during 1918 as the various combatants made peace deals. The armistice with Germany was signed on 11 November, though a state of war officially existed between the two sides until the signing of the Treaty of Versailles on 28 June 1919.
Lloyd George set about an ambitious programme of post-war social reform: the national insurance scheme was extended to cover almost all workers, old age pensions were doubled, local authority house building programmes were subsidised, and in 1919 the Ministry of Health was established.
Education was not entirely neglected during the war and was an important element in the post-war reconstruction programme. The government 's Consultative Committee produced its report on Scholarships for higher education in 1916, after which it was suspended until 1920. In 1917 the Secondary Schools Examination Council was established to administer the new School Certificate and Higher School Certificate examinations, and the Lewis Report proposed a school leaving age of 14 with no exemptions, followed by attendance for at least 8 hours a week or 320 hours a year at 'day continuation ' classes up to age 18.
Unfortunately, spiralling public expenditure forced the government to implement severe cuts in the early 1920s (the so-called 'Geddes axe '), which meant that progress in social reform was slower than Lloyd George had hoped.
 For more on this period see David Lloyd George (Wikipedia).
1918 Education Act (The Fisher Act)
Most of the Lewis Report 's recommendations were enacted in the 1918 Education Act (8 August 1918), which extended educational provision, increased the powers and duties of the Board of Education, raised the school leaving age from 12 to to 14 and gave all young workers right of access to day release education. (The raising of the leaving age was not immediately implemented, however, and had to wait until the 1921 Act).
 Download the Education Act 1918 (pdf text 748kb).
Summary of the Act
Sections 1-7 dealt with the provision of a National System of Public Education.
Every county and county borough was required to provide for 'the progressive development and comprehensive organisation of education in respect of their area ' (Section 1).
Local education authorities were required to ensure
(a) that public elementary schools included 'practical instruction ' in the curriculum and offered advanced instruction 'for the older or more intelligent children ';
(b) that they attended to 'the health and physical condition of the children; and
(c) that they co-operated with other LEAs to prepare children for further education 'in schools other than elementary ', and to provide for the supply and training of teachers (2).
LEAs were to establish and maintain 'a sufficient supply of continuation schools ', co-operate with universities in the provision of lectures and classes, and appoint LEA representatives to the managing bodies of such schools 'if practicable ' (3).
In preparing schemes for submission to the Board of Education, LEAs were to consult with other authorities and parents within their area, take into account non-LEA provision, and ensure that 'children and young persons shall not be debarred from receiving the benefits of any form of education by which they are capable of profiting through inability to pay fees ' (4). Suitable schemes would be approved, inadequate ones discussed with the LEA concerned and, if agreement could not be reached, the Board of Education would hold a public inquiry (5).
LEAs could combine to form federations. The managing bodies of such federations should include 'teachers or other persons of experience in education and of representatives of universities or other bodies ' (6).
The limit on LEA education expenditure imposed by the 1902 Education Act was abolished (7).
Sections 8-16 covered Attendance at School and Employment of Children and Young Persons.
School attendance would be compulsory from 5 to 14 (15 in certain cases). Such attendance could only count if the school was inspected and registers were kept. In certain circumstances an LEA could make the lower age limit 6 and the upper age limit 16. Any changes the LEA made to arrangements for secular instruction must not prevent a child from receiving religious instruction (8).
LEAs could require that pupils ' admission and leaving dates coincided with the start and end of school terms (9).
It would be compulsory for all children under 16 (with certain specified exemptions) to attend continuation schools for 320 hours a year (a minimum of 280 hours would be acceptable during the first seven years of the operation of the Act), with dates and times to be arranged by the LEA (10). Non-attendance could result in fines ranging from 5s (25p) to £5 (11). There were new administrative provisions relating to continuation schools (12).
The rules relating to the employment of children were amended. No under-twelves were to be employed and there were new limits on the employment of over-twelves. No child was to be employed in street trading. LEA permission would be needed for children taking part in licensed entertainments (13). Children were banned from working in factories, workshops, mines, and quarries (14) and no child was to be employed in circumstances which might be 'prejudicial to his health or physical development, or to render him unfit to obtain the proper benefit from his education ' (15). The Act laid down penalties for the illegal employment of children and young persons (16).
Sections 17-25 dealt with the Extension of Powers and Duties of local education authorities. They were: * empowered to provide holiday or school camps, physical training centres and equipment, playing fields, school baths, and school swimming baths (17); * required to provide medical inspections and treatment in allmaintained schools (not just in elementary schools, as had been required by the 1902 Education Act) (18); * empowered to provide or aid nursery schools for 2-5 year olds. The Board of Education would make grants for such schools provided they were inspected by the LEA (19); * required to identify 'physically defective or epileptic ' children in their areas. The scope of the Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act 1914 was widened to include physically defective as well as 'mentally defective ' children (20); * empowered to offer board and lodging to children in certain circumstances - such lodging to be, where possible and if the parents requested it, 'with a person belonging to the religious persuasion of the child 's parents ' (21); * empowered (in some cases) to extend the provision of employment advice to 18 year olds (22); * empowered to aid teachers and students in carrying out research 'for the advancement of learning ' (23); * empowered to include maintenance allowances in the provision of scholarships under the 1902 Education Act (24); and * prohibited from establishing 'a general domiciliary service of treatment by medical practitioners for children or young persons ' but were required to 'consider how far they can avail themselves of the services of private medical practitioners ' (25).
Section 26 provided for the Abolition of Fees in Public Elementary Schools:
No fees shall be charged or other charges of any kind made in any public elementary school, except as provided by the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906, and the Local Education Authorities (Medical Treatment) Act, 1909.
The remainder of the Act (sections 27-52) dealt with various technical and administrative matters: * voluntary inspection of schools not liable for government inspection (27); * provision of information by non-maintained schools to the Board of Education (28); * appointment of certain classes of teachers by LEAs (29); * managers of non-maintained elementary schools to give the LEA 18 months ' notice of their intention to close the school (30); * grouping of non-provided schools 'of the same denominational character ' if required by an LEA (31); * power of LEAs over central schools and classes (32); * acquisition of land by a local education authority (34); * LEAs ' power to provide elementary schools outside their own areas (35); * allocation of expenses to particular areas (36); * council expenses relating to Provisional Orders (37); * expenses of education meetings and conferences (38); * expenses of prosecution for cruelty (39); * public inquiries by the Board of Education (40); * minutes of LEA proceedings to be open to the ratepayer (41); * payments to the Central Welsh Board (42); * 'certificates, notices, requirements, and documents ' issued by local education authorities (43); * Board of Education grants to LEAs for at least half of their expenditure on schools (44); * the trustees and property of educational trusts (45-47); and * other technical matters (48-52).
As a result of the provisions in section 2 of the Act, the Board withdrew the Regulations for Higher Elementary Schools (see Hadow 1926:33-34).

1918-1939 Between the wars
Politically, the twenty years between the two world wars saw leaders of all three main parties come to grief. Lloyd George 's Liberals were defeated in 1922 and his party has never won an election since. Ramsay MacDonald led Labour into government for the first time but he was expelled from the party after he agreed to lead a Conservative-dominated coalition. Stanley Baldwin led the Conservatives for most of the period, with Neville Chamberlain replacing him in 1937. Chamberlain was forced to resign in 1940 when Labour and the Liberals refused to join a coalition while he remained Conservative leader.
In socio-economic terms, the inter-war years were equally difficult. The depression of the early 1930s caused devastation in northern industrial areas. Unemployment rose to 2.5 million and in some areas the proportion out of work reached 70 per cent. A quarter of the population existed on a subsistence diet, often with signs of child malnutrition such as scurvy, rickets and tuberculosis. National Hunger Marches were held and queueing at soup kitchens became a way of life.
Towards the end of the period there were signs of improvement, especially in the more prosperous areas of the midlands and the south: the manufacture of electrical goods, a booming motor industry and improvements in agriculture were matched by a growing population and an expanding middle class.
 For more on this topic see Great Depression in the United Kingdom(Wikipedia).
In education, the period may be viewed as one of consolidation and preparation.
The wide-ranging education act of 1921 consolidated all previous education legislation and raised the school leaving age to 14. The 1936 education act raised the leaving age to 15.
Meanwhile, the government 's Consultative Committee produced six reports - the five Hadow reports published between 1923 and 1933, and the Spens report of 1938. All these made recommendations which would shape the national education system in the wake of the 1944 Education Act.
There was also much debate about the nature of primary education, with growing interest in the works of Dewey, Montessori and Edmond Holmes, and Susan Isaacs ' books on the intellectual and social development of children.
Even the Board of Education came up with some surprisingly modern ideas. The Prefatory Note to the 1918 edition of its Handbook of Suggestions for the Consideration of Teachers declared that:
Neither the present volume nor any developments or amendments of it are designed to impose any regulations supplementary to those contained in the Code. The only uniformity of practice that the Board of Education desire to see in the teaching of Public Elementary Schools is that each teacher shall think for himself, and work out for himself such methods of teaching as may use his powers to the best advantage and be best suited to the particular needs and conditions of the school. Uniformity in details of practice (except in the mere routine of school management) is not desirable even if it were attainable. But freedom implies a corresponding responsibility in its use.
And it added:
However, the teacher need not let the sense of his responsibility depress him or make him afraid to be his natural self in school. Children are instinctively attracted by sincerity and cheerfulness; and the greatest teachers have been thoroughly human in their weaknesses as well as in their strength. ' (1918 Handbook, quoted in MoE 1959:9)

1921 Education Act
The 1921 Education Act (19 August 1921) raised the school leaving age to 14 and consolidated all previous laws relating to education and to the employment of children and young persons.
Summary of the Act
Part I Central and Local Education Authorities
The Board of Education remained the Central Authority for education (Section 1) and the consultative committee was retained (2).
The Act specified which councils would be local education authorities (LEAs) (3), required them to have education committees (4) and laid down rules for their operation (5-10).
Part II Schemes as to Powers and Duties
LEAs were to provide for 'the development and comprehensive organisation of education in respect of their area ' (11) and to submit schemes to the Board of Education for elementary education and for continuation schools (12-16).
Part III Elementary Schools
LEAs were: * required to 'maintain and keep efficient all public elementary schools within their area ' and provide sufficient accommodation, including new schools where the Board of Education deemed them necessary (17-19); * required to ensure provision in elementary schools of 'practical instruction suitable to the ages, abilities, and requirements of the children ', and 'courses of advanced instruction for the older or more intelligent children ' including those who stayed on beyond the age of 14 (20); * empowered to provide nursery schools (or classes) for 2-5 year olds, and to attend to the 'health, nourishment, and physical welfare ' of children attending such schools (21); * empowered to provide children with 'vacation schools, vacation classes, play-centres or other means of recreation during their holidays ' (22); * empowered to provide board and lodging in certain cases (23), scholarships or bursaries (24), marine schools (25), and, in certain cases, education up to the age of 16 (26).
The Act laid down regulations for the conduct of public elementary schools: * no pupil was to be required to attend or abstain from attending 'any Sunday School, or any place of religious worship ' (27(1)(a)); * parents were entitled to withdraw children from religious observance or instruction (27(1)(b)); * schools (and the religious instruction in them) was to be open to HMI 'at all times ' (27(1)(c)); * LEAs were to report infractions of these rules to the Board of Education (27(2)); * 'No religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught in the school ' (28); * LEAs were to have control of secular instruction in non-provided public elementary schools (29); * every public elementary school provided by the LEA was to have a body of managers, and two LEA representatives were to be appointed to the managers of non-provided schools (30); * other provisions concerned: foundation managers (31-32), the grouping of schools under one management (33-34), the powers of managers (35), the management and grouping of provided schools in London (36), the prohibition of fees in public elementary schools (37), the power to transfer a school to the LEA (38), the re-transfer of schools (39), the closure of a school (40), and endowments (41).
Part IV School Attendance
It shall be the duty of the parent of every child between the ages of five and fourteen, or, if a byelaw under this Act so provides, between the ages of six and fourteen, to cause that child to receive efficient elementary instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic. (42)
The Act went on to make provisions regarding: * the duty of LEAs to enforce attendance (43); * school attendance orders (44); * proceedings in cases of non-compliance with school attendance orders (45); * the duty of LEAs to make byelaws (46); * the powers of the Board of Education in case of default of an authority (47); * procedure for Board of Education approval of byelaws (48); * the definition of 'reasonable excuse ' for non-attendance of a child (sickness etc) (49); and * application of the attendance rules to children in canal boats (50).
Part V Blind, Deaf, Defective and Epileptic Children
The Act required: * parents to ensure that blind and deaf children received suitable education (51); * LEAs to provide or obtain suitable education for blind and deaf children - but not for 'idiots or imbeciles ', residents of workhouses or those 'boarded out by guardians ' (52); * parents to ensure that 'defective and epileptic ' children received suitable education (53); * LEAs to enforce attendance of defective and epileptic children (54); * LEAs to identify defective and epileptic children - certificates 'in such form as may be prescribed by the Board of Education ' were to be obtained from a 'duly qualified medical practitioner ' (55); and * LEAs to provide or obtain suitable education for defective and epileptic children (56).
LEAs were empowered to close special schools or classes for defective and epileptic children if the average attendance was less than 15 (57) and were required to consult with parents and others over provision for such children (58).
The remainder of Part V made general provisions regarding the education of blind, deaf, defective and epileptic children (59-69).
Part VI Higher Education
Part VI made provisions regarding: * the duty of LEAs to 'supply or aid the supply of higher education, and to promote the general co-ordination of all forms of education ' (70); * the power of LEAs to train teachers for such education, to make provision outside their area, and to provide scholarships (71); * rules regarding religious instruction: these were to be the same as for elementary schools (72); * the transfer to LEAs of schools for science and art (73); * the power of LEAs to aid educational research (74); * LEAs ' duty to provide sufficient continuation schools 'in which suitable courses of study, instruction, and physical training are provided without payment of fees ' (75); * LEAs ' power to require attendance at continuation schools (76); * exemptions from attendance at continuation schools (77); and * the enforcement of attendance (78).
Part VII Provisions for Health and Well-being of Scholars
LEAs were: * required to provide medical inspections and treatment (80); * empowered to recover the cost of treatment from parents (81); * empowered to support the provision of meals by 'school canteen committees ' (82); * empowered to recover the cost of meals from parents (83); * empowered to provide free meals to children 'unable by reason of lack of food to take full advantage of the education provided for them ' (84); * empowered to provide holiday or school camps, centres and equipment for physical training, playing fields, swimming baths and 'other facilities for social and physical training ' (86); * required to ensure the 'cleansing of verminous children ' (87); * empowered to provide transport for teachers and children in certain cases (88); and * empowered to bring prosecutions for child cruelty (89).
Teachers were under no obligation to supervise meals or collect money for them (85).
Part VIII Employment of Children and Young Persons
The Act laid down rules regarding: * LEAs ' powers to make byelaws for regulating the employment of children (90) and street trading (91); * limitations on the employment of children (no under 12s etc) (92); * the suspension of employment to ensure attendance at continuation schools (93); * LEAs ' power to prohibit employment if it was prejudicial to the child 's health, physical development or education (94-95); * offences and penalties (96-97); * the power of LEAs to inspect places of employment (98); * restrictions on the employment of children in entertainments (99), and LEAs ' power to issue licences for such employment (100-104); * general provisions (105); * provisions relating to the city of London (106); * LEAs ' powers to offer employment advice to under 18s (107); and * exceptions relating to children in 'certified industrial or reformatory schools ' (108).
Part IX General
This last part of the Act covered matters relating to: * purchase of land by LEAs (109-117); * Board of Education grants (118-132); * inspection of schools (133-134); * age of children (135-138); * legal proceedings (139-147); * LEA officers (148-149); * powers of the Board of Education to enforce the duties of LEAs (150-151); * the duty of LEAs and school managers to provide the Board of Education with attendance returns and other information (152-155); and * the power of the Board of Education to hold public inquiries (156).
The remaining sections of the Act dealt with other technical matters (157-172).

1936 Education Act
The 1936 Education Act (31 July 1936) raised the school leaving age to 15, but empowered LEAs to issue employment certificates to allow 14 year olds to work rather than attend school in certain circumstances - for example, where a family would suffer 'exceptional hardship ' if the child did not work (Sections 1-7).
The raising of the school leaving age necessitated extra accommodation which had enormous cost implications, especially for the churches. The 1936 Act therefore empowered LEAs to make agreements regarding the enlargement or establishment of non-provided elementary schools for senior children, and to make grants of between half and three quarters of the cost of such a scheme; provided that religious instruction was given in accordance with the LEA 's syllabus and that the teachers were employed, appointed and dismissed by the LEA (8-11). These became known as 'special agreement ' schools. As a result, the Church of England submitted proposals for 230 new schools, the Catholic Church for 289.
The Act required non-provided schools, where possible, to provide religious instruction in accordance with the LEA 's syllabus if parents requested it (12); and it allowed parents to withdraw their children during religious instruction periods if they wished them to receive 'religious instruction of a kind which is not given in the school ' (13).

Other Acts
Two other acts in this period related to children 's welfare and higher education.
1920 Employment of Women, Young Persons, and Children Act
This Act (23 December 1920) amended employment law to bring it into line with conventions agreed by the International Labour Organisation of the League of Nations in 1919 and 1920.
 Download the Employment of Women, Young Persons, and Children Act 1920 (pdf text 220kb).
1923 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge Act
This Act (31 July 1923) established Commissions for the two universities and set out their membership and duties.
 Download the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge Act 1923 (pdf text 384kb).

Reports
1921 Newbolt Report
The Board of Education 's enthusiasm for reports continued after World War I. In 1919 a departmental committee was set up under Sir Henry Newbolt 'to inquire into the position occupied by English (Language and Literature) in the educational system of England '.
The committee 's report The Teaching of English in England declared that 'every teacher is a teacher of English ' (Newbolt 1921:63) and that, while all pupils should be taught to speak standard English, dialects should not be suppressed. It stressed the importance of the art of listening, communication skills and drama; and argued that the needs of business were best met by 'a liberal education ' (Newbolt 1921:129). It called for improvements in teacher training and the raising of the status of English in university exams.
The Hadow Reports
Six further reports were published in the decade between 1923 and 1933. These were produced by the government 's Consultative Committee, chaired by Sir Henry Hadow. They were: * The Differentiation of the Curriculum (1923) * Psychological Tests of Educable Capacity (1924) * The Education of the Adolescent (1926) * Books in Public Elementary Schools (1928) * The Primary School (1931) * Infant and Nursery Schools (1933)
The importance of the Hadow reports to the development of the education system during the 20th century is hard to overestimate. The Education of the Adolescent, for example, proposed the division of the elementary school system into two stages, junior and senior, with a break at eleven for all.
Galton, Simon and Croll (1980:32) argue that the motivation for this fundamental change did not arise from any serious consideration of the needs and character of children aged seven to eleven (or five to eleven). It arose solely from a consideration of the needs of the older (senior) children.
This is, perhaps, a little unfair. The 1931 and 1933 reports demonstrated a considerable concern for the education and welfare of younger pupils and contained some surprisingly progressive ideas.
The 1931 report suggested, for example, that 'A good school ... is not a place of compulsory instruction, but a community of old and young, engaged in learning by co-operative experiment ' (Hadow 1931:xvii) and that 'the curriculum of the primary school is to be thought of in terms of activity and experience rather than knowledge to be acquired and facts to be stored ' (Hadow 1931:93).
 For summaries and analysis of the Hadow reports, see my article The Hadow Reports: an introduction.
1938 Spens Report
By the late 1930s, about ten per cent of elementary school pupils were being selected to go on to secondary schools. The rest either remained in 'all-age ' schools or went on to senior schools.
It was becoming clear that England 's class-divided secondary schools were failing the nation 's children. Twice as many students were going on to higher education in Germany, more than twice as many in France, over three times as many in Switzerland, and almost ten times as many in the US. Scotland 's education system, 'based on a widespread respect for learning and a more traditionally egalitarian social outlook ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:4), was also doing much better than England 's.
Yet arguments were still put forward in support of a divided and elitist system. The only difference was that, whereas in the late 19th century such divisions were openly based on class, now they were based on notions of intelligence and aptitude.
Thus the 1938 Spens Report Secondary Education with Special Reference to Grammar Schools and Technical High Schoolsrecommended that there should be three types of secondary school: * grammar schools for the academically able; * technical schools for those with a practical bent; and * new 'modern ' secondary schools for the rest.
(Spens also recommended that the school leaving age should be raised to 16. Incredibly, it would be 1973 before this was finally implemented).
The newly-appointed principal of London University 's Institute of Education, Fred Clarke, was horrified. The proposed 'tripartite system ' would be 'hardly intelligible ... in ... any British dominion or in the United States ', he wrote, and warned that failure to change would 'weaken the power of Britain to co-operate with the other free peoples of the world ' and would 'intensify social conflict ' at home (Clarke 1940:44, quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:5).
Trades unionists and others in the Labour Party began to campaign for a unified and more equal system of schools, and in 1942 several local government chief executives, anxious to have a more rational system, asked for an end to plans for differentiated secondary education. But their pleas fell on deaf ears and, as we shall see in the next chapter, 'The decision-makers at the Ministry of Education were determined on the divided system ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:5).

Primary education
The Education Act of 1918 enforced compulsory education up to the age of 14 and, by making it a duty of local education authorities to provide courses of advanced instruction for older and more intelligent children, encouraged some of the more enlightened authorities to revise their arrangements for children below the age of 12. From 1919, several authorities began to create junior schools and departments.
By the 1920s, London - and some other towns - had numerous 'three decker ' schools. The infant department was on the ground floor, then at the age of seven boys and girls were promoted to one of the other storeys which normally housed separate boys ' and girls ' departments where pupils stayed until they left school at the age of 14.
The 1926 Hadow report proposed a rearrangement of the two upper storeys: it suggested that there should be a change of department at 11 as well as at seven years of age. The typical three decker could be rearranged quite easily to meet these suggestions. The three storeys could house infant, junior and senior departments instead of infant, girls ' and boys ' departments (see Plowden 1967 I:97-99).
Following the Hadow reports of 1926 and 1931 reorganisation began in earnest. In just three years, from 1927 to 1930, the number of pupils in separate junior departments rose from 150,000 to 400,000 - an increase from seven to sixteen per cent of the total child population aged between eight and twelve (see Plowden 1967 I:99).
Hadow 's 1926 recommendation for transfer at age 11 led to the creation of primary schools (sometimes referred to as junior schools) for children aged 5-11, which became government policy from 1928, though they were only formally established in the 1944 Education Act.
In their reports of 1931 and 1933 the Hadow committee made suggestions about the style of education to be offered in these schools. This was important because, despite the efforts of the developmentalists, the earliest primary schools bore all the hallmarks of the elementary system 'in terms of cheapness, economy, large classes, obsolete, ancient and inadequate buildings, and so on ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:33). They also continued to provide a curriculum based on the arid drill methods of the elementary schools.
But the principles of child development were beginning to influence - albeit very slowly - the style of education offered to younger pupils. Blyth (1965:40-1) distinguishes five factors which gave impetus to the developmental tradition during this period: * the growth of developmental psychology; * the writings of Dewey, especially his emphasis on the 'curricular importance of collective preparation for change, and on liberation from the traditional thought-patterns which could be regarded as undemocratic whether in the home, the school or society at large ' (Blyth 1965:40); * the 'great wave of emancipation that characterised the years after 1918. Children were to be given the chance to be themselves at any age and in concert with their peers of both sexes ' (Blyth 1965:40); * the growth of what is now rather loosely described as the 'welfare state '; * the rapid growth of the concept of 'secondary education for all ' officially enunciated for the Labour Party by the great socialist historian RH Tawney in 1923.
To Blyth 's list we may add the following: * the kindergarten movement, based on Froebel 's theory and practice from the 1890s onward - 'natural development ', 'spontaneity ' etc. This had been adapted to the Board Schools ' drill practice in an extremely mechanistic manner, so losing its educative significance; * the work of Dr Maria Montessori in the early 1900s, with its emphasis on structured learning, sense training and individualisation. Its main impact was in infant schools, especially middle class private schools; * Margaret and Rachel McMillan and their emphasis on improving hygienic conditions, overcoming children 's physical defects, and providing an appropriate 'environment ' for young children; * What is and what might be published by ex-Chief Inspector of Elementary Schools Edmund Holmes in 1911. This was 'the first striking manifesto of the "progressives" in its total condemnation of the arid drill methods of the contemporary elementary school ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:34); * Susan Isaacs ' two books of 1930 and 1933 on the intellectual and social development of children.
The developmentalists appeared to be winning the argument. Galton, Simon and Croll (1980:35) argue that 'the approach of the "new" educationalists had, by 1939, become the official orthodoxy; propagated in training colleges, Board of Education in-service courses, by local authority inspectors, and the like. '
But was developmentalist education being put into practice? Galton, Simon and Croll (1980:35) are doubtful: 'How far it affected actual practice in schools is, however, another matter. '
There were two main reasons why the implementation of developmentalist education was slow and patchy.
First, the new primary schools quickly became the battleground for a number of competing forces. Those who believed in the new ideas about child development clashed with those who saw the job of the primary schools as being to get children through the 'scholarship ' examination. The latter group tended to win, so the primary schools were seen as a 'sorting, classifying, selective mechanism ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:36).
And second, psychologist Cyril Burt and educationist Percy Nunn continued to assert 'the absolute determination of "intelligence" by hereditary or genetic factors ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:36). They therefore strongly recommended that children should be segregated into classes on the basis of ability ( 'streamed ').
For these two reasons, 'the basic class teaching approach, with the main emphasis on literacy and numeracy, continued in the new junior schools after the Second World War ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:36).
The inter-war years, then, can be characterised as a period when there was a lot of debate about lots of ideas - but little significant action. Once more, educational developments would have to rely on a major war to be the catalyst which precipitated a real advance.

1939-1945 World War II
The second world war, which began in September 1939, had serious effects on the country 's children and their education: * by the end of 1939 a million children had been evacuated from the major cities and had had no schooling for four months; * in 1940 a ship taking 90 London children to safety in Canada was sunk by a torpedo; * by 1943 almost half a million children had been evacuated from London alone; * there were regular gas mask practices in schools; and * as the war came to an end in 1945, a Women 's Institute survey revealed that more than half of village schools still had earth or bucket lavatories. (TES 1999)
It also led to increasing criticism of the education services - and of the Board of Education in particular - over the persistence of half-time schooling and the delay in starting up school medical and meals services for returning evacuees.

More reports
But the war didn 't stop committees from producing yet more reports on education.
1943 Norwood Report
The Norwood Report Curriculum and Examinations in Secondary Schools backed Spens ' idea of three types of schools by arguing that children naturally had three 'types of mind '. The first was the type who is interested in learning for its own sake, who can grasp an argument or follow a piece of connected reasoning, who is interested in causes, whether on the level of human volition or in the material world, who cares to know how things came to be as well as how they are, who is sensitive to language as expression of thought, to a proof as a precise demonstration, to a series of experiments justifying a principle. (Norwood 1943:2)
The second was the pupil whose interests and abilities lie markedly in the field of applied science or applied art. The boy in this group has a strong interest in this direction and often the necessary qualities of mind to carry his interest through to make it his life work at whatever level of achievement. He often has an uncanny insight into the intricacies of mechanism whereas the subtleties of language construction are too delicate for him. (Norwood 1943:3)
As to the third group - the majority:
The pupil in this group deals more easily with concrete things than with ideas. He may have much ability, but it will be in the realm of facts. He is interested in things as they are; he finds little attraction in the past or in the slow disentanglement of causes or movements. (Norwood 1943:3) 'Norwood thus imagined an entire mental and emotional universe for its groupings, each of which as it were lived on different worlds, inhabiting different subjectivities ' (Jones 2003:21).
McNair and Fleming Reports
Two further reports were published during the second world war, both in 1944.
The McNair Report Teachers and Youth Leaders (Report of the Committee appointed by the President of the Board of Education to consider the Supply, Recruitment and Training of Teachers and Youth Leaders) recommended the rationalisation of teacher training provision, a three year course and salary increases.
And the Board of Education 's Committee on Public Schools, under the chairmanship of Lord Fleming, published its report The Public schools and the general educational system, which examined how independent schools might be integrated into the state system. It was never implemented.

Special educational needs
Note: The information in this section is taken from chapter 2 (pages 14-19) of the 1978 Warnock Report Special Educational Needs, which itself was largely based on DG Pritchard 's 1963 book Education and the Handicapped 1760-1960.
Following the 1902 Education Act, the new LEAs assumed the functions previously exercised by school boards, including those relating to special education. They were empowered to provide secondary education for blind, deaf, defective and epileptic children.
New facilities were opened, many by voluntary organisations: open air schools, day and boarding schools for physically handicapped children, schools in hospitals and convalescent homes and trade schools. These included the Heritage Craft Schools and Hospital at Chailey, Sussex (1903), the Swinton House School of Recovery at Manchester (1905), the London County Council 's Open Air School at Plumstead (1907) and the Lord Mayor Treloar Cripples ' Hospital and College at Alton (1908). Manchester 's LEA opened a residential school for epileptics in 1910: by 1918 there were six such schools throughout the country.

Provision for mentally defective children
In 1908 of the Royal Commission on the Care and Control of the Feeble-Minded concluded that institutional provision for mentally defective children on occupational lines was to be preferred to provision in special schools. This proposal was not accepted, however, and the Mental Deficiency Act of 1913 required local education authorities to ascertain and certify which children aged 7 to 16 in their area were defective. Only those who were judged by the authority to be incapable of being taught in special schools were to pass to the care of local mental deficiency committees. The duty to provide for the educable children which naturally followed was enacted a year later (see Warnock 1978:14-15).
The Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic) Act 1914 converted into a duty the earlier powers conferred on authorities by the 1899 Act to provide for the education of mentally defective children; the 1918 Education Act did the same in respect of physically defective and epileptic children. Thus compulsory provision was extended to all the categories of handicapped children which had so far been recognised (see Warnock 1978:14).
In 1929 the Mental Deficiency (Wood) Committee reported that 105,000 school children were mentally defective, that only a third of them had been 'ascertained ' and only half of these were actually attending special schools. The Committee also estimated that a further ten per cent of all children, though not mentally deficient, were retarded and failing to make progress in ordinary schools. (After 1944 these children were categorised as 'educationally sub-normal ').
The Wood Committee argued that mentally deficient children should not be isolated from the mainstream of education and proposed that the system of certification should be abolished:
We do not however contemplate that these [special] schools would exist with a different legal sanction, under a different system of nomenclature and under different administrative provisions. If the majority of children for whom these schools ... are intended are, ex hypothesi, to lead the lives of ordinary citizens, with no shadow of a 'certificate ' and all that that implies to handicap their careers, the schools must be brought into closer relation with the Public Elementary School System and presented to parents not as something both distinct and humiliating, but as a helpful variation of the ordinary school. (quoted in Warnock 1978:16)
This view of special education as a variant of ordinary education advanced a principle which would later be extended to all forms and degrees of disability.

Provision for the blind
By 1902 most blind children were receiving education - free for those whose parents could not afford to contribute towards the cost. There were, however, three areas of deficiency: there was no pre-school provision, children with partial sight or hearing were at a disadvantage in ordinary schools, and there was no provision of academic education for girls.
Nursery education for blind children began in 1918 when the Royal National Institute for the Blind opened its first residential home for deprived blind children.
The first provision for partially sighted children was made by the London County Council in 1907, when myopic children in the Authority 's blind schools were taught reading and writing from large type instead of braille. The following year the Council established a special higher class for myopic children. By 1913 eight English authorities were making provision for the partially sighted, and in 1934 the Board of Education Committee of Inquiry into Problems relating to Partially Sighted Children recommended that where possible these children should be educated in classes within ordinary schools and should not be taught alongside the blind. The Committee found that provision for 2,000 partially sighted children was being made in 37 schools and that a further 18 schools for the blind offered special education for the partially sighted. Nevertheless many partially sighted children were being educated as if they were blind.
In 1921 the Institute founded Chorleywood College as a secondary school for blind girls.

Provision for the deaf
Educational provision for the deaf was not brought into line with the blind until 1938 (under the Education (Deaf Children) Act 1937).
The first special school for partially deaf children was established by the Bristol LEA in 1906, and another by the London County Council soon afterwards. But most partially deaf children continued for many years to receive ordinary education or to be taught with deaf children in special schools.
Their needs were examined by the Committee of Inquiry into the Problems relating to Children with Defective Hearing appointed by the Board of Education in 1934. Reporting four years later the Committee recognised that the needs of partially deaf children were different from those of deaf children, and were also varied. It suggested a three-fold classification: those capable of attending ordinary classes without special arrangements; those more severely affected who might either attend an ordinary school with the help of a hearing aid and support from visiting teachers of lip-reading or be taught in a special school (day or boarding) for the partially deaf; and those whose hearing was so impaired that they needed to be educated with the deaf. Teachers of partially deaf pupils should have the same qualifications as those of the deaf. The report led some authorities to provide residential schools for the partially deaf.

Maladjustment
The notion of 'maladjustment ' was relatively new. The British Child Study Association had been founded in 1893 and by the turn of the century University College London 's psychological laboratory was studying difficult children.
In 1913 the London County Council appointed psychologist Cyril Burt to examine cases referred by teachers, school doctors, care workers, magistrates and parents. Largely influenced by developments in America, the concept of child guidance on multi-professional lines began to emerge, and in 1927 the Child Guidance Council, which later merged into the National Association for Mental Health, was formed. It aimed 'to encourage the provision of skilled treatment of children showing behavioural disturbances '.
Voluntary bodies and hospitals began opening clinics, with LEA provision following: by 1939 22 clinics, officially recognised as part of the school medical service, were wholly or partly maintained by authorities. However, since maladjustment was not an officially recognised form of handicap, virtually no provision was made by authorities for these pupils before 1944.
The Board of Education 's Green Paper Education after the war (June 1941) proposed that maladjustment should be recognised as an additional category of handicap. Part V of the 1921 Act, which dealt with the education of handicapped children, should be revised and updated, and the system of certification of defective children should be reconsidered.
The White Paper Educational Reconstruction (1943) contained a chapter devoted to children 's health and welfare. Handicapped children were dealt with in the two sentences of paragraph 97: 'Provision for the blind, deaf and other handicapped children is now made under Part V of the Education Act, 1921. This Part of the Act will require substantial modification ' (Board of Education 1943:25). (For more on the white paper see the next chapter).
Chapter 5 : 1944-1951
Post-war reconstruction

Introduction
In May 1940 Britain had been at war with Nazi Germany for eight months and Conservative prime minister Neville Chamberlain had lost the confidence of his party and most of the public. He was forced to resign and was replaced by Winston Churchill (pictured), who formed a coalition government with a war cabinet consisting of members of both main parties.
In October 1940 President of the Board of Education Herwald Ramsbotham (later Lord Soulbury) met with senior officers of the Board at its temporary office in the Branksome Dene Hotel at Bournemouth. Interrupted by the occasional air raid, they discussed the educational measures which would be needed to achieve the prime minister 's ideal of 'establishing a state of society where the advantages and privileges which hitherto have been enjoyed only by the few, shall be far more widely shared by the men and youth of the nation as a whole ' (quoted in Taylor 1977:158).
The Board 's proposals were set out in Education after the war, the 'Green Book ' which was circulated, on a strictly confidential basis, to selected recipients in June 1941. These proposals formed the basis of much (but not all) of what would become the 1944 Education Act.
It was proposed that the existing differentiation between elementary and secondary education should be abolished and that instead there should be three stages of education: primary, secondary and further. The provision of secondary education would be a duty - not just a power - of local education authorities; all schools at the secondary stage would be subject to a single Code of Regulations 'providing for equality of treatment in such matters as accommodation, size of classes, etc '; and all secondary schools (with the exception of the direct grant grammar schools) would be free.
Rather than ending the 'dual system ' (of LEA-provided and voluntary schools), further financial assistance would be offered to the voluntary schools, 'accompanied, as it must be, by such extended public control as is necessary, not simply to secure a quid pro quo, but to ensure the effective and economical organisation and development of both primary and secondary education ' (quoted in Taylor 1977:159).
Rab Butler (Conservative) was appointed President of the Board of Education in the summer of 1941 and the coalition government began to make plans for an ambitious programme of 'social reconstruction ' in the post-war period. Policies, though executed by ministers of one of the two parties, were jointly agreed. The 1944 Education Act (3 August 1944), based on the 1943 white paper Educational Reconstruction, formed an important part of this programme.
Communist and teachers ' leader GCT Giles described the white paper as 'a drastic recasting of our educational system ' (Giles 1946:21, quoted in Jones 2003:15). He and other reformers were delighted that it promised a free, common and universal system of education for students up to 18 underpinned by the principle that 'the nature of a child 's education should be based on his capacity and promise and not by the circumstances of his parent ' (Board of Education 1943:7).
Indeed, the importance of the Act - sometimes referred to as the Butler Act since it was Butler (pictured) who piloted the bill through parliament - cannot be overemphasised. It replaced almost all previous education legislation and set the framework for the post-war education system in England and Wales. There were similar Education Acts for Scotland (1945) and Northern Ireland (1947).
 Cabinet Papers and other documents relating to the 1944 Education Act can be found on the National Archives website here.

1944 Education Act
The 1944 Act 's major provisions concerned: * the Ministry of Education: - the Minister - Central Advisory Councils for Education; * the statutory system of education: - local education authorities - primary, secondary and further education - school management - secular instruction - appointment and dismissal of teachers - transitional arrangements - special educational treatment - compulsory school age - provision of further education - ancillary services (medicals, milk, meals etc) - employment of children - miscellaneous (prohibition of fees etc); * independent schools; * miscellaneous provisions: - parents ' wishes - inspections - administrative provisions - financial provisions.
 Download the Education Act 1944 (pdf text 1.8mb).
 Download the Education (Scotland) Act 1945 (pdf text 1.5mb).
(The equivalent Act for Northern Ireland is not currently available online).

Summary of the Act
Part I Central Administration
The Act provided for the appointment of a Minister of Education and the establishment of the Ministry of Education. The Minister 's duty was: to promote the education of the people of England and Wales and the progressive development of institutions devoted to that purpose, and to secure the effective execution by local authorities, under his control and direction, of the national policy for providing a varied and comprehensive educational service in every area (Section 1(1)).
Provision was made for the appointment of a Parliamentary Secretary and other staff (1(3) and for the transfer of Board of Education property to the new Ministry (2(1)).
Two Central Advisory Councils for Education (one for England, one for Wales) were to be established 'to advise the Minister upon such matters connected with educational theory and practice as they think fit, and upon any questions referred to them by him ' (4(1)).
The Minister was required to make an annual report to Parliament on 'the exercise and performance and the powers and duties conferred and imposed upon him ' (5).
Part II The Statutory System of Education
Local education authorities
Every county and county borough would be the local education authority (LEA) for its area (6(1). Property and staff previously owned and employed for educational purposes would be transferred to the LEAs (6(3 and 4).
The statutory system of education shall be organised in three progressive stages to be known as primary education, secondary education, and further education; and it shall be the duty of the local education authority for every area, so far as their powers extend, to contribute towards the spiritual, moral, mental, and physical development of the community by securing that efficient education throughout those stages shall be available to meet the needs of the population of their area (7).
Local authorities were charged with providing primary and secondary schools sufficient in number, character, and equipment to afford for all pupils opportunities for education offering such variety of instruction and training as may be desirable in view of their different ages, abilities, and aptitudes (8(1).
LEAs were to ensure that there were separate schools for primary and secondary education; that nursery education was available for under-fives; that provision was made for 'pupils who suffer from any disability of mind or body '; and that boarding accommodation was offered where appropriate (8(2)).
LEAs were given the power to establish primary and secondary schools, to be known as 'county schools '. Schools not established by an LEA (ie mainly church schools) were to be known as 'voluntary schools ' (9). The Minister would make regulations 'prescribing the standards to which the premises of schools maintained by local education authorities are to conform ' (10). Each LEA was required to produce, within a year, a 'development plan ' for schools in its area (11); the Minister would then issue a 'local education order ' specifying which schools the LEA was required to maintain (12). LEA proposals for opening or closing schools, or for changing their status, were to be submitted to the Minister (13). Rules were laid down regarding the closure of voluntary schools (14). The Act specified three categories of voluntary schools: controlled, aided and special agreement (15).
Section 17 set out the arrangements for the governance of schools: a primary school was to have a body of managers, a secondary school a body of governors, each having 'an instrument ' providing for its constitution. Membership of these bodies was described in sections 18 (primary schools) and 19 (secondary schools). Provision was made for the grouping of schools under one management body (20).
In county schools (and most voluntary schools) the 'secular instruction ' and matters such as the length of the school day and the dates of school terms were to be under the control of the local education authority. In aided secondary schools, this control would be exercised by the governors (23).
The appointment of teachers would be under the control of the local education authority (24).
Religious education
Section 25 dealt with religious education. On collective worship (school 'assembles ') it said: the school day in every county school and in every voluntary school shall begin with collective worship on the part of all pupils in attendance at the school, and the arrangements made therefor shall provide for a single act of worship attended by all such pupils unless, in the opinion of the local education authority or, in the case of a voluntary school, of the managers or governors thereof, the school premises are such as to make it impracticable to assemble them for that purpose (25(1)).
And on religious instruction: religious instruction shall be given in every county school and in every voluntary school (25(2)).
Parents had the right to withdraw their children from religious worship or instruction (25(4)).
In county schools, collective worship shall not ... be distinctive of any particular religious denomination, and the religious instruction given to any pupils ... shall be given in accordance with an agreed syllabus adopted for the school or for those pupils and shall not include any catechism or formulary which is distinctive of any particular religious denomination (26).
Controlled schools could employ 'reserved teachers ', 'selected for their fitness and competence to give such religious instruction as is required to be given ' (27(2)). In aided and special agreement schools, religious instruction would be under the control of the managers or governors. However, if parents desired their children to be taught according to the local agreed syllabus and there was no county school which they could reasonably be expected to attend, the aided school would have to provide such instruction (28(1)).
LEAs were empowered to convene, and make appointments to, a standing advisory council on religious education to advise the authority upon matters connected with the religious instruction to be given in accordance with an agreed syllabus and, in particular, to methods of teaching, the choice of books, and the provision of lectures for teachers (29(2)).
The Act allowed teachers a 'conscience clause ': no person shall be disqualified by reason of his religious opinions, or of his attending or omitting to attend religious worship, from being a teacher in a county school or in any voluntary school, or from being otherwise employed for the purposes of such a school; and no teacher in any such school shall be required to give religious instruction or receive any less emolument or be deprived of, or disqualified for, any promotion or other advantage by reason of the fact that he does or does not give religious instruction or by reason of his religious opinions or of his attending or omitting to attend religious worship (30).
Transitional arrangements
Transitional arrangements (for the separation of primary and secondary schools and for the management and maintenance of voluntary schools) were set out in sections 31 and 32.
Special educational treatment
The education of 'pupils requiring special educational treatment ' was dealt with in sections 33 and 34. The Minister would 'make regulations defining the several categories of pupils requiring special educational treatment ' (33(1)) and LEAs would be expected to provide places in special schools for more serious cases (33(2)).
It would be the duty of each LEA: to ascertain what children in their area require special educational treatment; and for the purpose of fulfilling that duty any officer of a local education authority authorised in that behalf by the authority may by notice in writing served upon the parent of any child who has attained the age of two years require him to submit the child for examination by a medical officer of the authority for advice as to whether the child is suffering from any disability of mind or body and as to the nature and extent of any such disability (34(1)).
Where an LEA decided that special education treatment was necessary, it was required to inform the parents and provide the treatment (34(4).
If the LEA or parents requested it, the medical officer who examined the child would issue 'a certificate in the prescribed form showing whether the child is suffering from any such disability as aforesaid and, if so, the nature and extent thereof ' (34(5)).
School attendance
Section 35 dealt with compulsory attendance at primary and secondary schools and defined 'compulsory school age ' as between five and fifteen years, with the hope that, as soon as it became practicable, the upper limit would be raised to sixteen. (Section 38 set the upper limit for pupils in special schools at sixteen).
Section 36 stated that:
It shall be the duty of the parent of every child of compulsory school age to cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability, and aptitude, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.
Section 37 set out the rules relating to 'school attendance orders ' which could be served by LEAs on parents who failed to comply with section 36.
Sections 39 and 40 dealt with the enforcement of school attendance.
Further education
LEAs were charged with providing 'adequate facilities ' for full-time and part-time education 'for persons over compulsory school age ' and 'leisure-time occupation, in such organized cultural training and recreative activities as are suited to their requirements, for any persons over compulsory school age who are able and willing to profit by the facilities provided for that purpose ' (41). They were to submit their schemes for further education to the Minister (42) and set up county colleges for this purpose (43). LEAs could serve 'college attendance notices ' on under-eighteens, requiring them to attend a county college for (roughly) a day a month or for eight weeks in a year (44-47).
Supplementary provisions
The Act required LEAs to: * make provision for medical inspections in schools and colleges (48); * provide 'milk, meals and other refreshment for pupils in attendance at schools and colleges maintained by them ' (49); * offer boarding accommodation where appropriate (50); * make clothing grants (51); * recover the costs of boarding and clothing where parents could afford to pay (52); * provide 'adequate facilities for recreation and social and physical training ' (53); * ensure the cleanliness of 'the persons and clothing of pupils ' in schools and colleges (54); * provide transport for pupils where necessary (55); * make 'special arrangements ' in 'extraordinary circumstances ' for children to be educated 'otherwise than at school ' (56); and * arrange for the medical examination of a child considered 'incapable of receiving education at school ' (57).
Sections 58-60 dealt with the law relating to the employment of children and young people and gave LEAs the power to prohibit or restrict such employment.
Other miscellaneous provisions were set out in Sections 61-69: * no fees were to be charged for admission to schools or colleges (61); * the Minister could require LEAs to establish and maintain teacher training colleges (62); * the Minister could exempt certain buildings from building byelaws (63); * voluntary schools were exempt from paying rates (64); * voluntary school endowments would continue to be payable to the managers or governors (65); * LEAs could make grants to voluntary schools in certain circumstances (66); * disputes between LEAs and school managers or governors could be referred to the Minister (67); * the Minister could intervene to prevent LEAs or managers or governors from acting unreasonably (68); and * the Minister could make regulations relating to medical examinations (69).
Part III Independent Schools
Part III of the Act: * provided for the appointment of a Registrar of Independent Schools and laid down the conditions of registration (70); * provided for a school proprietor to be served with a 'notice of complaint ' if the Minister considered that the school 's premises, accommodation, teaching or staff were inappropriate (71); * allowed a proprietor to appeal against the notice, such appeals being heard by an Independent Schools Tribunal, which could annul the complaint, order that the school be struck off the register, or lay down conditions for the school remaining on the register (72); * set the penalty for continuing to operate a deregistered school as a fine of up to £50 and/or a prison sentence of up to three months (73); * allowed the Minister to remove the disqualification if he felt it was no longer necessary (74); and * empowered the Lord Chancellor, with the concurrence of the Lord President of the Council, to make rules relating to the practice and procedure to be followed by Independent Schools Tribunals (75).
Part IV General
General Principle to be observed by Minister and Local Education Authorities
Section 76 stated that:
In the exercise and performance of all powers and duties conferred and imposed on them by this Act the Minister and local education authorities shall have regard to the general principle that, so far as is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure, pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.
Miscellaneous Provisions
Sections 77-87 dealt with the following: * the inspection of schools and colleges (77): - regular and special inspections as required by the Minister (77(2)) - LEA inspections by their own officers (77(3)) - illegality of obstructing an inspection (77(4) - special rules relating to religious instruction (77(5 and 6)); * the provision of LEA ancillary services to non-maintained schools (78); * the provision of LEA information to the Minister of Health (79); * the duty to keep registers of pupils and to make returns to the Minister and the LEA as required (80); * the power of LEAs to offer financial assistance and scholarships where appropriate (81); * the power of LEAs to conduct or sponsor educational research (82); * the power of LEAs to organise educational conferences (83); * the power of LEAs to provide financial assistance to a university to improve further education facilities (84); * the right of LEAs to accept gifts for educational purposes (85); * the right of the Minister to amend certain endowment schemes (86); and * amendments to some 19th century Acts relating to assurances of property (87).
Administrative Provisions
Sections 88-99 provided for: * the appointment by LEAs of Chief Education Officers (88); * the remuneration of teachers (89); * the compulsory purchase of land by LEAs (90); * the auditing of local authority accounts (91); * LEA reports and returns to the Minister (92); * the Minister 's right to order a local inquiry (93); * the power of the Minister to intervene if an LEA or school management body failed to comply with the Act (99); and * various other technical matters.
Financial Provisions
Sections 100-107 provided for: * grants by the Minister to LEAs and others, and grants by the Minister of Health in respect of medical inspections and treatment (100); * special provisions relating to Wales and Monmouthshire (101); * grants by the Minister to aided and special agreement schools of up to 50 per cent of the cost of buildings maintenance (102); * grants by the Minister to aided and special agreement schools of up to 50 per cent of the cost of new premises (103); * grants by the Minister to aided and special agreement schools for displaced pupils (104); * power of the Minister to make loans to aided and special agreement schools in respect of initial expenditure (105); * contributions between LEAs (106); and * 'Any expenses incurred by the Minister or by the Minister of Health in the exercise of their functions under this Act shall be defrayed out of monies provided by Parliament '. (107)
Part V Supplemental
Part V of the Act covered various administrative matters including: * the commencement of arrangements under Part II of the Act (108); * temporary assistance for voluntary schools (109); * variation of rates (110); * revocation and variation of orders and directions (111); * regulations to be laid before Parliament (112); * the serving of notices under the Act (113); * interpretation of terms used in the Act (114); and * other technical matters (115-122).
Schedules
There were nine Schedules to the Act:
1 Local Administration (pdf page 93) Part I Joint Education Boards (93) Part II Education Committees (94) Part III Delegation of Functions of LEAs to Divisional Executives (95)
2 Transfer to an LEA of an interest in the premises of a voluntary school (98)
3 Special agreements in respect of certain voluntary schools (99)
4 Meetings and proceedings of managers and governors (101)
5 Procedure for preparing and bringing into operation an agreed syllabus for religious instruction (102)
6 Constitution of Independent Schools Tribunals (104)
7 Adjustment of variations of rates consequent upon commencement of Part II of this Act (104)
8 Amendment of enactments (changes to previous Acts) (106)
9 Enactments repealed (111)

Commentary on the Act
The 1944 Act was undoubtedly an enormous achievement. In its 116 pages it effectively created an entire education system. It was all the more remarkable in view of the fact that it was conceived in the depths of a horrific world war.
The government of education
The Act divided responsibility for education between central government, which was to set national policies and allocate resources; the local education authorities (LEAs), which were to set local policies and allocate resources to schools; and the schools themselves, whose head teachers and governing bodies would set school policies and manage the resources.
Jones notes that some historians have seen in the 1944 Act a strengthening of central government over local control and he acknowledges that, in some respects, this was true. But he argues that: to stress centralisation too strongly is to miss something about the dynamic that 1944 in effect encouraged. Local authorities had some power to organise and reorganise schooling. In addition, because the Act made no stipulations about curriculum and pedagogy, teachers had considerable capacities to initiate school-level change ... these capacities were often under-used, but none the less the elements of decentralisation built into the Act were later the basis for significant initiatives of local curricular reform. (Jones 2003:20)
Central government
The Act replaced the Board of Education with the Ministry of Education and gave the Minister 'a creative rather than a merely controlling function, charging him with promoting education in England and Wales ' (Mackinnon and Statham 1999:54). The Minister had 'the duty to secure the effective execution by the local authorities, under his control and direction, of the national policy for providing a varied and comprehensive education service in every area ' (1944 Act, Section 1(1)). He was responsible to parliament and exercised this responsibility through the Ministry. 'The Secretary of State does not provide schools or colleges, nor employ teachers or prescribe textbooks or curricula ' (Shipman 1984:39). But he (and later, she) 'can identify areas for development and place duties on local authorities ' (Shipman 1984:40).
 In 1964 the Ministry of Education was renamed the Department of Education and Science (DES) and the Minister became the Secretary of State for Education and Science. The Department 's name has been changed repeatedly since then:
1992 Department for Education (DFE)
1995 Department for Education and Employment (DfEE)
2001 Department for Education and Skills (DfES)
2007 Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) and Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS)
2010 Department for Education (DfE)
Local education authorities
The bulk of the 1944 Act (Part II) set out the way in which the national service would be locally administered by LEAs, which were based on the counties and county borough councils, the largest of which was the London County Council (LCC). They were to build and maintain the county (state) schools and the one third of schools provided by voluntary, mostly religious, bodies. The LEAs would usually appoint and always pay the teachers. They were to allocate resources to the schools, including staff, buildings, equipment and materials.
They would not have detailed control of the curriculum but were to 'contribute towards the spiritual, moral, mental, and physical development of the community by securing that efficient education ... shall be available to meet the needs of the population of their area ' (1944 Act, Section 7). They were to provide sufficient places for 5-15 year olds, set the dates of school terms and the length of the school day.
Within this framework, LEAs did have considerable autonomy:
Over the years these local authorities have often developed distinctive styles of administration and forms of school organisation. Cross a local government boundary and you may find different ages of transfer between schools, whether from primary to secondary, primary to middle or middle to secondary. There are sixth forms in schools, consortia of schools, tertiary and sixth form colleges. Some LEAs pioneered comprehensive secondary schooling, while others doggedly fought for the survival of their grammar schools. (Shipman 1984:48)
Every local authority was to have an Education Committee consisting of elected councillors, and was required to appoint a Chief Education Officer who would head the salaried officers of the LEA.
 For more on the role of the chief education officer see my article The Chief Education Officer: the real master of local educational provision?.
The schools
The Act established a nationwide system of free, compulsory schooling from age 5 to 15. (The school leaving age was raised to fifteen in 1947 and the Act said it should be raised to 16 as soon as practicable).
Pupils could be taught in LEA schools ( 'county maintained schools '), schools maintained by other organisations or, in certain circumstances, (under Section 56 of the Act) 'otherwise '. (The phrase 'or otherwise ' came to be used by parents who did not wish their children to attend school but preferred to educate them at home. An organisation supporting such parents is known as 'Education Otherwise ').
Disappointments
The main reason why the 1944 Act was considered less radical than many had hoped it would be was its failure to resolve two problems: the church schools and private education.
The church schools
Since the 1870 Education Act, the Church of England had controlled most rural elementary schools and many urban ones. 'They were in many cases the epitome of low-level mass education ' (Jones 2003:18). Almost all were housed in Victorian buildings which the church could not afford to maintain - Giles called them 'pigsty schools ' (Giles 1946:35 quoted in Jones 2003:18). The government could have opted simply to subsidise them, but would have faced strong opposition from nonconformists and secularists who objected to public funds being used to support the church. 'Butler 's solution was to trade influence for cash - public funding of church schools in return for majority local authority representation on governing bodies ' (Jones 2003:18).
The Act thus categorised church schools as voluntary 'aided ' (where the church had greater control) or 'controlled ' (where the LEA had greater control). Aided schools were offered 50 per cent of their building and maintenance costs from state funds; controlled schools 100 per cent. Both Rab Butler and Archbishop of Canterbury William Temple assumed that only about 500 of the 9,000 Church of England schools would opt for voluntary aided status. In fact, around 3,000 of them did - along with all the Roman Catholic and Jewish schools.
 The proportion of church school building costs funded by the taxpayer rose to 75 per cent in 1959; to 80 per cent in 1967; to 85 per cent in 1974; and to 90 per cent in 2001.
As part of his deal with the churches, Butler also promised that state schools would be required to provide non-denominational religious education and a daily act of worship. LEAs were required to have an Agreed Syllabus for Religious Education, to be compiled by elected politicians, local church leaders, and teachers and other education professionals. All county and controlled schools were required to teach this syllabus, but in aided schools religious education was left to the discretion of the churches. Parents were given the right to withdraw their children from religious education and worship if they wished.
In the years following the 1944 Act, most Church of England aided schools taught the local Agreed Syllabus but supplemented it. Roman Catholic schools ignored the Agreed Syllabus and sought to indoctrinate their pupils through a more confessional style of religious instruction, 'very much concentrated on introducing children to the Catholic community of faith ' (Gates 2005:23).
Thus the 1944 Act cemented the church schools into the state system of education. This was hardly surprising: the churches provided about a third of all school places and to have removed them from the picture altogether would have been inordinately expensive at a time when the country 's infrastructure had been devastated by Nazi bombs. However, the Act could have stated that this was the long-term aim and perhaps even suggested a possible timescale.
The failure to tackle the church school problem in 1944 and the willingness of subsequent governments (especially Blair 's) to kowtow to the religious lobby have led to the current scandal of religious extremists being given taxpayers ' money to indoctrinate the nation 's children.
Private education
This was another area where hopes for the Act ran high. The 1944 Fleming Committee had examined how the independent schools might be integrated into the state system, but it was not to be. The Act did nothing about the private schools, other than to require them to be registered.
Thus the 1944 Act sought to provide a decent education for all children, but it failed to tackle the twin problems of religious and class divisions in society. As Williams (1961:149-150) put it:
One has only to compare the simple class thinking of the Taunton Commission 's recommended grades with the Hadow, Spens, and Norwood reports, and the practical effects of the 1944 Education Act, to see the essential continuity, despite changes in the economy, of a pattern of thinking drawn from a rigid class society, with its grading by birth leading to occupation, and then assimilated to a changing society, with a new system of grading.
Progressive
But perhaps we shouldn 't be too harsh in our judgement of an Act created during the horrors of a world war. Despite the points argued above, it is worth noting that the 1944 Act was, in many respects, progressive and forward-looking.
For example, it extended the concept of education to include those older and younger than the school age and 'the community 's needs for culture and recreation ' (Mackinnon and Statham 1999:54).
It aimed to provide a comprehensive School Health Service by requiring the provision of school meals, free milk, medical and dental treatment, and various support services including transport and clothing grants.
And it established two Central Advisory Councils for Education (one for England, one for Wales) to advise the Minister. It was this body which would later produce the 1959 Crowther Report on the education of 15 to 18 year olds, the 1963 Newsom Report on the education of less able children, and, most famously of all, the 1967 Plowden Report on Children and their Primary Schools.
 Various sections of the 1944 Act were replaced by later legislation and it was repealed in its entirety by the 1996 Education Act.

After the war
Like much of Europe, Britain emerged from the second world war impoverished and facing a huge amount of expensive reconstruction.
Labour won the general election in July 1945 with a Commons majority of 146, so it was Clement Attlee 's government which faced this monumental task. Nevertheless, it set about pursuing an extraordinarily wide-ranging and radical agenda which included the creation of the National Health Service and what came to be known as 'the welfare state ', as well as implementing the 1944 Education Act.

Ellen Wilkinson
The first post-war Minister of Education was Ellen Wilkinson (pictured), whose main task was to implement the provisions of the 1944 Education Act. She accepted the challenge enthusiastically, seeing opportunities for a new kind of schooling with 'laughter in the classroom, self-confidence growing every day, eager interest instead of bored uniformity ' (Wilkinson 1947:5, quoted in Jones 2003:24).
Wilkinson had 'fought her way through to university from a working-class home ... and in the process developed strong loyalties to the selective secondary education which had helped her to do so ' (Jones 2003:25).
She had ambitious aims and wanted, among other things, to raise the school leaving age to 16 and to provide meals for all children free of charge. Both were ruled out on grounds of cost. Universal free school milk was introduced, however, in August 1946.
 For more on the history of school meals see my article Food for Thought: child nutrition, the school dinner and the food industry.
Sadly, Wilkinson 's early enthusiasm did not last and she became so depressed by her failure to achieve all the reforms she believed necessary that she took an overdose of barbiturates and died on 6 February 1947. George Tomlinson became the new Minister.

Selection: comprehensive failure
The concept of comprehensive education (in which all children attend a common school rather than being divided by selection between secondary modern, grammar, specialist schools etc) came late to Britain.
Many in the Labour Party hoped that the new government would get rid of elitism and pursue a common education for all children, something the 1944 Act would have allowed.
Regrettably, the Attlee government 's radicalism did not extend to tackling the class-ridden divisiveness of Britain 's secondary school provision. Private schools and 'direct grant ' secondary schools were left untouched, so 'the notion of a universal system of state schooling was thus compromised from the first ' (Jones 2003:16). Neither was there any attempt to introduce comprehensive education - indeed, it was Attlee 's government which promoted the 'tripartite ' system of grammar, technical and secondary modern schools.
The tripartite system
In circular No. 73 (12 December 1945) the government told local authorities to 'think in terms of three types ' of state school for the new secondary education. An accompanying booklet, The Nation 's Schools, explained that the new 'modern ' schools would be for working-class children 'whose future employment will not demand any measure of technical skill or knowledge ' (MoE 1945, quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:5).
Labour Party members were furious and Wilkinson withdrew the document. But as a result of intense pressure from education officials, the policy remained the same and was restated in The New Secondary Education (1947).
Once again, Britain contented itself with a move others had taken a generation before, simply making secondary education free and available to all. It put right the failure to move between the two world wars but it did little to establish a system that would be appropriate for life after the second, when the education system had to prepare for the internationalisation of every aspect of culture, work and production. (Benn and Chitty 1996:6)
So instead of radical reform, the Labour government continued with a divided system, 'newly cloaked in spurious educational thinking about children 's minds, backed by supposedly scientific methods of measuring intelligence which would make all the necessary decisions about selecting children for different types of school ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:6).
The myth quickly grew that this system was what the writers of the 1944 Act had intended. This was not true. Section 8 of the Act required the provision of opportunities for all pupils 'in view of their different ages, abilities and aptitudes, and of the different periods for which they may be expected to remain at school '.
This was interpreted as meaning the tripartite system of secondary education, with grammar schools for the most able, secondary modern schools for the majority, and secondary technical schools for those with a technical or scientific aptitude.
In fact, the Act did not specify any particular kind of secondary school, as J Chuter Ede, Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education, had pointed out in a speech reported in The Times of 14 April 1944:
I do not know where people get the idea about three types of school, because I have gone through the Bill with a small toothcomb, and I can find only one school for senior pupils - and that is a secondary school. What you like to make of it will depend on the way you serve the precise needs of the individual area in the country. (quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:20)
The tripartite system, then, was not required by the Act. Indeed, the Act itself never mentioned the words 'tripartite ', 'selection ', 'eleven plus ', 'grammar schools ' or 'secondary modern schools '. It simply required that education should be provided at three levels: primary, secondary and further.
The tripartite system was no more than the continuation of the 19th century class-based system of English education which had been promoted, shamefully, by the reports of Spens (1938) and Norwood (1943).
The Attlee government made matters worse by restricting entry to grammar schools, by refusing to allow secondary modern schools to run exam courses, and by rejecting proposals from several local authorities to introduce comprehensive schools.
The result was that there was no 'parity of esteem ' between grammar and secondary modern schools. Competition for grammar school places increased as these schools offered pupils the opportunity of a place at university and thereafter a professional career. The tripartite system thus reinforced the notion that working class children were of lower intelligence.
Neither was the system ever really the 'tripartite ' one which had been promised. The LEAs were reluctant to develop expensive new secondary technical schools, and even as late as 1958 these schools were providing education for less than 4 per cent of the secondary age group.
The system was therefore effectively a bipartite one, with grammar schools taking, on average, the 'top ' twenty per cent of children and secondary modern schools taking the rest. Selection for grammar schools was made largely on the basis of the 'eleven plus ' examination, which usually consisted of tests of intelligence and attainment in English and arithmetic. In the eyes of the public, children either 'passed ' it and went to the grammar school or 'failed ' it and went to the local secondary modern. The system thus caused great damage to the self-esteem of most children and most schools.
This appalling system was based on the notion of the IQ (intelligence quotient) promoted by the now-discredited educational psychologist Cyril Burt. Burt had stated his definition of 'human intelligence ' in How the mind works, a book based on his series of talks broadcast in 1933:
By the term 'intelligence ', the psychologist understands inborn, all-round intellectual ability. It is inherited, or at least innate, not due to teaching or training; it is intellectual, not emotional or moral, and remains uninfluenced by industry or zeal; it is general, not specific, ie it is not limited to any particular kind of work, but enters into all we do or say or think. Of all our mental qualities, it is the most far-reaching. Fortunately, it can be measured with accuracy and ease. (Burt 1933:28-9, quoted in Chitty 2004:26)
 For more on Burt and intelligence tests see the 1924 Hadow ReportPsychological Tests of Educable Ability.
General Certificate of Education
Whatever its origins, the effect of the tripartite system was to disqualify a majority of the nation 's children from access to qualifications.
The General Certificate of Education (GCE) was introduced in 1951, replacing the old School Certificate ( 'matriculation '). It was designed for the top 25 per cent of the ability range. GCE exams were normally taken at 16 (Ordinary Level) and 18 (Advanced Level), mostly in the grammar schools and the independent (public or private fee-paying) schools.
The introduction of the new exam was not without controversy, as Angela Best pointed out in the Daily Mirror (14 February 1952) when the results of the first GCE exams were published. There were three main concerns: * a widespread perception that the new exams were harder than those they replaced (this may have been because the pass mark was set higher); * a rigid lower age-limit of 16 was imposed for entry to the exam; and * lack of grading - candidates either passed or failed (this was of particular concern to teachers).
 Read the Daily Mirror article here (JPG image 1108 x 1404 pixels). (Reproduced by kind permission from Mirrorpix).
Primary education
The tripartite system also had a damaging effect on the new primary schools, the success of whose pupils in the eleven plus quickly became the measure by which the schools were judged. 'Once again, the fate of the junior school and its educational role depended on developments at the upper levels ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:38).
So the eleven plus - and the continued existence of large classes through the late 1940s and 1950s - forced the new primary schools to continue with the class teaching approach inherited from the elementary schools, with its emphasis on basic literacy and numeracy. 'In fact the tradition derived from 1870 was still dominant ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:36).
Progressive primary education would have to wait for the 1960s.

Special educational needs
Prior to the 1944 Act, the education of handicapped children was treated as an entirely separate category of provision. Now, special educational provision was to be included in LEAs ' development plans for primary and secondary education. The less seriously handicapped might be catered for in ordinary schools, while those with more serious disabilities would, wherever practicable, continue to be educated in special schools. (The 1953 Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act extended these requirements to independent schools).
In 1928 the Wood Committee had stressed the unity of ordinary and special education. The philosophy underpinning the 1944 Act had been explained during the debate on the Bill by Chuter Ede:
May I say that I do not want to insert in the Bill any words which make it appear that the normal way to deal with a child who suffers from any of these disabilities is to be put into a special school where he will be segregated. Whilst we desire to see adequate provision of special schools we also desire to see as many children as possible retained in the normal stream of school life. (Parliamentary Debates: Hansard Vol. 398 Col 703 21 March 1944, quoted in Warnock 1978:33)
The Act required LEAs to ascertain all types of disability: theHandicapped Pupils and School Health Service Regulations 1945defined eleven categories of pupils: blind, partially sighted, deaf, partially deaf, delicate, diabetic, educationally subnormal, epileptic, maladjusted, physically handicapped and those with speech defects. Blind, deaf, epileptic, physically handicapped and aphasic children were considered seriously disabled and were to be educated in special schools. Children with other disabilities might attend ordinary schools if adequate provision for them was available (see Warnock 1978:19-20).
As a result of the Act 's rigid categories of special need: children were to be diagnosed, principally by medical authorities, and then assigned to particular disability groups with which particular institutions and curriculum forms were associated. ... Intelligence testing and medical examination were thus crucial to the workings of special education, and - just as in the tripartite system - inclusion was a heavily qualified principle, while exclusion was justified on quasi-scientific grounds. (Jones 2003:31)
Post-war planning of special educational provision proceeded on two main assumptions: that special educational treatment would be required for up to 17 per cent of the school population; and that ordinary schools would have the major share in providing it.
These intentions were not fulfilled: special educational treatment came to acquire a much narrower connotation than official guidance suggested and its provision in ordinary schools failed to develop on the scale envisaged, partly because in the decade after the war LEAs were hard-pressed to maintain the fabric of the education service. Much school accommodation had been destroyed; many surviving buildings were in a bad state; building materials were scarce; extra accommodation was needed to cope with the raising the school leaving age; secondary modern schools had large classes; and there were shortages of suitably trained teachers and other professionals (see Warnock 1978:33-40).

Other matters
The curriculum
The 1944 Act had given governors and head teachers control of the school curriculum and resourcing. It had said virtually nothing about the content of the curriculum (other than religious education): 'secular instruction ' was a matter for the LEA and the schools. The Act 's authors clearly had not anticipated national government interfering in the curriculum. Indeed, it had not given the minister the legal right to determine the content of education and, in the phrase first used by Conservative minister of education Sir David Eccles in 1960, he was not expected to enter 'the secret garden of the curriculum '.
In the years following the Act central government did exercise indirect influence through HMIs, and later, through DES participation in the Schools Council, and through government sponsored research projects like the one on comprehensive education. But, as Anthony Crosland (Secretary of State 1965-67) commented, 'the nearer one comes to theprofessional content of education, the more indirect the Minister 's influence is ' (Kogan 1971:172).
For the time being, then, head teachers were very much in control in the schools, and education would rarely be the subject of debate at Cabinet level until the 1980s.
Teacher training
One of the most urgent problems facing the new Ministry of Education after the war was the shortage of teachers. The problem was exacerbated by the raising of the school leaving age to 15 (as recommended by Hadow in 1926 and implemented in April 1947) and the reorganisation of secondary education. An emergency training programme was introduced in 1945, with 53 training colleges opened by 1950.
In line with the recommendations of the 1944 McNair Report, in 1947 13 Area Training Organisations (ATOs) were established in England and one in Wales to co-ordinate the provision of teacher training. The universities kept their separate training departments and institutes, which now served as hubs for the ATOs ' clusters of colleges. By the early 1950s LEAs had opened 76 new training colleges.
Miscellaneous
In the higher education sector the Percy Report (1945) made recommendations about technological education in colleges and universities and the Barlow Report (1946) recommended more university places for science students.
The Central Advisory Councils for Education (CACE), set up under the 1944 Act, produced two early reports. The Clarke Report (1947) School and Life looked at the transition from school to working life and made many recommendations, including a plea for increased funding for schools. This was followed by a second Clarke Report (1948) Out of Schoolwhich recommended government spending on out of school facilities for children and parents.
The 1946 Education Act (22 May 1946) made amendments to the 1944 Education Act relating to voluntary and controlled schools, religious worship in aided and special agreement schools, clothing grants for boarders and nursery school pupils, and the qualification of teachers for membership of local authorities and their committees.
 Download the Education Act 1946 (pdf text 280kb).
The 1948 Employment and Training Act established the Youth Employment Service. (This Act is not currently available online).
The 1948 Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (30 June 1948) extended the range of pupils who could be provided with clothing by an LEA, and allowed an LEA to cancel a report that a child was 'incapable of receiving education at school owing to disability of mind ' if recommended to do so by the local health authority.
 Download the Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1948 (pdf text 292kb).
The 1948 Nurseries and Child-Minders Regulation Act (30 July 1948) made provisions regarding the registration and inspection of nurseries and child-minders.
 D Chapter 6 : 1951-1970
The wind of change

Political background
1951-1964 The Conservatives
Clement Attlee 's Labour government won the general election in February 1950 - but only just. It managed to survive until October 1951 when another election resulted in the return of a Conservative government under Winston Churchill (pictured).
The Tories were to remain in power for thirteen years under prime ministers Anthony Eden (1955-57), Harold Macmillan (1957-63) and Alec Douglas-Home (pronounced 'Hume ') (1963-64).
The ministers of education for this period were: * November 1951: Florence Horsbrugh * October 1954: Sir David Eccles * January 1957: Viscount Hailsham * September 1957: Geoffrey Lloyd * October 1959: Sir David Eccles * July 1962: Sir Edward Boyle * April 1964: Quintin Hogg (Secretary of State).
In 1964, the Ministry of Education was reorganised as the Department of Education and Science (DES), and Quintin Hogg became the first Secretary of State for Education and Science.
Wind of change
In an address to the South African parliament in February 1960 prime minister Harold Macmillan famously declared that 'the wind of change is blowing through this continent. Whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact. '
He was speaking, of course, about the desire of African nations for their independence. But he might just as easily have been talking about education in England, where public consciousness of the unfairness of the selective system and awareness of the need for a more child-centred style of education - especially in primary schools - had been growing for some time and was now reaching a climax.
So the wind of change was blowing through England 's schools. In the 1960s and early 70s it would become something of a hurricane.

1964-1970 Labour
In October 1964, after 13 years of Conservative government, Harold Wilson led the Labour Party to a general election victory with a majority of just five.
He went to the country again in March 1966 and was rewarded with a larger majority of 96.
The period was one of low unemployment and relative economic prosperity, though there were problems with the country 's external balance of payments.
Mixed picture
In social policy terms Wilson was a liberal and during his first administration * capital punishment was abolished (1965); * homosexuality was decriminalised (1967); * abortion was legalised (1967); * theatrical censorship was abolished (1968); and * divorce law was reformed (1969)
- a remarkable achievement by any standard.
Wilson was anxious to increase opportunity within society. In the education system this meant change and expansion: for the first time ever, a British government spent more on education than on defence. There was a significant increase in the number of university places, with more women undertaking higher education courses.
But Wilson 's record on secondary education was disappointing: while the proportion of children attending comprehensive schools rose to thirty per cent during this period, his government, like Attlee 's in the post-war years, failed to establish a fully comprehensive system and selection survived.
The secretaries of state for education and science in this period were: * October 1964: Michael Stewart * January 1965: Anthony Crosland * August 1967: Patrick Gordon-Walker * April 1968: Edward Short
Wilson lost power in June 1970 when Ted Heath 's Tories won the general election with a majority of 30.

Selection: missed opportunity
Around the world, selective education systems were being replaced with comprehensive ones. The Scandinavian countries and Japan had begun the process immediately after the war; Israel and most of Europe followed; New Zealand and Canada continued with the reforms they had started before the war; eastern Europe adopted the common school model of the Soviet Union.
Yet in Britain, the Conservatives seemed determined not to notice what was going on elsewhere. Indeed, their commitment to grammar schools and their lingering doubts about the benefits of mass education were backed by various conservative commentators, including poet and literary critic TS Eliot, who wrote:
In our headlong rush to educate everybody, we are lowering our standards, and more and more abandoning the study of those subjects by which the essentials of our culture ... are transmitted; destroying our ancient edifices to make ready the ground upon which the barbarian nomads of the future will encamp in the mechanised caravans. (Eliot 1949:111, quoted in Jones 2003:36)
Churchill appointed Florence Horsbrugh (pictured) minister of education in November 1951.
In 1954 Horsbrugh intervened to stop London County Council (LCC) closing Eltham Hill Girls ' Grammar School and transferring its pupils to the new Kidbrooke School. So 'London 's first purpose-built comprehensive school was not as "comprehensive" as it might have been ' (Chitty and Dunford 1999:20).
And shortly after becoming education minister in October 1954, Sir David Eccles made it clear that the Tories did not approve of comprehensive reorganisation. In determining the pattern of secondary education, he said, 'one has to choose between justice and equality, for it is impossible to apply both principles at once. Those who support comprehensive schools prefer equality. Her Majesty 's present government prefer justice. My colleagues and I will never allow local authorities to assassinate the grammar schools ' (quoted in The Schoolmaster 7 January 1955).

Growing concerns
But criticism of the selection process was growing - as was parental dissatisfaction with the system, especially among the middle classes. As Benn and Chitty (1996:8) put it: 'The middle class was expanding and grammar schools were not '.
The selection system was perceived as failing because: * research cast doubt on theories of inherited intelligence; * there were many errors in school placements owing to the fallibility of the selection mechanism; * there was a great deal of inequality in outcome - the level of provision of grammar school places ranged from 10 per cent in some LEAs to more than 30 per cent in others; * there was a great deal of gender inequality - many LEAs had single-sex grammar schools with far more places for boys than for girls; * talent was being wasted as many children left school too early - a view reinforced by the Newsom Report (see below).
So change was in the air, and despite government hostility, the 1950s did see 'the development of largely unnoticed "experimental" comprehensive schools, often on urban sites in Labour authorities affected by Luftwaffe bombing ' (Crook 2008). 46 such schools were open by 1958.
In 1957 Conservative-controlled Leicestershire began what became known as the 'Leicestershire experiment ' in which all the children in a locality transferred at age 11 to a three-year 'junior high ' school. The brightest went on at 14 to grammar schools, the rest did a final year in the junior high and then left school.
This scheme seemed to appeal to education ministers, and the 1958 white paper Secondary Education for All: A New Drive emphasised the importance of local initiatives in secondary education.
But educational apartheid was further exacerbated in 1960, when the Beloe Report Secondary School Examinations other than the GCErecommended that there should be a new exam system for pupils considered incapable of coping with the demands of the GCE. This led to the introduction of the Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE) in 1965.
Williams (1961:146) summed up the problem of a divided schools system thus:
Differences in learning ability obviously exist, but there is great danger in making these into separate and absolute categories. It is right that a child should be taught in a way appropriate to his learning ability, but because this itself depends on his whole development, including not only questions of personal character growth but also questions of his real social environment and the stimulation received from it, too early a division into intellectual grades in part creates the situation which it is offering to meet.
Sir Edward Boyle became education minister in July 1962. He shared Eccles ' enthusiasm for local initiatives and approved limited comprehensive experiments in a few small areas. But otherwise the Conservatives continued to support the divided system and the eleven plus that Labour had introduced, arguing that 'Britain 's grammar schools and public schools were the envy of the world ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:8).

1963 Newsom Report
The concerns about selection were given added weight by the 1963 Newsom Report Half Our Future, which looked at the education of 13-16 year olds of average and less than average ability and urged that they should receive a greater share of the nation 's educational resources.
When Churchill had come to power in 1951 he had immediately cut spending on education. But in the ensuing years the Tories accepted the notion that increased investment in education led to national economic growth, and public expenditure on education rose from 3 per cent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) in 1953-4 to 4.3 per cent in 1964-5. As a result, there had been huge improvements in educational provision since the end of the war. 1,800 new secondary schools had been built in England and Wales, there was more variety in the curriculum, equipment and materials had improved, and there were more out of school activities.
However, children of average or less than average ability had largely missed out on this progress. A survey conducted for the Newsom Committee showed that 40 per cent were still being taught in overcrowded and inadequate school buildings. Children in slum areas were particularly badly served: 79 per cent of the schools in these areas had seriously inadequate buildings; playing fields were often some distance away; and there were frequent changes of teaching staff. Moreover, expectations were low: they were set less homework and the curriculum they were offered was more traditional. 'The contrasts in educational provision were growing sharper ' (Rogers 1980:67).

Labour U-turn
No wonder, then, that where comprehensive schools were introduced they were popular and that many people argued that they fostered greater social cohesion. Public concern about the unfairness of the selection process convinced the Labour Party that comprehensivisation would now be a vote winner.
So Labour authorities in northern industrial areas - Bradford, Lancashire, Liverpool, Manchester and Sheffield - began planning a new wave of authority-wide comprehensive systems, and Labour went into the 1964 general election promising to abolish the eleven plus and develop the secondary school system on comprehensive lines - 'without any clear idea of what this really meant ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:8).
Labour 's manifesto for the 1964 general election couldn 't have been clearer: 'Labour will get rid of the segregation of children into separate schools caused by 11-plus selection: secondary education will be reorganised on comprehensive lines '.
The provision of secondary education in England and Wales at the time was as follows: Secondary modern schools | 3,906 | Grammar schools | 1,298 | Direct grant grammar schools | 179 | Technical schools | 186 | Bi- and Multi-lateral schools | 69 | Comprehensive schools | 195 | Other secondary schools | 240 | All-age schools | 411 |
(Statistics of Education 1964 HMSO 1965 p.12, quoted in Lester Smith 1966:108)
In a speech in May 1965, education secretary Anthony Crosland said:
The fact is that there has been a growing movement against the 11-plus examination and all that it implies. This movement has not been politically inspired or imposed from the centre. It has been a spontaneous growth at the grassroots of education, leading to a widespread conviction that separation is an offence against the child as well as a brake on social and economic progress ... The whole notion of a selection test at this age belongs to the era when secondary education was a privilege of the few. (quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:21)

Circular 10/65
Two months later, after 'a fierce debate within the DES ' (Chitty 2004:29), the new government published Circular 10/65, which began with the bold declaration that it intended 'to end selection at eleven plus and to eliminate separatism in secondary education ' (DES 1965: para.1).
But the boldness was short-lived. Although the language of the Circular made it clear that the government expected LEAs to go comprehensive, it stopped short of actually compelling them to do so. It presented some of the schemes which LEAs had put forward and invited others to adopt one: 'local education authorities are requested to submit plans to the Secretary of State for the reorganisation of secondary education in their areas on comprehensive lines ' (DES 1965: para.43).
It concluded that the government had no desire to impose 'destructive or precipitate change on existing schools ' and that 'the evolution of separate schools into a comprehensive system must be a constructive process requiring careful planning by local education authorities in consultation with all those concerned ' (DES 1965: para.46).
 Read Circular 10/65 The organisation of secondary education.
The prevarication continued. Dates for submission of schemes were set but not enforced. The government made a further - fatal - mistake in accepting plans for partial comprehensivisation. No one bothered to explain how you could logically run comprehensive and grammar schools side by side.

Disappointment
When Labour won a bigger majority in the 1966 general election with a clear mandate for comprehensivisation, many hoped the new government would require all LEAs to go fully comprehensive. In fact, four years were to pass before a bill was drafted and, when Labour lost the 1970 general election, the bill was lost too. 'From the beginning, therefore, comprehensive reform in England was implemented in an uneven way. It lived in the shadow of selective education and in many cases perpetuated selective arrangements ' (Jones 2003:78). The whole process was a shambles.
Little wonder then, that radicals lost heart. Fife head teacher RF McKenzie spoke for many when he declared: 'those of us who imagined that the Labour Party would make fundamental changes in our society, and particularly in our education system, now see their efforts overborne like an irrelevant eddy in a stream ' (McKenzie 1970:67, quoted in Jones 2003:90).

Certificate of Secondary Education
Even within schools there was selection. The Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE), introduced in England and Wales in 1965, increased the pressure on schools to divide students between 'academic ' and 'non-academic ' streams. 'Within comprehensives, GCE students were placed in different teaching groups from CSE students, while in the secondary modern school ... students who were deemed capable of CSE entry were separated from those who were not ' (Jones 2003:84-5).
(The CSE did have one positive effect, however. Through its localised teacher-designed 'Mode 3 ' syllabuses it encouraged school-based curriculum development).

Comprehensivisation in Scotland
In Scotland, comprehensivisation was much more widely supported. Indeed, it had been awaited since 1945, when Scotland 's Advisory Council on Education had recommended a comprehensive system for all secondary pupils aged 12 to 16 with a common core curriculum and a common leaving exam. This, the Council said, was 'the natural way for a democracy to order the post-primary schooling of a given area ' (quoted in Benn and Chitty 1996:10).
In the event, the Scots had to wait twenty years for reorganisation, which began in 1965 following the publication of Circular 600, the Scottish equivalent of Circular 10/65.

Independent schools
Another long-held ambition of the Labour Party was to integrate the independent ( 'public ') schools into the state system. But Wilson seemed no more determined to realise this aim than he was to get rid of selection.
The Public Schools Commission 's first report (the Newsom Report, 1968) - a 'costly and prolonged exercise ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:10) - was shelved because its proposals were based on the continuation of selection. The Commission 's second report (the Donnison Report, 1970) proposed that the direct grant grammar schools should either become comprehensives or go fully private.
Over the following six years a third of them (around fifty) went comprehensive, but the majority (more than a hundred) joined the private sector.

Primary education
Progressivism
By the early 1960s educational developments were 'rapid, all-embracing, and, in retrospect, perhaps surprising ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:39). Galton, Simon and Croll argue that some of the problems which were to face primary education in the 1980s (of which more later) 'clearly [had] their roots in this period and the apparent subsequent reaction from ideas and practices then regarded as positive ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:39).
These 'ideas and practices ' can loosely be defined as the move towards more informal, child-centred education with an emphasis on individualisation and learning by discovery: in short, a 'progressive ' style of education.
This trend was facilitated by the introduction of comprehensive secondary education. In those LEAs which went comprehensive - Oxfordshire, Leicestershire, Bristol, London, and the West Riding of Yorkshire were among the first - the abolition of the eleven plus freed the curriculum of the junior schools from the constraints of the eleven plus exam.
It was in these areas, also, that the system of streaming, which reinforced the methodology of class teaching, was most rapidly discarded. The swing from streaming in the junior schools in these and other areas, which started very slowly in the mid 1950s, meeting strong opposition, suddenly took off with extraordinary rapidity in the mid to late 1960s, gaining influential support from the Plowden Report of 1967. (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:39)
A number of factors provided the context for these educational developments in the 1960s: * the 'permissive society '; * a heightened consciousness among young people of their role in society - full employment, relative affluence and so increased independence and autonomy; * the encouragement by LEAs of innovation in schools; * the increased professionalisation of teachers and the high degree of autonomy which they enjoyed; * a decline in the inspectorial role of HMI and LEA inspectors; * the development of new 'open plan ' schools, which reflected the decline in whole-class teaching methods and the increasing importance (encouraged by the Plowden Report) given to the individualisation of the teaching/learning process.

1967 Plowden Report
Children and their Primary Schools, the report produced by the Central Advisory Council for Education (CACE) chaired by Bridget Plowden (pictured) was thus published at a time of great excitement and creativity in education. The eleven plus was being abolished, freeing primary schools from the constraints imposed by the need to 'get good results '. Streaming was being abandoned. Sybil Marshall was writing about the creativity of primary pupils in An Experiment in Education. Comprehensive schools and middle schools were being established. Teacher-led curriculum innovation was being actively encouraged.
Plowden, the first thorough review of primary education since Sir Henry Hadow 's Report of 1931, was very much a product of its time, full of enthusiasm and optimism. It clearly and definitely espoused child-centred approaches in general, the concept of "informal" education, flexibility of internal organisation and non-streaming in a general humanist approach - stressing particularly the uniqueness of each individual and the paramount need for individualisation of the teaching and learning process. (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:40)
The essence of Plowden is summed up at the start of Chapter 2: 'At the heart of the educational process lies the child ' (Plowden 1967 I:7). And not just the child, but the individual child. 'Individual differences between children of the same age are so great that any class, however homogeneous it seems, must always be treated as a body of children needing individual and different attention ' (Plowden 1967 I:25).
In relation to the curriculum, the committee was clear. 'One of the main educational tasks of the primary school is to build on and strengthen children 's intrinsic interest in learning and lead them to learn for themselves rather than from fear of disapproval or desire for praise ' (Plowden 1967 I:196).
The report 's recurring themes were individual learning, flexibility in the curriculum, the use of the environment, learning by discovery, and the importance of the evaluation of children 's progress - teachers should 'not assume that only what is measurable is valuable ' (Plowden 1967 I:202).
 The full text of the Plowden Report and articles about it by AH Halsey and Kathy Sylva, Maurice Kogan, George Smith, David Winkley, Neville Bennett, Maurice Galton, Philip Gammage, Andrew M Wilkinson and Bridget Plowden can be found here.

Middle schools
During the 1960s a number of LEAs chose to change their school systems from two-tier (primary and secondary) to three-tier (first or lower schools, middle schools, upper schools). Why and how did this come about?

Background
Up to 1964 transfer at age 11 was determined by both convention and law: the 1907 Secondary Regulations had required LEAs to provide 25 per cent of their grammar school places free by examination at 11; the 1926 Hadow Report had identified 11 as the start of adolescence; the 1944 Education Act had given this legal backing by defining children who had not reached the age of 12 as primary pupils. The effect was to make transfer at ages other than 11 illegal.
During the 1940s and 50s many relatively small schools were built to house the grammar, technical and secondary schools which had been recommended by the Spens and Norwood Reports (1938 and 1943). This was to prove a problem when comprehensivisation began to take hold in the late 50s and early 60s. Many of the schools were too small to become comprehensives but the Ministry of Education insisted that those buildings which were in good condition must continue to be used.
Some LEAs solved the problem by creating split-site schools. Others decided that the only solution was to divide their secondary schools on the basis of age. Leicestershire, for example, created 11-14 and 14-18 schools. Two main concerns were expressed about some of these schools - the 'junior high schools ' were thought to be too small and would have difficulty attracting well-qualified staff; the upper schools would have insufficient time to prepare students for examinations.

Sir Alec Clegg
To avoid these problems, Sir Alec Clegg (pictured), Chief Education Officer of the West Riding of Yorkshire, proposed in 1963 that schools should be organised in three tiers with age ranges 5-9, 9-13 and 13-18. Such a system would alleviate the pressures on upper schools caused by their sheer size.
His proposal required a change in the law and he set about trying to persuade minister of education Edward Boyle of the desirability - even the necessity - of the change.

1964 Education Act
Boyle agreed, and shortly before the 1964 general election he gave the Ministry what he called his 'parting gift ' - the 1964 Education Act (31 July 1964), which permitted transfer at ages other than 11 and granted limited experimental status to the middle school. (Although Boyle was responsible for the formulation of the 1964 Act, it was actually his successor as Minister of Education, Quintin Hogg, who saw it through Parliament).
The 1964 Act had widespread cross-party support in both local and central government. David Crook has described it as 'the high point of consensual post-war educational policy-making ' (Crook 2008:120). It provided the context for the Plowden Committee to consider the age of transfer, and it enabled 'excited LEAs to dispense with the 11-plus without creating over-large "all-through" comprehensives ' (Crook 2008:121).
 Download the Education Act 1964 (pdf text 64kb).

Educational justification
Educational arguments were put forward for middle schools. They would 'extend the best practices of primary education ' and would provide better support for pupils 'during a critical transitional stage of their personal development and educational career ' (Hargreaves and Tickle 1980:3).
Clegg summed up his vision of the middle school thus:
Middle schools as we envisage them in the West Riding are a new departure. It would be unfortunate if they came to be regarded simply as the last two years of what we now know as primary education joined to the first two years of the secondary school. The main educational justification for this kind of school is a belief, shared by many primary and secondary school teachers, that there is a similarity in the kinds of interests and needs and ways of learning of children within this age group which could be better catered for if they could be brought into the same school, where forms of organisation and ways of working might be developed which would enable these needs to be satisfied more effectively than is at present possible in a system which has a break of school at about the age of eleven. (Clegg 1967:2-3 quoted in Crook 2008:121)

Rapid development
The Wilson government 's Circular 10/65 (see above), which invited LEAs to submit their proposals for comprehensivisation, listed six possible forms of school organisation. The last of these was:
(vi) A system of middle schools which straddle the primary/secondary age ranges. Under this system pupils transfer from a primary school at the age of 8 or 9 to a comprehensive school with an age range of 8 to 12 or 9 to 13. From this middle school they move on to a comprehensive school with an age range of 12 or 13 to 18. (DES 1965: para.3)
Two years later the Plowden Report advocated 12 as the age of transfer: 'on the whole we think that transfer at 12 is more likely to give us the middle school we want to see ' (Plowden 1967 I:146).
From then on, the development of middle schools was extraordinarily rapid. In 1967 there were none. In 1968 the first opened in Bradford and the West Riding. By 1980 there were more than 1400. Blyth has described this development as 'one of the strangest stories in the history of English education ' (Blyth 1980:20 quoted in Crook 2008:122).
Yet no one had done any academic research into the effectiveness of middle schools. They were, it 's fair to say, created out of financial necessity - any educational justification for them was very much an afterthought. 'The middle school was an innovation that cried out for legitimation ' (Hargreaves and Tickle 1980:5).
In 1970 the DES published Towards the Middle School, which noted the views of psychologists and experts in child development that middle schools could provide good pastoral support, especially for girls and early-maturing boys; that they could stimulate children 's creativity in language and the arts; and that they shielded children from the undesirable pressures of exams (DES 1970).
 For more on middle schools see chapters 9 and 10 of this history and the website of the National Middle Schools Forum, which represents the interests and aspirations of middle school head teachers, staff, pupils and governors.

Special educational needs
Note: Much of the information in this section is taken from chapter 2 (pages 22-32) of the 1978 Warnock Report Special Educational Needs, which itself was largely based on DG Pritchard 's 1963 book Education and the Handicapped 1760-1960.

Post-war progress
Considerable progress in special needs provision had been made in the decade 1945-1955, despite the huge problems which had faced the country in the aftermath of the war. The number of special schools had increased from 528 to 743 and the number of pupils in them from 38,499 to 58,034. The number of full-time teachers in special schools had risen from 2,434 to 4,381.
Provision for the blind and partially sighted was now judged to be adequate, while provision for the deaf and partially hearing had expanded rapidly to cope with the lower age of entry to school and was 'nearing sufficiency ' (Warnock 1978:22). The importance of early diagnosis, assessment and an early start to education was coming to be recognised.
There had been improvements in the methods of controlling epilepsy, and teachers in ordinary schools were increasingly willing to accept responsibility for less severe cases, with medical help. Twenty-five new boarding schools had been built for children suffering from all kinds of physical handicap, including cerebral palsy.
The development of provision for children with speech defects had been delayed by lack of qualified staff, though the number of speech therapists employed full or part-time by LEAs had increased from 205 to 341 between 1949 and 1954.
In 1955 12,000 'delicate ' children were being educated in day and boarding open air schools in England and Wales. The National Health Service and the provision of milk and meals in schools had led to considerable improvements in the standard of living and in the general health of school children.
The needs of educationally sub-normal (ESN) pupils, however, remained 'obstinately unsatisfied ' (Warnock 1978:23). By the end of 1955 nearly 11,000 new places had been provided and 8,000 more were planned. The number of children in ESN special schools had nearly doubled between 1947 and 1955 (from 12,060 to 22,639) but there were still 12,000 children awaiting placement.
The special education of children in hospitals had been safeguarded by the 1946 National Health Service Act, and the number of hospital special schools had grown from 95 in 1947 to 120 (15 run by voluntary bodies) in 1955.

Further developments
1954 NACTST Report
In 1954 the fourth report of the National Advisory Council on the Training and Supply of Teachers (NACTST) recommended that, with certain exceptions, all intending teachers of handicapped children should have experience in ordinary schools and some preliminary experience with handicapped children, and then undertake a full-time course of additional training.
In Circular 324 The Training and Supply of Teachers of Handicapped Pupils (29 May 1957), the Ministry accepted this recommendation in principle but declared it to be impracticable for the time being.
1955 Underwood Report
Provision for maladjusted pupils had expanded and improved but was still seen as being 'relatively undeveloped ' (Warnock 1978:24).
The 1955 Underwood Report Maladjusted Children recommended that there should be a comprehensive child guidance service in every LEA area, involving a school psychological service, the school health service and child guidance clinics, all of which should work in close co-operation.
Progress was hindered by the continuing shortage of professional staff, a problem which was exacerbated by the Underwood Committee 's recommendation that maladjusted children should, wherever possible, continue to live at home during treatment and attend ordinary schools or special schools or classes.
1956 Jameson Report
The 1956 Jameson Report An Inquiry into Health Visiting and the 1959 Younghusband Report on Social Workers in the Local Authority Health and Welfare Services urged a national scheme for the training of health visitors and social workers. This was enacted in the 1962 Health Visiting and Social Work (Training) Act (see Warnock 1978:25-26).
1959 Mental Health Act
Increasing concern about the exclusion of many mentally handicapped children from school was addressed by the 1959 Mental Health Act. Criticism of the system continued to grow, however. Moreover, the concept of special education was 'broadening to encompass needs hitherto regarded as beyond its reach ' (Warnock 1978:28).
1968 Summerfield Report
The 1968 Summerfield Report Psychologists in Education Servicesmade recommendations regarding the duties, training and supply of educational psychologists.
1970 Education (Handicapped Children) Act
This Act (23 July 1970) transferred the provision of training for mentally handicapped children from the health authorities to the LEAs. As a result, 24,000 children in junior training centres and special care units, 8,000 in hospitals, and an uncertain number at home or in private institutions ceased to be treated as 'mentally deficient ' and became entitled to special education. For this purpose they were to be regarded as severely educationally sub-normal (ESN(S)), as distinct from the moderately educationally sub-normal (ESN(M)) who had previously made up the ESN category. Many of the children had other difficulties.
 Download the Education (Handicapped Children) Act 1970 (pdf text 60kb).

Other developments
London 's local government
One of the last acts of Sir Alec Douglas-Home 's Tory government was the reorganisation of local government in London.
Since the boundaries of the London County Council (LCC) had been set in 1855, many people had moved out of central London into the suburbs. Labour control of the city had become unchallengeable, so the Conservatives decided to create a council covering the whole greater London area which they had some chance of controlling.
Sir Edwin Herbert was appointed to head a Royal Commission on the matter, and his report, published in 1960, recommended that new London Boroughs, covering an enlarged area of London, should be the primary institution of local government, while the LCC would be replaced by the Greater London Council (GLC) with fewer powers. Education would be under the control of a new Inner London Education Authority (ILEA).
These proposals were enacted in Part IV Section 30 of the 1963 London Government Act (31 July 1963) and the GLC and ILEA were established in April 1964.
 Download the London Government Act 1963 (pdf text 5mb).

Immigration
The education of 'ethnic minority ' children began to be the subject of much debate in the 1960s.
The British Nationality Act of 1948 had given Commonwealth citizens recognition as British subjects, entitled to work and live in Britain. Immigration from these countries had been encouraged and the children of the new immigrants were now passing through the schools.
The question which needed to be answered was: should they be assimilated into the 'host ' society and lose their own language and culture, or should they integrate but retain their distinctiveness?
Until the mid sixties central government had no policy on the education of immigrant children. The main concerns were to teach English to non-English speakers and to disperse immigrant pupils, partly to prevent individual schools having to cope with large numbers of them and partly to facilitate their assimilation into British society.
However, Birmingham 's LEA and the newly-established Inner London Education Authority (ILEA), both of which had large numbers of immigrant children, rejected this dispersal policy and it was eventually ruled illegal in 1975.
Section 11
Section 11 of the 1966 Local Government Act (13 December 1966) dealt with the funding of education for immigrant children.
It authorised the secretary of state, with the consent of the Treasury, to make grants for the employment of staff in those local authorities which were 'required to make special provision in the exercise of any of their functions in consequence of the presence within their areas of substantial numbers of immigrants from the Commonwealth whose language or customs differ from those of the community '.
 Download the Local Government Act 1966 (pdf text 880kb).
Many LEAs and schools began to develop their own policies and practices, mainly concerned with the teaching of English as a second language. ILEA in particular achieved a considerable reputation for its equal opportunities policies. (See chapter 6 for more on ILEA).
Towards the end of the sixties, 'assimilation ' was replaced by 'integration ' in policy statements which began to refer to diversity, tolerance and equal opportunity and attempted 'to give at least some recognition in schools to the backgrounds of ethnic minority children ' (Swann 1985:191).

Miscellaneous
The 1953 Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (14 July 1953) required LEAs to provide free dental treatment for children and amended the provisions of the 1944 Act relating to school attendance orders.
 Download the Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1953 (pdf text 424kb).
In the Gurney-Dixon Report (1954), Early Leaving, the Central Advisory Council for Education (England) examined the problem of premature school-leaving in England.
The 1956 Teachers (Superannuation) Act (5 July 1956) made provisions relating to teachers ' pensions (the contributions of teachers and employers were both raised from five to six per cent) and to the employment of teachers over the age of sixty-five years.
 Download the Teachers (Superannuation) Act 1956 (pdf text 572kb).
In 1956 selected technical and further education colleges were upgraded to College of Advanced Technology status - most of these would become the 'new universities ' in the mid-1960s.
The Carr Committee (1958) reported that employers were overwhelmingly opposed to vocational instruction provided by schools and the 1959 Crowther Report 15-18 recommended raising the school leaving age to 16 and the provision of further education for 15-18 year olds. It questioned the value of day release provision for apprenticeships.
The 1959 Education Act (29 July 1959) enlarged the powers of the Minister of Education 'to make contributions, grants and loans in respect of aided schools and special agreement schools, and for purposes connected therewith '.
 Download the Education Act 1959 (pdf text 68kb).
In 1960 the teacher training course was extended from two years to three.
In 1962 the Ministry of Education set up a 'Curriculum Study Group ' to consider curriculum issues and pedagogy, but the initiative failed because of opposition from teachers ' organisations and local authorities.
The 1962 Education Act (29 March 1962) required LEAs to provide grants for living costs and tuition fees to students resident in their area for full-time first degree courses, for teacher training, and for courses leading to the Diploma in Higher Education (Dip HE) and the Higher National Diploma (HND). These mandatory local authority maintenance grants were sufficient to support students away from home if necessary. Over 25s could receive a higher rate of grant, as could under 25s who had been employed or had lived away from home for a substantial period.
 Download the Education Act 1962 (pdf text 240kb).
In 1963, the Robbins Report Higher education, commissioned by Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, recommended a massive expansion of higher education to cater for all who had the necessary ability. The Conservative government accepted its recommendations in full, but they were not all implemented by Harold Wilson 's Labour administration, which came to power in October 1964.
The 1963 Children and Young Persons Act (31 July 1963) updated the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. It made provisions relating to local authorities ' responsibility for the welfare of children, approved schools, juvenile courts, and the employment of children and young persons.
 Download the Children and Young Persons Act 1963 (pdf text 1020kb).
Following the failure of the Curriculum Study Group set up by the Ministry of Education in 1962, the government now accepted the recommendation of the Lockwood Report and, in 1964, established the Schools Council to disseminate ideas about curricular reform in England and Wales. The Council was dominated by teachers ' representatives. 'It was teachers - through their organisations and as individuals - who had a leading influence on curriculum change ' (Jones 2003:52-3).
Scotland went one better. The 1965 Teaching Council (Scotland) Act (2 June 1965) provided for the establishment of a General Teaching Council for Scotland, for the registration of teachers, for regulating their professional training, and for cancelling registration in cases of misconduct.
 Download the Teaching Council (Scotland) Act 1965 (pdf text 336kb).
The four year Bachelor of Education (BEd) course, which had been proposed by the 1963 Robbins Report, was introduced in 1965. The rising birth rate forced the government to increase provision for student teachers: there were 80,000 places for them by the end of the decade.
The 1967 Education Act (16 February 1967) enlarged the powers of the secretary of state to make contributions, grants and loans in respect of aided and special agreement schools and to direct LEAs to pay the expenses of establishing or enlarging controlled schools; and to provide loans for capital expenditure incurred for purposes of colleges of education by 'persons other than local education authorities '.
 Download the Education Act 1967 (pdf text 68kb).
The 1968 Education Act (10 April 1968) amended the law relating to changes in the character, size and situation of county and voluntary schools to enable special age limits to be adopted, and made other amendments relating to the approval or provision of school premises.
 Download the Education Act 1968 (pdf text 180kb).
The 1968 School Meals Agreement ended the obligation on teachers to supervise children at lunchtimes.
The 1969 Children and Young Persons Act (22 October 1969) amended the law relating to the care of children undergoing court proceedings, in care or being fostered.
 Download the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 (pdf text 2.2mb).

Optimism
Perhaps the word which best sums up education in the 1960s is optimism.
It is, of course, easy to look back through the proverbial rose-tinted spectacles. But I think it is fair to say that, in areas where the eleven plus was abolished, it felt as though a great weight had been lifted from the shoulders of the schools. Teachers - especially in primary schools - suddenly had enormous freedom to experiment with progressive styles of teaching, child-centred learning, open plan schools, discovery methods, creativity and spontaneity. It was a heady mix.
It seemed that Britain was, at last, emerging from the twin dark shadows of the second world war and the old ideas about children and their education.
It is fashionable to deride the 1960s as culturally aberrant and wildly idealist. Healthy idealism may be preferable to entrenched ideology parading as pragmatism, which has been the chief characteristic of subsequent decades. Many of us who were active in education in the 1960s look back on a time of optimism, a spirit of shared concerns, and the beginnings of an articulation (in every sense) of an education system which would offer the greatest possible opportunities to everyone as an entitlement, not a privilege. (Plaskow 1990:90, quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:22)
As a young teacher beginning his career in 1966, I shared Plaskow 's 'healthy idealism ' - as did many of my colleagues. Regrettably, our optimism was not to survive long in the following decade.
Chapter 7 : 1970-1979
Recession and disenchantment

Political background
The decade began with a Conservative administration led by Ted Heath (pictured), elected in June 1970 with a Commons majority of 30.
Heath needed to make cuts in public expenditure and his new secretary of state for education - one Margaret Thatcher - offered, among other things, to abolish the universal provision of free school milk. This was achieved in the 1971 Education (Milk) Act and led to the jibe 'Thatcher, Thatcher, milk snatcher '.
In 1974 there were two elections. The first, held on 28 February, was inconclusive. Heath could not bring himself to promise proportional representation - the Liberals ' price for a coalition - so Harold Wilson formed a minority Labour administration.
Wilson went to the country again in October but the electorate was still indecisive and gave him a majority of just three. His education secretaries were Reg Prentice (March 1974) and Fred Mulley (June 1975).
Heath 's political career was effectively over and in February 1975 he was replaced as leader of the Conservative Party by Margaret Thatcher.
Wilson resigned in April 1976 and was replaced by Jim Callaghan. In September 1976 Callaghan appointed Shirley Williams as education secretary and in the following month he gave his famous Ruskin College speech in which he called for a 'Great Debate ' about the nature and purposes of education.
Callaghan might have been re-elected had he gone to the country in the autumn of 1978, when opinion polls indicated that Labour would win. But he chose not to and, following the 'winter of discontent ' when trades unions called multiple strikes in protest at prolonged pay restraint, he lost the election in May 1979 to Thatcher 's Conservatives.

End of the post-war consensus
The economic background to the period was not auspicious. The oil crisis and subsequent recession of 1971-3 'fundamentally altered the map of British politics ' by exposing 'all the underlying weaknesses of Keynesian social democracy '. The governments of Heath, Wilson and Callaghan were all 'unable to breathe new life into the old system '. The post-war 'welfare capitalist consensus ' had relied on increasing prosperity to foster social unity. 'When that prosperity disintegrated, so, too, did the consensus ' (Chitty 2004:31).
The post-war consensus finally collapsed under the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79, amid mounting inflation, swelling balance of payments deficits, unprecedented currency depreciation, rising unemployment, bitter industrial conflicts and what seemed to many to be ebbing governability. The Conservative leadership turned towards a new version of the classical market liberalism of the nineteenth century. Though the Labour leadership stuck to the tacit 'revisionism ' of the 1950s and 1960s, large sections of the rank and file turned towards a more inchoate mixture of neo-Marxism and the 'fundamentalist ' Socialism of the 1920s and 1930s. (Marquand, 1988:3, quoted in Chitty 2004:32)
The recession 'provided a rationale for economic cutbacks in education not only in England but in most advanced western industrial countries ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:41).

Disenchantment
In addition, the 1970s saw the beginning of a 'general disenchantment with education as a palliative of society 's ills ' which first found expression in the USA following 'the supposed (and some hold premature) evaluation of theHeadstart programmes as a failure ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:41).
As a result, politicians were beginning to call for teachers to become more accountable. In 1974 the DES established the Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) to 'promote the development of methods of assessing and monitoring the achievement of children at school, and to seek to identify the incidence of under-achievement '. Teacher accountability would become a priority for both major parties following Callaghan 's Ruskin College speech in 1976.

Selection: broken promises
Circular 10/70
With Margaret Thatcher as education secretary, Ted Heath 's Conservative government issued Circular 10/70, in which it announced that it would accept no further LEA plans for wholesale comprehensivisation - it would only accept proposals for individual schools.
In fact, LEAs continued to submit plans - presented as individual school plans - which Thatcher accepted. Indeed, she sanctioned more comprehensivisations than any other education minister before or since. The halfway point was reached during this period - there were now more children in comprehensive schools than in selective ones.
When Wilson was returned to power in 1974, many in education hoped that Labour would now finish the job and go for total comprehensivisation. But once again the party failed to live up to its promises.

1976 Education Act
The 1976 Education Act (22 November 1976) stated the principle that: local education authorities shall, in the exercise and performance of their powers and duties relating to secondary education, have regard to the general principle that such education is to be provided only in schools where the arrangements for the admission of pupils are not based (wholly or partly) on selection by reference to ability or aptitude. (Section 1(1))
The principle, then, was crystal clear: no selection. Unfortunately, the rest of the Act hedged about this principle with so many conditions and loopholes that its effect was negligible. 'There was no legal requirement to end selection, and the Act produced no visible effect ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:11).
The Act was repealed by the Conservatives in 1979.
 Download the Education Act 1976 (pdf text 148kb).

Lurch to the right
Conservative politicians were beginning to demand 'consumer-oriented education ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:11). They wanted the Schools Council abolished, more national testing, the school leaving age put back to 15 (it had been raised to 16 in 1973), and they called for national inquiries into 'everything progressive ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:11).
Not to be outdone, the Labour government took its own dramatic turn to the right and 'announced a sudden halt to the forward march of comprehensive change ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:11-12). Its 1976 'Yellow Book ' - commissioned by prime minister Jim Callaghan and produced by the DES - was supposed to be secret but was widely leaked to the press. It promoted 'the imposition of a new "agreed" core curriculum and claimed that the reorganisation of secondary education was now complete ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:12). This was nonsense - eleven plus selection still existed wholly or partially in more than half of LEAs.
The Yellow Book was about much more than pedagogic method:
The DES aimed not just at reshaping practice through judicious advice, but at bringing to a halt what seemed to be the spontaneous and deep-seated tendencies of the school system, towards localised, piecemeal, unsupervised, professionally led and progressive-influenced reform in primary schools and throughout the state system. (Jones 2003:95)
With Callaghan 's Ruskin College speech in 1976 and the 'Great Debate ' which followed, comprehensivisation slipped off the political agenda. It disappeared from view altogether in 1979 when Margaret Thatcher 's Conservative government came to power and set out to transform the country 's schools into an education market place.

The Great Debate
Recession
By 1976, the Labour government was in deep financial trouble and Callaghan (pictured) was pressured by the US and by the right wing of his own party to accept a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The cuts in public expenditure which were forced on him increased unemployment and worsened the provision of education and other public services.
Callaghan told the Labour Party conference 'that his government was making a definitive break with the post-war past - a break that embraced not only financial policy but the social and political order that economic growth and full employment had enabled ' (Jones 2003:73).

The Black Papers
The worrying economic climate provided the context for the views presented in a series of five 'Black Papers ' written by right-wing educationalists and politicians.
The first, published in 1969, specifically focused on the progressive style of education being developed in the primary schools as 'a main cause not only of student unrest in the universities but of other unwelcome tendencies or phenomena ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:41).
All five Black Papers - supported by the right-wing press - attacked the concepts of comprehensive education, egalitarianism and progressive teaching methods. They deplored the lack of discipline in schools and blamed comprehensivisation for preventing 'academic ' students from obtaining good examination results.
In the last two Black Papers (1975 and 1977) contributors went beyond 'the cautious conservatism of the first three documents ' (Chitty 2004:46) and advocated voucher schemes under which parents would be issued with a free basic coupon valued at the average cost of schools in a local authority area. The editors of the 1975 Paper wanted education vouchers trialled in at least two areas, and in the last Black Paper a 'Letter to Members of Parliament ' said:
The possibilities for parental choice of secondary (and also primary) schools should be improved via the introduction of the education voucher or some other method. Schools that few wish to attend should then be closed and their staff dispersed. (Cox and Boyson 1977:9, quoted in Chitty 2004:46)
These arguments for choice, competition and parental control of schools - and the questioning of the very concept of a 'national system, locally administered ' - would be taken up with enthusiasm by Margaret Thatcher 's administrations from 1979.
The five Black Papers were: * 1969 Fight for Education: A Black Paper edited by CB Cox and AE Dyson. Critical Quarterly Society. * 1969 Black Paper Two: The Crisis in Education edited by CB Cox and AE Dyson. Critical Quarterly Society. * 1970 Black Paper Three: Goodbye Mr Short edited by CB Cox and AE Dyson. Critical Quarterly Society. * 1975 Black Paper 1975: The Fight for Education edited by CB Cox and R Boyson. London: Dent. * 1977 Black Paper 1977 edited by CB Cox and R Boyson. London: Maurice Temple Smith.

Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress
Another influential document of the time was Neville Bennett 's report on his research at Lancaster into primary school teaching methods. Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress (1976) was represented in the media as 'a condemnation of so-called "progressive" methods in the primary school ' (Galton, Simon and Croll 1980:41).
Bennett concluded that 'formal ' methods (whole classes teaching, regular testing and competition) resulted in pupils being four months ahead of those taught using 'informal ' methods.
His study was widely criticised, particularly for its use of oversimplified categorisation of teaching methods, but it was represented in the media as 'a full-scale scientific study of "progressive" teaching methods which proved that they simply did not work ' (Chitty 2004:37).
The objections of critics were, predictably, largely ignored.

The William Tyndale Affair
Those who sought to attack progressive education methods were given ammunition by the 'William Tyndale Affair '.
In 1974 some of the staff at William Tyndale primary school in north London introduced radical changes associated with an extreme form of romantic liberalism. The result was a violent dispute among the staff and between some of the staff and the school managers.
Chaos ensued as the staff lost control of the school and its pupils. Local government politicians and the local inspectorate became involved and, ultimately, there was a public inquiry in 1975-6 into the teaching, organisation and management of the school.
The affair raised a number of crucial questions which centred on issues such as: * the control of the school curriculum; * the responsibilities of local education authorities; * the accountability of teachers; and * the assessment of effectiveness in education.

Callaghan 's Ruskin College Speech
This, then, was the political, economic and educational context in which Callaghan began the 'Great Debate ' about education with his speech at Ruskin College Oxford on 18 October 1976.
Callaghan called for a public debate on education which would allow employers, trades unions and parents, as well as teachers and administrators, to make their views known. He said he had been 'very impressed ... by the enthusiasm and dedication of the teaching profession ', but he acknowledged that there was 'criticism about basic skills and attitudes ' and he argued that there was 'a need for more technological bias in science teaching '.
Underlying the speech was the feeling that the educational system was out of touch with the fundamental need for Britain to survive economically in a highly competitive world through the efficiency of its industry and commerce:
I do not join those who paint a lurid picture of educational decline because I do not believe it is generally true, although there are examples which give cause for concern. I am raising a further question. It is this. In today 's world, higher standards are demanded than were required yesterday and there are simply fewer jobs for those without skill. Therefore we demand more from our schools than did our grandparents.
The speech was viewed with suspicion by many teachers, who still held the view enunciated in 1954 by National Union of Teachers general secretary Ronald Gould that democracy itself was safeguarded by 'the existence of a quarter of a million teachers who are free to decide what should be taught and how it should be taught ' (quoted in Timmins 1996:323).
 Read the full text of Callaghan 's Ruskin speech.
The speech was followed by various DES and HMI initiatives regarding the curriculum, the establishment of the Assessment of Performance Unit and the beginning of mass testing by LEAs.
The debate was characterised by the increasingly detailed interventions of central government into schooling:
The interventions began in the form of spending cuts and developed into a strategy for relating education to a large-scale programme of social and economic restructuring: the education revolution of the 1980s and '90s had its origins in the conflicts, crises and realignments of the 1970s. (Jones 2003:74)

Education in Schools: A Consultative Document
Expanding on Callaghan 's theme, the green paper Education in Schools: A Consultative Document acknowledged that there had been positive developments:
Primary schools have been transformed in recent years by two things: a much wider curriculum than used to be considered sufficient for elementary education, and the rapid growth of the so-called 'child-centred ' approach. (DES 1977:8)
It commended many aspects of these developments:
In the right hands, this approach has produced confident, happy and relaxed children, without any sacrifice of the 3Rs or other accomplishments - indeed, with steady improvement in standards. Visitors have come from all over the world to see, and to admire, the English and Welsh 'primary school revolution '. (DES 1977:8)
However, it went on to suggest that few teachers had sufficient experience and ability to make the new approach work:
It has proved to be a trap for some less able or less experienced teachers who applied the freer methods uncritically or failed to recognise that they require careful planning of the opportunities offered to children and systematic monitoring of the progress of individuals. (DES 1977:8)
It concluded that 'the challenge now is to restore the rigour without damaging the real benefits of the child-centred developments ' (DES 1977:8).

Special educational needs
Child guidance
Circulars from the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Health and Social Security in March 1974 recommended that the child guidance service should be based on a multi-professional team, providing assessment, diagnosis, consultation, treatment and other help.
LEAs and health authorities were asked to extend the available help to children with behavioural, emotional and learning difficulties.
The Court Committee 's report on Child Health Services Fit for the future(1976) recommended 'that the child guidance clinics and psychiatric hospital services should be recognised as part of an integrated child and adolescent psychiatry service ' (quoted in Warnock 1978:26).

Assessment
A Circular issued in March 1975 The Discovery of Children Requiring Special Education and the Assessment of their Needs examined the process of discovery, diagnosis and assessment of children with special needs. It emphasised its multi-professional character and stressed the value of informality and the importance of parental participation.
It also introduced an improved set of forms for recording the educational, medical, psychological and other data required for deciding the nature of a child 's special educational needs, and a summary sheet for use during the process of assessment, placement and review.
Comments received in 1977 from LEAs indicated their general satisfaction with the new procedures and their wish to develop them further (seeWarnock 1978:30-31).

Integration
Section 10 of the 1976 Education Act required LEAs to provide for the special education of all handicapped pupils in county and voluntary schools, except where this was 'impracticable or incompatible with the provision of efficient instruction in the schools ' or would involve 'unreasonable public expenditure ', in which case it could be given in special schools or, with the secretary of state 's approval, in independent schools.
The provision (an amendment of Section 33(2) of the 1944 Education Act) was to have come into force on a day to be 'appointed by the Secretary of State '.
However, in January 1977 secretary of state Shirley Williams announced that before deciding to introduce the new provision she proposed to consult widely with educational and other interests and also to await the findings of the Warnock committee (see Warnock 1978:34-5).
 Download the Education Act 1976 (pdf text 148kb).

Legislation
In addition to the Acts mentioned above (the 1976 Education Act and the 1971 Education (Milk) Act), the following Acts were passed during this period:

1970 Education (Handicapped Children) Act
(23 July 1970) discontinued the classification of handicapped children as unsuitable for education at school.
 Download the Education (Handicapped Children) Act 1970 (pdf text 60kb).

1971 Teaching Council (Scotland) Act
(17 February 1971) allowed the secretary of state to deduct Council membership fees from employees ' salaries.
 Download the Teaching Council (Scotland) Act 1971 (pdf text 64kb).

1972 Children Act
(27 July 1972) ensured that the minimum age at which children could be employed would not be affected by any further change in the school leaving age.
 Download the Children Act 1972 (pdf text 44kb).

1973 Education Act
(18 April 1973) made provisions regarding the operation of certain educational trusts.
 Download the Education Act 1973 (pdf text 296kb).

1973 Education (Work Experience) Act
(23 May 1973) enabled education authorities to arrange for children under school leaving age to have work experience as part of their education.
 Download the Education (Work Experience) Act 1973 (pdf text 52kb).

1973 Employment of Children Act
(23 May 1973) laid down new regulations regarding children 's employment and its supervision by local authorities.
 Download the Employment of Children Act 1973 (pdf text 144kb).

1973 National Health Service Reorganisation Act
(5 July 1973) transferred responsibility for the school health service in England and Wales to area health authorities: the change was effected in April 1974. A similar change took place in Scotland (see Warnock 1978:30).
 Download the National Health Service Reorganisation Act 1973 (pdf text 2.4mb).

1973 Employment and Training Act
(25 July 1973) established the Manpower Services Commission (MSC) which would later oversee the Technical and Vocational Initiative (TVEI).
 Download the Employment and Training Act 1973 (pdf text 1.5mb).

1976 Education (School-leaving Dates) Act
(25 March 1976) a very brief Act amending the summer school leaving date.
 Download the Education (School-leaving Dates) Act 1976 (pdf text 56kb).

Reports
1972 James Report
The James Report Teacher Education and Training recommended a broader role for the higher education colleges, and the White PaperEducation: A Framework for Expansion promoted diversification and rationalisation.
With the dip in the birth rate resulting in fewer children in the schools, the government announced (in Circular 7/73) a halving of the number of student teachers. It also became clear that the government intended to increase the proportion of student teachers trained through the one year Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE).

1975 Bullock Report
The Bullock Report A language for life made wide-ranging recommendations on the teaching of English.

1977 Taylor Report
The Taylor Report A New Partnership for Our Schools recommended major changes in the management of schools - including a greater role for parents on governing bodies - which were implemented in the 1980 Education Act.

1978 Warnock Report
The Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People, chaired by Mary (later Baroness) Warnock, was appointed in November 1973 by secretary of state Margaret Thatcher. Its remit was:
To review educational provision in England, Scotland and Wales for children and young people handicapped by disabilities of body or mind, taking account of the medical aspects of their needs, together with arrangements to prepare them for entry into employment; to consider the most effective use of resources for these purposes; and to make recommendations. (Warnock 1978:1)
Its wide-ranging report Special Educational Needs was presented to the secretary of state in March 1978.

1978 Waddell Report
The Waddell Report School Examinations recommended a single exam at age 16 to replace the GCE and CSE. (The first GCSE exams were taken in 1988).

1977-82 HMI: Matters for Discussion
As part of the 'Great Debate ' (see above), HMI produced a series of 15 discussion documents under the series title Matters for Discussion: 1 Ten Good Schools (1977) 2 Classics in Comprehensive Schools (1977) 3 Modern Languages in Comprehensive Schools (1977) 4 Gifted Children in Middle and Comprehensive Secondary Schools(1977) 5 The Teaching of Ideas in Geography (1978) 6 Mixed Ability Work in Comprehensive Schools (1978) 7 The Education of Children in Hospitals for the Mentally Handicapped(1978) 8 Developments in the BEd Degree Course (1979) 9 Mathematics 5 to 11 (1979)
10 Community Homes with Education (1980)
11 A View of the Curriculum (1980)
12 Modern Languages in Further Education (1980)*
13 Girls and Science (1980)
14 Mathematics in the Sixth Form (1982)
15 The New Teacher in School (1982)
*I have been unable to find this book. If you have a copy of it which you would be willing to lend me, I 'd be very grateful. Contact details are here.

1978-85 HMI surveys
The 1967 Plowden Report Children and their Primary Schools had recommended (in chapter 30, page 426, para. 1164) that surveys of the quality of primary schools should be conducted at least once every ten years.
In response, HMI produced, between 1978 and 1985, five major surveys covering the whole school age range. They were:
1978 Primary education in England
1979 Aspects of secondary education in England
1982 Education 5 to 9
1983 9-13 Middle Schools
1985 Education 8 to 12 in Combined and Middle Schools

Chapter 8 : 1979-1990
Thatcherism: the marketisation of education

Neo-liberalism
Neo-liberalism became the dominant force in British politics with the election in 1979 of the Conservative administration led by Margaret Thatcher (pictured). Her government 's policies 'accelerated the closing down of unprofitable industries and promoted a profound social and economic restructuring ' (Jones 2003:107).
By 1982 the Thatcher government was highly unpopular. Soaring inflation and a massive increase in unemployment made it seem unlikely that she would win a second term. She needed a miracle. Fortunately for her, Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and she was able to play the part of heroic war leader in the Falklands War between March and June 1982. The result was a landslide in the 1983 general election. With a vastly increased Commons majority (up from 44 to 144), she felt emboldened to take her reforms further.
She won a third term in office at the general election in 1987. Her majority of 101, though reduced, was nevertheless substantial, and the 'iron lady ' felt powerful enough to push ahead with some unpopular polices, most notably the introduction of a form of poll tax. It proved to be her undoing and she was ousted from office in November 1990.

Public services
Thatcher 's neo-liberal policies affected not only industry and commerce but also public services.
Conservative legislation sought to drive neo-liberal principles into the heart of public policy. An emphasis on cost reduction, privatisation and deregulation was accompanied by vigorous measures against the institutional bases of Conservatism 's opponents, and the promotion of new forms of public management. The outcome of these processes was a form of governance in which market principles were advanced at the same time as central authority was strengthened. (Jones 2003:107)
Thus the twin aims of Margaret Thatcher 's education policies in the 1980s were to convert the nation 's schools system from a public service into a market, and to transfer power from local authorities to central government.
The origins of this policy can be traced back to the establishment in 1955 of the Institute of Economic Affairs (lEA), a right-wing think-tank which, during the 1970s, had 'worked tirelessly to persuade the Conservative Party to abandon the post-war welfare consensus and embrace social and educational policies based on nineteenth-century free-market anti-statism ' (Chitty 2004:47).
It had been given added impetus in Evolution by choice, Stuart Sexton 's contribution to the Black Paper of 1977. (For more on the Black Paperssee the previous chapter). He set out to 'sketch a new system for secondary education ' based on 'absolute freedom of choice by application '. Local authorities would no longer allocate children to schools. Where a school was oversubscribed it would select its students on the basis of 'ability and aptitude '. If it was undersubscribed it would face the possibility of closure. The educational market would not be entirely unregulated. There would be an 'effective and independent inspectorate ', a government-defined 'minimum curriculum ' and specified 'minimum standards ' (Sexton 1977, quoted in Jones 2003:106).
Sexton 's theme was taken up by an 'ever-growing number of right-wing think-tanks with small but interlocking memberships ' which 'bombarded ' ministers with policy ideas 'ideologically driven by commitment to the market and to privatisation ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:12).

Selection
Despite their claims to be radical and modernising, Thatcher 's Tories - and the 'New Right ' which supported them - couldn 't bring themselves to ditch the elitist policies of the past. The most obvious of these was selection for secondary education.
Thus the 1979 Education Act - Thatcher 's first - gave back to LEAs the right to select pupils for secondary education at 11. The move backfired, however. The Tories had underestimated the popularity of comprehensive schools, and attempts to reintroduce or extend selection in Berkshire, Wiltshire, Redbridge and Solihull all failed as a result of strong local opposition.
But the Tories weren 't going to give up. 'Such defeats served to encourage Conservative Ministers to opt for rather more subtle policy initiatives aimed at establishing a wider variety of secondary schools and providing for greater parental choice ' (Chitty and Dunford 1999:25).
They began work on a series of radical changes characterised by the absence of any popular demand for them from any section of the education community nationally or locally, nor even from the populist media. One by one all had to be imposed by means of a parliamentary majority against continuing opposition from all other political parties and from much of the educational establishment. (Benn and Chitty 1996:13)

Preparing the ground
When she took office in May 1979 Thatcher appointed Mark Carlisle as her first education secretary. He was 'moderate and essentially pragmatic ' (Chitty 2004:48) and freely admitted that 'I had no direct knowledge of the state sector either as a pupil or as a parent ' (Ribbins and Sherratt 1997:55 quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:1). This suited Thatcher because at first reform of education was not her priority: she was more concerned with bringing down the rate of inflation (causing very high levels of unemployment in the process) and with curbing the power and influence of the trade unions.
But Carlisle was replaced in September 1981 by the very different Keith Joseph (pictured), a long-time advocate of free market ideas (especially parental choice and education vouchers). In 1974 he had been a co-founder of the right-wing Centre for Policy Studies, a think-tank which wanted schools to be autonomous with a minimum of state interference.
His appointment was a signal that school reform was moving up the government 's agenda. Ironically, as secretary of state for education Joseph found himself commanding an apparatus that was now increasingly involved in specifying the everyday practice of schools. ... Joseph, like the ministers who succeeded him, organised in the name of 'effective education ' a vast new complex of regulations and regulators that would measure and direct the processes and outcomes of schooling. (Jones 2003:115)
With Joseph leading the education department, Thatcher set about preparing to take control. This meant confronting the 'education establishment ' - the teachers and their unions, the training institutions and national and local inspectors and advisors. There would be action on three fronts: * the curriculum - traditionally seen as the 'secret garden ' which government ministers were not supposed to enter; * the teachers - controlling their training and development and restricting their role in curriculum development; and * the local education authorities (LEAs) - many of which (especially the Labour-controlled ones) Thatcher saw as her enemy.

The curriculum
In 1976 Labour prime minister Jim Callaghan had begun the 'Great Debate ' on the nature and purposes of education. Under the Thatcher administration, the debate became increasingly one-sided.
The opening shot was the publication in 1979 of LEA Arrangements for the School Curriculum which required local authorities to publish their curriculum policies.
This was followed, two years later, by The School Curriculum (25 March 1981), in which the secretaries of state (for Education and Wales) said they had decided to 'set out in some detail the approach to the school curriculum which they consider should now be followed in the years ahead '. Every local education authority was expected to frame policies for the school curriculum consistent with the government 's 'recommended approach ' (DES 1981a:5).
On 1 October 1981 the DES issued Circular 6/81 which requested that, in the light of the advice contained in The School Curriculum, each local education authority should
(a) review its policy for the school curriculum in its area, and its arrangements for making that policy known to all concerned;
(b) review the extent to which current provision in the schools is consistent with that policy; and
(c) plan future developments accordingly, within the resources available.
In taking these actions, local education authorities should consult governors of schools, teachers and others concerned (DES 1981b para.5).
Two years later, on 8 December 1983, Circular 8/83 requested each LEA to provide:
(a) a report on the progress which has been made in drawing up a policy for the curriculum in its primary and secondary schools ...
(b) a description of the roles played in the processes of drawing up the policy by heads and other teachers, governors, parents and other interested parties in the local community;
(c) a brief statement of the ways in which the policy is being given or will be given practical effect in the schools ...
(d) a summary, giving examples where appropriate, of the steps being taken and planned by the authority to seek to ensure that the curriculum is planned as a whole ...
(e) a summary of the steps being taken and planned by the authority to ensure that the curriculum is appropriately related to what happens outside school, and includes sufficient applied and practical work, particularly in mathematics ... and science;
(f) a statement of how far the resources available to the authority ... are enabling it to give effect to its policy for the curriculum. (DES 1983 para.5)
To support schools and LEAs in formulating curriculum policies, HMI produced a number of publications, including: * A Framework for the School Curriculum (HMI 1980); * A View of the Curriculum (HMI Series: Matters for Discussion No. 11 1980); * The Curriculum from 5 to 16 (HMI Curriculum Matters 2 1985).
Many of these HMI documents were progressive in outlook. The Curriculum from 5 to 16, for example, argued that the school curriculum should be thought of in terms of 'areas of learning and experience ' and that it included not only the formal programme of lessons, but also the 'informal ' programme of so-called extracurricular activities as well as all those features which produce the school 's 'ethos ', such as the quality of relationships, the concern for equality of opportunity, the values exemplified in the way the school sets about its task and the way in which it is organised and managed. (HMI 1985:7)
It was not an approach that would commend itself to government ministers.
In July 1987 the government published The National Curriculum 5-16. This consultation document set out plans for the introduction of a national curriculum and associated assessment procedures. Its 40 A4-size pages appear to have been produced in haste: the cover was printed but the contents were typed - presumably on an electric typewriter or perhaps on an early Amstrad word processor (which had been launched the previous year).

The teachers
Central government also sought greater control over teachers.
In 1984 the Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (CATE) was established to set standards for initial teacher training courses.
In a move designed to reduce the influence of teachers in curriculum development, the Schools Council, in which teachers had played a significant role, was abolished in 1984. Its work was shared between the School Examinations Council (SEC), whose members were nominated by the secretary of state, and the School Curriculum Development Council (SCDC), which was specifically instructed not to 'concern itself with policy '.
And in 1985 Keith Joseph proposed linking teacher appraisal and performance-related pay. The result was a year of industrial action by teachers.

The local authorities
For Thatcher, the local authorities - many of them run by Labour - were an irritant, blocking central government 's ability to affect what was going on in the schools. Her government therefore set about weakening the role of the LEAs by dismantling the triangular framework of responsibility - central government, local authorities and the schools - which had been established by the 1944 Education Act, and by offering parents a greater role in the running of schools.
The LEAs were already in a difficult position. Local government had been reorganised in 1974, when the number of LEAs was reduced from 146 to 104. Many of the reorganised authorities had embraced corporate management policies which led to some widely publicised resignations of Chief Education Officers (CEOs) who felt they no longer had control over the service. Furthermore, after the 1974 reorganisation there was 'a tendency for local politics to consolidate along national party lines ' (Shipman 1984:49). Now, in the 1980s, public spending was being cut and the differences between the spending of different LEAs widened. As contraction replaced expansion, power tended to ebb back to central government.
Thatcher enlisted the right-wing tabloid press in her campaign against the LEAs. Papers like The Sun and the Daily Mail ran endless stories about the absurdities perpetrated - often in the name of equal opportunities - by 'the loony left '. Ealing, for example, was supposed to have banned any mention of the nursery rhyme 'Baa baa black sheep ' in its schools. It wasn 't true, of course (I know - I was there!), but the endless repetition of such stories damaged the image of local authorities in the eyes of the public - which is precisely what it was intended to do.
Vocational education
The government took another swipe at the local authorities in 1982, when it launched the Technical and Vocational Education Initiative (TVEI), aimed at 14-18 year olds. LEAs were not allowed to participate. Instead, it was administered by the Department of Employment 's Manpower Services Commission (MSC). It was not exactly a success. 'From 1977 to 1989 change was breathtaking in this area and so was expenditure: £89 billion spent on introducing 25 training schemes, of which 22 were subsequently cancelled, some after only a year or two in existence ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:16).
The National Council for Vocational Qualifications (NCVQ) was set up in 1986 to promote National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs).
In 1989 the government announced that schools would in future be allowed to offer vocational courses like those from the Business and Technology Education Council (BTEC). It also made an effort to rationalise 'Britain 's renowned jungle of vocational qualifications ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:17) in an attempt to create a single new system of vocational qualifications: GNVQ for educational qualifications and NVQ for qualifications gained through work.
For a brief moment it looked as if at last a British government was going to catapult the country into a position where it could compete with other industrialised countries which had already made all these changes through comprehensive education reform and an integration of vocational and academic education. (Benn and Chitty 1996:17)
But it was not to be. The Major administration (see the next chapter) chose not to pursue the integration of academic and vocational education.

Legislation
1979 Education Act
The 1979 Education Act (26 July 1979) - Thatcher 's first - was very short (just two pages). It repealed Labour 's 1976 Act and gave back to LEAs the right to select pupils for secondary education at 11.
 Download the Education Act 1979 (pdf text 40kb).
1980 Education Act
This Act (3 April 1980) began the process of giving more power to parents. Its main provisions were: * school governing bodies were to include at least two parents (Section 2(5)); * parents were to have the right to choose schools (6) and the right to appeal if they didn 't get the schools they had chosen (7); * there were new rules regarding school attendance orders (10 and 11), the creation of new schools and the closing of existing ones (12), and the number of school places (15); * the Assisted Places Scheme would provide public money to pay for 30,000 children to go to private schools (17); * the obligation on local authorities to provide free milk and meals was removed, except in the case of children from families receiving Supplementary Benefit or Family Income Supplement (22); and * local authorities could establish nursery schools (24).
 Download the Education Act 1980 (pdf text 1mb).
1981 Education Act
The 1981 Education Act (30 October 1981) followed the publication of the 1978 Warnock Report Special Educational Needs. It gave parents new rights: LEAs were required to * identify the needs of children with learning difficulties (Section 4); * have assessment procedures for ascertaining those needs (5-6); and * produce 'statements ' specifying how the needs would be met (7).
 Download the Education Act 1981 (pdf text 496kb).
Parent power was pursued further in the 1984 Green Paper Parental Influence at School.
1983 Education (Fees and Awards) Act
This Act (13 May 1983) allowed the secretary of state to require higher education institutions to charge higher fees to students 'not having the requisite connection with the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man ' and to exclude such students from being eligible for certain discretionary awards.
 Download the Education (Fees and Awards) Act 1983 (pdf text 36kb).
1984 Education (Grants and Awards) Act
This Act (12 April 1984) introduced Education Support Grants (ESGs), which were to be given to LEAs for government-specified purposes. It was thus another step in taking control of education policy away from the LEAs and giving it to central government - a move which was taken still further in 1987 when Specific Grants for INSET (In-Service Training) were introduced.
 Download the Education (Grants and Awards) Act 1984 (pdf text 88kb).
1986 Education (Amendment) Act
This short Act (17 February 1986) increased the limit set in section 2(1) of the Education (Grants and Awards) Act 1984 on expenditure approved for education support grant purposes, and excluded remuneration for lunchtime supervision from the Remuneration of Teachers Act 1965.
 Download the Education (Amendment) Act 1986 (pdf text 36kb).
1986 Education Act
In May 1986 Kenneth Baker replaced Keith Joseph as education secretary. He was kept busy: there were two education acts in his first year in the job. The first (and much the shorter - 5 pages) was the 1986 Education Act (18 July 1986), which concerned certain further education grants and the pooling of expenditure by local authorities.
 Download the Education Act 1986 (pdf text 92kb).
1986 Education (No. 2) Act
The second Education Act of 1986 (7 November 1986) was not only much longer than the first, it was also profoundly more important. It implemented the proposals set out in the 1985 White Paper Better Schools which were summarised in the DES booklet Better Schools: A Summary.
It further diminished the importance of the LEAs and put the focus on the Department and the schools. Governors were to be given much greater responsibility for the curriculum, discipline and staffing. The head was to have a pivotal role - s/he was singled out for specific responsibilities including the 'determination and organisation of the secular curriculum ' (though the Act said nothing about what what would happen if governors disagreed). The head (and only the head) had the power to exclude pupils.
Equally significantly, the Act introduced the concept of educational law, so that lawyers became involved in education for the first time. It was very detailed but often ambiguous - it gave parents pegs on which to hang their disenchantments.
The Act 's main provisions were: * every maintained school was required to have a governing body (Sections 1-2); * the composition of governing bodies was changed - the number of parent governors was to be equal to the number of LEA governors and there were to be staff governors and others co-opted from business and industry (3-8). (Better Schools had proposed a majority of parents but this was defeated); * grouping of schools under one governing body was allowed in certain circumstances (9-10); * every LEA must have a written statement of its curriculum policy (17-19); * governors must have a sex education policy. If taught (it didn 't have to be), sex education had to encourage pupils 'to have due regard to moral considerations and the value of family life ' (46); * governors must give parents information about the school 's curriculum (20); * discipline was the responsibility of the head, though the principles underlying it were to be supplied by governors (22); * there were new rules on pupil exclusions (23), reinstatement (24) and appeals (26); * LEAs were to give governors financial information relating to the school (29); * governors were to produce an annual report (30) and hold an annual parents ' meeting (31); * LEAs retained responsibility for the appointment and dismissal of staff but were to consult with governors (34-41); * there was to be freedom of speech in universities and colleges (43); * there was to be no political indoctrination in schools - this was an attack on subjects like 'peace studies ' which had been introduced in a number of schools (44); * corporal punishment was abolished in maintained schools (from August 1987). Independent schools were still permitted to beat their pupils, but not those whose fees were paid by the state (47); * provision was made for the appraisal of teachers (49); * governors were required to supply information to the secretary of state (56); * LEAs were required to provide training for governors (57); and * the secretary of state was no longer required to produce annual report (60).
 Download the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 (pdf text 1.6mb).
1988 Local Government Act
LEAs ' equal opportunities policies were attacked in the 1988 Local Government Act (24 March 1988). The infamous Section 28 of this act forbade local authorities from 'promoting teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship '. (Section 28 was eventually repealed by New Labour in November 2003).
 Download the Local Government Act 1988 (pdf text 856kb).
1988 Education Reform Act
The Education Reform Act (29 July 1988) was the most important education act since 1944. It is sometimes referred to as 'The Baker Act ' after secretary of state Kenneth Baker (pictured).
The Act was presented as giving power to the schools. In fact, it took power away from the LEAs and the schools and gave them all to the secretary of state - it gave him hundreds of new powers.
Even more importantly, it took a public service and turned it into a market - something the Tories had been working towards for a decade.
Chitty and Dunford (1999:25) argue that the 'meretricious agenda ' of the 1988 Act was in many ways 'a tribute to the remarkable resilience of the comprehensive ideal '. Having failed to get selection reinstated in 1979, the Tories now used 'devices like opting out, open admission, city technology colleges and the introduction of "local markets" ... as attempts to introduce selection by the back door. '
The Act 's major provisions concerned: * the curriculum: - the National Curriculum - new rules on religious education and collective worship - the establishment of curriculum and assessment councils; * admission of pupils to county and voluntary schools; * local management of schools (LMS); * grant maintained (GM) schools; * city technology colleges (CTCs); * changes in further and higher education; and * the abolition of ILEA.
 Download the Education Reform Act 1988 (pdf text 4.1mb).
Summary of the Act
Part I Chapter I: The Curriculum
The 1988 Act provided for a 'basic curriculum ' to be taught in all maintained schools, consisting of religious education and the National Curriculum (Section 2(1)). The National Curriculum would set out 'attainment targets ' - the knowledge, skills and understanding which children would be expected to have by the end of each key stage; the 'programmes of study ' to be taught at each key stage; and the arrangements for assessing pupils at the end of each key stage (2(2)).
The National Curriculum would consist of three 'core subjects ' (mathematics, English and science); six foundation subjects (history, geography, technology, music, art and physical education); plus a modern foreign language at key stages 3 and 4 (3(1-2)). Schools in Welsh-speaking areas of Wales would also teach Welsh.
The Act defined Key Stage 1 as ages 5-7, Key Stage 2: ages 8-11, Key Stage 3: 12-14, and Key Stage 4: 15-16 (3(3)).
It set out new rules on religious education: every day was to begin with an 'act of collective worship ' (6(1)), a majority of which were to be 'wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character ' (7(1)). Every LEA was required to set up a standing advisory council on religious education (SACRE) (11(1)) consisting of representatives of religious groups, the Church of England, teachers and the local authority (11(4)). Agreed Syllabuses for Religious Education should 'reflect the fact that the religious traditions in Great Britain are in the main Christian whilst taking account of the teaching and practices of the other principal religions represented in Great Britain ' (8(3)).
Two new councils were to be established: the National Curriculum Council (NCC) and the School Examinations and Assessment Council (SEAC). (Wales was to have its own Curriculum Council for Wales). The members of the councils would be appointed by the secretary of state (14(1)).
The NCC would be required to review all aspects of the curriculum and advise the secretary of state, carry out programmes of research and development, publish and disseminate information relating to the curriculum and perform 'such ancillary activities as the Secretary of State may direct ' (14(3)).
SEAC 's functions were similar in respect of examinations and assessment; it was also to make arrangements with appropriate bodies for the moderation of assessments made in pursuance of assessment arrangements (14(4)).
Part I Chapter II: Admission of Pupils to County and Voluntary Schools
The Act introduced new rules governing the admission of pupils to maintained schools, in particular the conditions which were to be met if the authority responsible for admissions to a school wished to reduce the 'standard number ' of places in a year group (28).
Part I Chapter III: Finance and Staff
Before 1988, schools had only had control over 'capitation ' - that part of their budget relating to books and materials. The staff were employed and the buildings maintained by the local authority. Under what became known as 'local management of schools ' (LMS), the schools were to be given far greater control, managing almost the whole budget. 'It shall be the duty of the authority to put at the disposal of the governing body of the school in respect of that year a sum equal to the school 's budget share for that year to be spent for the purposes of the school ' (36(2)).
School budgets would be determined on the basis of an 'allocation formula ' based on the number and ages of the pupils in the school and the number of pupils with special needs (38(3)). Each local authority was required to submit a scheme for this financial delegation (39).
Responsibility for the appointment and dismissal of staff would be transferred from the local authority to schools ' governing bodies (44-46).
Part I Chapter IV Grant-Maintained Schools
The Act made provision for the establishment of grant-maintained schools which would be independent of local authorities and funded directly by central government. It set out rules governing the membership of the schools ' governing bodies (4-5); the articles of government (58); the conduct of parents ' ballots to decide whether schools should seek grant-maintained status (61); the transfer of property and staff to the governing bodies (74-5) and the grants (maintenance, special purpose and capital) payable to the schools (79). It made clear that funds directed to grant-maintained schools would be deducted from the relevant local authority budget (81).
Part I Chapter V Miscellaneous
The Act provided for the establishment of City Technology Colleges (CTCs) and City Colleges for the Technology of the Arts (CCTAs) (105) and laid down new rules governing what could, and what could not, be charged for in maintained schools (106-111).
Part II Higher and Further Education
Part II of the Act made changes to the provision and funding of higher and further education and provided for the establishment of two new funding bodies: the Universities Funding Council (UFC) and the Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council (PCFC), whose members would be appointed by the secretary of state. Local authorities which funded institutions would be required to produce a scheme for financial delegation similar to that required for the funding of schools.
Part III Education in Inner London
Part III of the Act provided for the abolition of the Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) and the transfer of its responsibilities, properties, rights and liabilities to the inner London boroughs.
Part IV Miscellaneous and General
Part IV of the Act covered a number of other matters: the establishment and functions of Education Assets Board; academic tenure; grants; unrecognised degrees etc.
Commentary on the Act
National Curriculum
The National Curriculum which resulted from the Act was written by a government quango: teachers had virtually no say in its design or construction. It was almost entirely content-based. Dennis Lawton, of the University of London Institute of Education, described it as the reincarnation of the 1904 Secondary Regulations.
It was huge and therefore unmanageable, especially at the primary level, and its introduction resulted in a significant drop in reading standards. It divided the curriculum up into discrete subjects, making integrated 'topic ' and 'project ' work difficult if not impossible. But perhaps the most damaging outcome of it was that it prevented teachers and schools from being curriculum innovators and demoted them to curriculum 'deliverers '.
It was also constantly revised. Right-wing think-tanks and pressure groups were unhappy with aspects of the first version and campaigned for 'the simplification and "Anglicisation" of the national testing system, so as to emphasise basic skills and the English cultural heritage ' (Jones 2003:141). The New Right gained control of the curriculum and assessment councils, where they provoked strong opposition from teachers, especially from teachers of English, leading to a widespread boycott of Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) in 1993-4.
As a result, the government was forced to redesign the national curriculum, reducing the amount of detail and removing 'the stronger signs of the traditionalist and ethnocentric enthusiasms of the New Right '. The 1995 revision of the national curriculum thus 'marked the end of the New Right 's curricular influence, at the same time as it helped embed the curriculum, and its associated testing system, at the consensual centre of English schooling ' (Jones 2003:141).
Assessment
The assessment arrangements for the National Curriculum were equally cumbersome. They were based on the 1988 report of the National Curriculum Task Group on Assessment and Testing (TGAT) led by Professor PJ Black (and therefore sometimes known as the Black Report).
The report was sound on the purposes of assessment. It began by listing four criteria for a national assessment scheme: * the assessment results should give direct information about pupils ' achievement in relation to objectives: they should be criterion-referenced; * the results should provide a basis for decisions about pupils ' further learning needs: they should be formative; * the scales or grades should be capable of comparison across classes and schools, if teachers, pupils and parents are to share a common language and common standards: so the assessments should be calibrated or moderated; * the ways in which criteria and scales are set up and used should relate to expected routes of educational development, giving some continuity to a pupil 's assessment at different ages: the assessments should relate to progression. (para.5)
It also made clear that there were concerns to be addressed: * the undesirable effects of testing on children (stress etc); * the possible damage to relationships between parents and schools; * the fear that external tests would 'impose arbitrary restrictions on teachers ' own work, and so limit and devalue their professional role ' (para.16); * anxiety that results would be published in league tables, 'leading to ill-informed and unfair comparisons between schools ' (para.18); and * the danger that teachers would 'teach to the test ' (para.58).
Unfortunately, the Report went on to propose a system of testing at ages 7, 11, 14 and 16 (at the end of the Key Stages) in which each pupil was to be assessed on ten 'Levels ' across hundreds of 'Attainment Targets ' in the ten National Curriculum subjects. This was hugely complicated and never had a chance of working.
Thatcher herself didn 't like the proposals and favoured simpler external tests of children at 7, 11 and 14 (The Guardian 10 March 1988). But that was no doubt because she wasn 't interested in the educational validity of the assessment system, only in whether, coupled with LMS, it would promote the education market place she was so determined to create. So league tables of school results were published (despite Black 's warning) and parents were given (theoretically at least) free choice as to where to send their children.
Three inevitable - and undesirable - effects quickly became apparent: * schools became unwilling to take on pupils with learning difficulties, since they tended to depress overall test results; * teachers were encouraged to concentrate their efforts on children who were on the borderline between one level and the next rather than on those who needed attention most; and * the curriculum became skewed by the need to practise for the tests.
 Download the TGAT Report (pdf text 889kb).
Religious education
On religious education and collective worship, it is interesting to compare the Act 's stipulations that the majority of a school 's 'acts of collective worship ' must be 'wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character ' and that Christianity should be the predominant religion in religious education lessons with Sections 25-29 of the 1944 Education Act, where Christianity is never mentioned - because it was taken for granted.
 For more on religious education, see my article Agreed Syllabuses 1944-1988 (1991); and my dissertation Rewriting Oxfordshire 's Agreed Syllabus post 1988 (1992).
Local Management of Schools
Local Management of Schools dramatically changed the role of the head teacher and governors.
The head was no longer an educationalist but an institutional manager. S/he now had to learn about recruitment and selection procedures, employment law, health and safety legislation, buildings maintenance etc.
The governors now had legal responsibilities in relation to the control of a school 's budget and to the appointment and dismissal of staff. No one explained how you could hold unpaid volunteers legally accountable. Inevitably, fewer people were prepared to take on the role.
Because school budgets were to be based largely on pupil numbers, schools had to attract as many pupils as possible in order to survive. This led to some bizarre cases of schools offering gifts to parents who enrolled their children.
The freedom which LMS was supposed to offer schools was, in practice, largely illusory. Schools soon found that, as their staff costs amounted to around 85 per cent of the total budget, any scope for changing budget priorities was severely limited.
For the government, LMS served three purposes: * it was an important element in the creation of an 'education market '; * it took financial control away from the local authorities; and * it enabled the government to 'pass the buck ' to the schools when budgets were cut - as they were from the second year of LMS onwards. Indeed, school budgets were cut in six of the eight years following 1988.
Grant-Maintained Schools
The grant-maintained schools policy was another clear attack on the LEAs. It was also iniquitous because, to bribe schools into opting out, they were offered substantial additional funding - at the expense of the remaining local authority schools.
Grant-maintained schools were allowed to select a proportion of their pupils on the basis of ability or aptitude.
Some secondary schools applied to become grant-maintained in the first year or two, but when the extra cash dried up, so did the applications. Ironically - but unsurprisingly - most of the schools that did opt out were in Conservative-controlled LEAs where spending on education tended to be lower. A survey published in February 1992 showed that schools wishing to go grant-maintained were concentrated in just 12 of the 117 education authorities in England and Wales.
Grant-maintained status was eventually abolished by New Labour.
City Technology Colleges
Baker presented his City Technology Colleges as a 'half-way house ' between the state and independent sectors. He told the TES:
What we have at present is seven per cent or so in the independent sector, probably going to rise to ten per cent; and on the other side, a huge continent: 93 per cent in the state-maintained sector. ... What I think is striking in the British education system is that there is nothing in between ... Now the City Technology Colleges I 've already announced are a sort of half-way house. I would like to see many more half-way houses, a greater choice, a greater variety. I think many parents would as well. (TES 3 April 1987)
In fact, the City Technology Colleges (CTCs) were just another attempt to destroy the power of the LEAs (and to reintroduce selection) by involving private enterprise in education. A hundred of the colleges were to be set up across the country, each one funded - 'sponsored ' - by a business, with spending per pupil far higher than in the neighbouring local authority schools.
In the event, only a handful of CTCs were ever established because few businesses were prepared to take part and, as usual, the taxpayer was left to pick up the bill.
The last CTC to be authorised, in April 1991, was Kingswood in Bristol. The chair of Cable and Wireless and former Tory Party chair Lord Young stumped up the required £2m; the government handed over the remaining £8m. Avon county council 's deputy director of education, Edward Watson, bitterly contrasted that £8m for capital spending on the 900 children at Kingswood CTC with the £4.5m he had for capital spending on the county 's other 150,000 children. With the extra money, he said, all secondary schools could have been fully repaired, all the improvements they wanted could have been done, every school could have had a new science laboratory, and there would still have been enough left over to give all primary schools an extra nursery class for a year (The Guardian 3 October 2006).
ILEA
Thatcher had disliked the Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) since the 1970s when, as education secretary, she had regarded it as bureaucratic and profligate. She also resented the fact that it was dominated by Labour politicians who were not afraid to comment on central government policies.
Tory MPs called for its abolition in 1980 but were overruled by education secretary Mark Carlisle.
In 1986 Thatcher abolished the Greater London Council (GLC) - she had never forgiven Londoners for electing her bête noire Ken Livingstone as leader - and she would have liked to get rid of ILEA at the same time, but she was advised that the London boroughs were not yet ready to take on responsibility for education.
But ILEA 's days were numbered. An amendment calling for its abolition, tabled by Tory MPs Michael Heseltine and Norman Tebbit, was incorporated into the 1988 Act. It was finally abolished on 1 April 1990 and its responsibilities delegated to the London boroughs.
The destruction of ILEA was a particularly noxious example of political spite and state vandalism: it had had a proud record of supporting schools in deprived areas and promoting curriculum development. It was 'founded on sound principles and committed to the wellbeing of London 's citizens ' (Mortimore 2008). Its Multi-ethnic education policy statement, published in 1977, had sought to combat racism, sexism and class prejudice in schools and society. And in 1980 HMI had described ILEA as 'a caring and generous authority with considerable analytical powers to identify problems, the scale of which is, in some cases, unique in this country. '
(A form of overall local government for London was reintroduced by New Labour in May 2000, when the first elections to the Greater London Assembly (GLA) were held. Ken Livingstone became the first elected Mayor of London).
1990 Education (Student Loans) Act
Thatcher 's last education act was the Education (Student Loans) Act (26 April 1990) which introduced 'top-up ' loans for HE students and so began the diminution of student grants.
 Download the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990 (pdf text 116kb).

Reports
1977-82 HMI: Matters for Discussion
As part of the 'Great Debate ' called for in 1976 by Prime Minister Jim Callaghan, HMI produced a series of 15 discussion documents under the series title Matters for Discussion: 1 Ten Good Schools (1977) 2 Classics in Comprehensive Schools (1977) 3 Modern Languages in Comprehensive Schools (1977) 4 Gifted Children in Middle and Comprehensive Secondary Schools(1977) 5 The Teaching of Ideas in Geography (1978) 6 Mixed Ability Work in Comprehensive Schools (1978) 7 The Education of Children in Hospitals for the Mentally Handicapped(1978) 8 Developments in the BEd Degree Course (1979) 9 Mathematics 5 to 11 (1979)
10 Community Homes with Education (1980)
11 A View of the Curriculum (1980)
12 Modern Languages in Further Education (1980)*
13 Girls and Science (1980)
14 Mathematics in the Sixth Form (1982)
15 The New Teacher in School (1982)
*I have been unable to find this book. If you have a copy of it which you would be willing to lend me, I 'd be very grateful. Contact details are here.
1978-85 HMI surveys
The 1967 Plowden Report Children and their Primary Schools had recommended (in chapter 30, page 426, para. 1164) that surveys of the quality of primary schools should be conducted at least once every ten years.
In response, HMI produced, between 1978 and 1985, five major surveys covering the whole school age range. They were:
1978 Primary education in England
1979 Aspects of secondary education in England
1982 Education 5 to 9
1983 9-13 Middle Schools
1985 Education 8 to 12 in Combined and Middle Schools

1981 Rampton Report
In March 1979 Jim Callaghan 's Labour government had set up the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Children from Ethnic Minority Groups, with priority being given to children of West Indian origin.
The Committee continued its work under the Thatcher government and published its interim report, West Indian Children in our Schools, in 1981. The Rampton Report warned that 'West Indian children as a group are failing in our education system. Urgent action is needed to remedy this ' (Rampton 1981:70). It noted that in both primary and secondary schools the curriculum, books and teaching materials were often inappropriate to meet the needs and backgrounds of West Indian pupils and that this was 'a cause of their lack of motivation and commitment to the work and their consequent underachievement ' (Rampton 1981:71).
However, the Committee said that there was 'no single cause for the underachievement of West Indian children but rather a network of widely differing attitudes and expectations on the part of teachers and the education system as a whole, and on the part of West Indian parents ' (Rampton 1981:72). They therefore recommended a range of specific, practical measures for the short-term together with some broader more general recommendations designed to bring about fundamental changes in attitude and practice in the longer term. Taken together, these constitute a programme for action which will go a long way towards enabling West Indian pupils to fulfil their true potential in our schools, as well as providing a more balanced education for all our children. (Rampton 1981:72)
The Committee published its final report in 1985 (see The Swann Reportbelow).
1982 Cockcroft Report
Callaghan 's Labour administration had also commissioned a report on the teaching of maths, in the light of concerns expressed by the Education, Arts and Home Office Sub-Committee of the Parliamentary Expenditure Committee in July 1977. These concerns related to the apparent lack of basic computation skills in many children, the increasing mathematical demands made on adults, the lack of qualified maths teachers, and the confusing multiplicity of maths syllabuses.
The Cockcroft Committee began work in September 1978. Its terms of reference were:
To consider the teaching of mathematics in primary and secondary schools in England and Wales, with particular regard to the mathematics required in further and higher education, employment and adult life generally, and to make recommendations.
The Committee submitted its report Mathematics counts in November 1981 and it was published in January 1982.
1985 Swann Report
The Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Children from Ethnic Minority Groups produced its final report Education for All in 1985.
Its principle conclusions and recommendations were: * there is no single cause of underachievement and therefore no single solution; * education has a major role in changing the attitudes of the white majority population; * there is a need for greater sensitivity in the education of 'ethnic minorities ' with more in-service training to raise teachers ' awareness; * in initial training courses attention should be paid to the needs of an ethnically diverse society; * statistics should be collected on the ethnicity of both teachers and pupils; * the first priority should be the learning of English; * school subjects should not be taught using mother tongue languages as a medium of instruction; and * schools should not take on responsibility for the teaching and maintenance of 'ethnic minority ' languages.
The report said:
We believe that unless major efforts are made to reconcile the concerns and aspirations of both the majority and minority communities along more genuinely pluralistic lines, there is a real risk of the fragmentation of our society along ethnic lines which would seriously threaten the stability and cohesion of society as a whole. (Swann 1985:7)
The fundamental change that is necessary is the recognition that the problem facing the education system is not how to educate children of ethnic minorities, but how to educate allchildren. (Swann 1985:363)

1988 Kingman Report
The Teaching of English Language was produced by a Committee of Inquiry chaired by Sir John Kingman, Vice-Chancellor of University of Bristol.
1988 Higginson Report
A committee under Dr Gordon Higginson reviewed education for 16-18 year olds. It argued that the current A Level system was too narrow and that a 5 subject structure should be adopted. The government rejected the recommendations.
1989 Cox Report
Chaired by Professor Brian Cox, Pro-Vice Chancellor and John Edward Taylor Professor of English Literature at Manchester University, the National Curriculum English Working Group was commissioned by Secretary of State Kenneth Baker to make recommendations on attainment targets and programmes of study for the English component of the new National Curriculum. The result was the Cox Report English for ages 5 to 16.
1989 Elton Report
In March 1988 Kenneth Baker asked Lord Elton to lead an enquiry into discipline in schools in England and Wales. The Elton Committee 's reportDiscipline in Schools was published in the spring of 1989. Its 138 recommendations made it clear that good discipline was the shared responsibility of pupils, teachers, heads, other staff, governors, parents, local authorities, teacher trainers, curriculum councils, central government, and the School Examinations and Assessment Council.
1990 Rumbold Report
Baker also commissioned a report on early years education. Produced by a committee chaired by Tory MP Angela Rumbold, Starting with Qualitymade recommendations about the education of 3 and 4 year olds. It was published in November 1990 when John MacGregor had just taken over as education secretary.

Conclusion
Tory attitudes to education - and to education professionals - during this period were well summed up by secretary of state Kenneth Baker. Speaking about the bill which was shortly to become the 1986 (No. 2) Education Act, he told the Tory Party Conference in October 1986:
It is crucial for parents to understand where power in the education system lies. Our Education Bill radically changes the composition of school governing bodies. It gives these bodies new powers and responsibilities. We will end the dominance of the local authority and its political appointees. There will be more parent governors elected by all the parents. Control over sex education will be removed from the teachers and local authorities and given to the new-style governing bodies which will have more parents on them and be answerable to an annual parents ' meeting.
But Thatcher had become increasingly unpopular and the last straw for many was her determination to introduce a form of poll tax. This led, in March 1990, to the worst riots London had seen for a century. She lost the confidence of her colleagues and in November 1990 she was replaced as Tory leader and prime minister by John Major.

Chapter 9 : 1990-1997
John Major: more of the same

A miserable inheritance
When John Major (pictured) became Tory leader and prime minister in November 1990, he inherited from Thatcher an education system which had suffered a massive decline in investment and a vast increase in inequality.
Public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP had reached a high point of 6.5 per cent in 1975-6 under Callaghan 's government. By 1983-4 it had fallen to 5.3 per cent and it remained below that level under both Thatcher and Major. By 1993-4 capital spending on schools was less than half what it had been in the mid-1970s (figures from Glennerster 1998:37, quoted in Jones 2003:112).
To make matters worse, schools faced huge problems caused by increasing social polarisation. When Thatcher had come to power in 1979 about ten per cent of children lived in households whose income was less than half the national average. By 1993, the figure was 33 per cent (figures from Oppenheim and Lister 1997:24, quoted in Jones 2003:112). In 1997 Ofsted noted that state schools with large numbers of children from poor homes were by far the worst performers at GCSE.

New faces, same policies
Many in education hoped that a Major government, with Kenneth Clarke (pictured) as the new education secretary, would be less harsh than its Thatcher predecessor.
They were to be disappointed: the Major administration was equally committed to selection and elitism; equally determined to continue undermining the local authorities; and equally destructive in its attitude to the teaching profession.
Thus the new government: * established a teachers ' pay review body; * introduced a 'Parents ' Charter '; * removed further education and sixth form colleges from local authority control; and * established Ofsted and appointed Chris Woodhead to lead it.

1991 School Teachers ' Pay and Conditions Act
The School Teachers ' Pay and Conditions Act (25 July 1991) established a teachers ' pay review body but gave the secretary of state extensive new powers.
 Download the School Teachers ' Pay and Conditions Act 1991 (pdf text 172kb).

1992 Further and Higher Education Act
The Further and Higher Education Act (6 March 1992): * established the Further Education Funding Councils (FEFCs) (Section 1); * removed further education and sixth form colleges from LEA control (11); * unified the funding of higher education under the Higher Education Funding Councils (HEFCs) (62); * introduced competition for funding between institutions; and * abolished the Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA) (80).
 Download the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 (pdf text 1.6mb).
The Further and Higher Education Act thus did for further education and sixth form colleges what the 1988 Education Reform Act had done for grant-maintained schools: it removed them from the control of local authorities and gave their governing bodies the status of 'further education corporations '. They would be subjected to 'quango-funding and control through a privatised market ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:14).
This made it harder for local authorities to develop strategic plans - which was the intention: 'there were to be no local systems, only individual education "businesses" competing with one another for "customers" within the centrally controlled legislative framework ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:14).

1992 Education (Schools) Act
The Education (Schools) Act (16 March 1992) made provision for the establishment of Ofsted (the Office for Standards in Education).
The agency was to employ private contractors to inspect schools and its reports on individual schools would be published. Every inspection team was to include at least one member 'without personal experience in the management of any school or the provision of education in any school ' (Schedule 2). These became known as 'lay inspectors '.
Voluntary aided faith schools were subject to two complementary inspections: a 'Section 9 ' inspection (which became Section 11 in 1996) covering the National Curriculum and other matters such as equal opportunities and health and safety, and a 'Section 13 ' inspection (Section 23 in 1996) covering the religious education under the control of the governors and foundation bodies.
 Download the Education (Schools) Act 1992 (pdf text 404kb).
The establishment of Ofsted caused teachers ' morale to plummet. The amount of paperwork and form-filling which a school had to complete before an inspection was grotesque; staff were suspicious of the motives and abilities of the private contractors; the week of the inspection itself was extraordinarily stressful; and there were concerns about the accuracy and fairness of some of the published reports - which was understandable, given that teachers ' careers were at stake.
Teachers did manage to find amusement in some aspects of the process, however, such as the inclusion of a 'lay inspector ' in every inspection team. The joke in school staffrooms was that to be a lay inspector you had to know nothing about education.
The situation wasn 't helped by the appointment of Chris Woodhead (pictured) as HM Chief Inspector of Schools and head of Ofsted in September 1994. He appeared to take a positive delight in criticising teachers and as a result he became something of a hate figure in schools up and down the country. Morale among teachers suffered further when government ministers began using Ofsted reports as a basis for 'naming and shaming ' so-called 'failing ' schools.

The 'Three Wise Men ' Report
Major faced his first general election in April 1992. He was expected to lose: all the polls suggested that Labour, led by Neil Kinnock, would win by a small majority. The Tories decided that a return to streaming and more formal teaching methods in primary schools would be a popular campaign policy, so in February 1992 Kenneth Clarke commissioned Robin Alexander, Jim Rose and Chris Woodhead to produce what became popularly known as the 'Three Wise Men Report '.
Written in just one month, Curriculum Organisation and Classroom Practice in Primary Schools: A discussion paper argued that: * there was evidence of falling standards in some 'important aspects of literacy and numeracy ' (DES 1992:1); * Piaget 's notion of 'learning readiness ', as set out in the Plowden Report, was dubious and the progress of primary pupils had been 'hampered by the influence of highly questionable dogmas ' (DES 1992:1); * the teacher should be an instructor rather than a facilitator; * teachers should use a range of organisational strategies including individual and group teaching, but there should be more use of whole class teaching; * while there was a place for well-planned topic work, more emphasis should be put on the subjects of the National Curriculum; * pupils should be grouped by ability in subjects ( 'setted ') rather than as a whole class ( 'streamed ') but 'teachers must avoid the pitfall of assuming that pupils ' ability is fixed ' (DES 1992:27); * many primary teachers were not equipped to teach subjects effectively and there was an acute shortage of specialist expertise; * there should be greater flexibility in the deployment of staff as specialists, generalists, semi-specialists and generalist-consultants; * there should be more specialist teaching in the upper years of Key Stage 2; * initial training, induction and in-service training should all take account of these needs; * heads should set and monitor INSET policies, should lead by example, and should teach; * the National Curriculum should be regularly reviewed to ensure that it made appropriate demands on pupils of different ages and abilities and that it was manageable in terms of the time, resources and professional expertise available in schools.
The report caused much controversy. Teachers who had been brought up on Plowden regarded it as an attack on their most dearly-cherished values and practices. The two reports shared some things in common, however. Both were products of their age - Plowden, the progressive sixties; Alexander, Rose and Woodhead, the new age of National Curriculum subjects and testing. Both, too, were widely misquoted and misrepresented.
Whether the publication of the Three Wise Men report affected the outcome of the election is open to debate. It was certainly not, as Major and Clarke had hoped, a resounding endorsement of traditionalist views.
In the event, to most people 's amazement - and many people 's profound disappointment - Major won the general election on 9 April 1992 with a Commons majority of 21. In the view of most commentators, his victory was a result of Kinnock 's poor judgement in staging, on the eve of the election, a triumphalist rally in Sheffield which many found distasteful.

Choice and diversity 'Selection ' becomes 'specialisation '
Following the election, John Patten (pictured) replaced Clarke as education secretary and the Department of Education and Science (DES) was renamed the Department for Education (DFE).
Patten was as keen as the prime minister to undermine the comprehensive system but he realised that public support for comprehensive schools was a problem - one which even Thatcher had been unable to solve. There had been widespread parental opposition to the reintroduction of selection in the wake of the 1979 Education Act, which allowed LEAs to maintain selective systems. Her response to this opposition had not been hugely successful: few schools had chosen to adopt grant-maintained status and few firms had agreed to sponsor city technology colleges.
So Major and Patten now sought other means to damage the comprehensive system and weaken local authority control of education. Their strategy was to convert 'selection ' into 'specialisation '.
In an article in the New Statesman and Society (17 July 1992) Patten argued that:
Selection is not, and should not be, a great issue of the 1990s as it was in the 1960s. The S-word for all Socialists to come to terms with is, rather, 'specialisation '. The fact is that children excel at different things; it is foolish to ignore it, and some schools may wish specifically to cater for these differences. ...
Such schools are already emerging. They will, as much more than mere exotic educational boutiques, increasingly populate the educational landscape of Britain at the end of the century, a century that introduced universal education at its outset; then tried to grade children like vegetables; then tried to treat them ... like identical vegetables; and which never ever gave them the equality of intellectual nourishment that is now being offered by the National Curriculum, encouraged by testing, audited by regular inspection. (Patten 1992:20-21, quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:27)
The independent National Commission on Education, funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation and chaired by Lord Walton of Detchant, was worried. Its final report, Learning to succeed: a radical look at education today and a strategy for the future, published in 1993, condemned the Major government 's obsession with creating 'a greater variety of secondary schools ' and warned that 'as we see it, there is a serious danger of a hierarchy of good, adequate and "sink" schools emerging within the maintained system ' (NCE 1993:180). The aims of giving all children access to 'high-quality ' schooling and of creating greater choice and diversity were simply not compatible:
As we see it, the main task for the future will not be to concentrate on producing highly educated elites, but to achieve higher learning outcomes for all, and particularly for those in the middle and lower bands of attainment ... At present, there is a conflict between, on the one hand, moves towards a greater diversity and choice of schools and, on the other hand, an ideal of equal access for all children to 'high-quality ' education ... Laudable principles for schools may often work against each other: serving a local community and catering for all abilities as in the comprehensive ideal; or encouraging choice of secondary school. For example, a community school where the neighbourhood is not socially mixed may not have a broad enough social or ability range to operate in a truly comprehensive manner. Choice, when exercised, is often used to escape from the local school, thereby working against the community school ideal. Similarly, those parents who are exercising their choice are tending to use it in favour of schools with other pupils of a similar and 'appropriate ' background. (NCE 1993:181-2)
Others warned that giving parents the choice of a diverse range of schools would ultimately result in selection of pupils by the schools themselves. Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach, then chair of SEAC, admitted as much. 'If you give parents real choice in the system, it is inevitable (and probably desirable) that the schools themselves will demand to choose the kind of pupils that come ' (reported in The Times 3 February 1992, quoted in Chitty 2004:71).
But Patten wasn 't listening. His 1992 white paper Choice and Diversity: A new framework for schools formed the basis of the 1993 Education Act.
Uniformity in educational provision presupposes that children are all basically the same and that local communities have essentially the same educational needs. The reality is that children have different needs. The provision of education should be geared more to local circumstances and individual needs: hence our commitment to diversity in education. (DfE 1992:3-4)
The white paper aimed to break up the comprehensive system by encouraging specialisation, and to diminish the role of local education authorities by promoting grant-maintained schools.

Dearing review of the National Curriculum
The 1993 Dearing Report The National Curriculum and Its Assessmentwas the first major review of the National Curriculum. It argued that the curriculum had become an unwieldy structure which was virtually impossible to implement and that the time spent on paperwork and testing was damaging good teaching and learning.
It recommended that: * the content of the curriculum should be reduced; * less time should be spent on testing; * around a fifth of teaching time should be available for use at the discretion of schools; * at Key Stage 4 (14-16 years) schools should have greater discretion, with art, geography, history and music becoming optional subjects; * some curriculum choice should be introduced at Key Stage 3; and * the National Curriculum Council (NCC) and Schools Examination and Assessment Council (SEAC) should become one body: the Schools Curriculum and Assessment Authority (SCAA.)
The government accepted these recommendations and spent £744m amending the national curriculum.

1993 Education Act
The 1993 Education Act (27 July 1993) was based partly on the 1992 white paper and partly on the 1993 Dearing Report. It was the largest piece of legislation in the history of education. Its first five parts covered: * I Responsibility for education (roles of the secretary of state and funding authorities; new rules about school places, admissions and religious education); * II Grant-maintained schools (changes in funding and new rules to make it easier for schools to become grant-maintained); * III Children with special educational needs (legal definition, Code of Practice on the Identification and Assessment of Special Educational Needs - came into force in 1994); * IV School attendance (attendance orders, parental choice of school); * V Schools failing to give an acceptable standard of education( 'special measures ').
Part VI Miscellaneous covered a huge range of matters including: * establishment of new schools by local authorities and other 'promoters '; * nursery education in grant-maintained schools; * rationalisation of school places; * incorporation of governing bodies; * the right of parents to withdraw a child from sex education lessons except those contained in the National Curriculum - the science curriculum was to be revised to exclude anything on HIV and AIDS, other sexually transmitted diseases, and aspects of human sexual behaviour; * the abolition of the National Curriculum Council (NCC) and the School Examinations and Assessment Council (SEAC) and their replacement by the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (SCAA); * agreed syllabuses for religious education to be reviewed; * new rules on pupil exclusions; * provision of information about city technology colleges; * admission appeals committees; * revision of local management funding schemes; * clarification of the period of compulsory schooling (5-16); * education support grants; * charges for musical instrument tuition; * assistance for voluntary schools; * amendment of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 (Section 47) to prohibit 'inhuman or degrading ' punishments; and * abolition of the requirement for local authorities to have education committees.
 Download the Education Act 1993 (pdf text 19.1mb).
In 1994 Patten went further and announced that the government would encourage the setting up of new grammar schools and would allow grant-maintained schools to select more of their intake. These decisions were extraordinary, given that a survey had just revealed that Scotland, which was entirely comprehensive, was achieving significantly better academic results than England, which was not. The proportion of pupils achieving the equivalent of five GCSE A-C passes in Scotland was 52 per cent; in England it was only 38.4 per cent (Benn and Chitty 1996:164).
In July 1994, Gillian Shepherd became secretary of state for education.
The DFE was renamed the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) in 1995.

Other legislation
1994 Education Act
The 1994 Education Act (21 July 1994) made provision for the establishment of the Teacher Training Agency (TTA) and laid down regulations concerning the conduct of student unions.
 Download the Education Act 1994 (pdf text 332kb).
1996 Education (Student Loans) Act
The Education (Student Loans) Act (29 April 1996) extended the provision of student loans.
 Download the Education (Student Loans) Act 1996 (pdf text 56kb).
1996 Education Act
The 1996 Education Act (24 July 1996) was another huge piece of legislation (557 pages) which mainly consolidated all previous education acts since 1944.
 Download the Education Act 1996 (pdf text 1.6mb).
1996 Nursery Education and Grant-Maintained Schools Act
The 1996 Nursery Education and Grant-Maintained Schools Act (24 July 1996) introduced a voucher scheme for nursery education (which was unsuccessful and was later withdrawn by Labour) and allowed governors of grant-maintained schools to borrow money.
 Download the Nursery Education and Grant-Maintained Schools Act 1996 (pdf text 208kb).
1996 School Inspections Act
The 1996 School Inspections Act (24 July 1996) consolidated previous legislation on school inspections.
 Download the School Inspections Act 1996 (pdf text 732kb).
1997 Education Act
The passage through Parliament of the 1997 Education Act (21 March 1997) was affected by the forthcoming general election, which the Tories were expected to lose. However, it was still a wide-ranging Act. Among its provisions, it * extended the assisted places scheme to primary schools (Section 1); * gave governors new responsibilities in relation to discipline and behaviour (2); * allowed teachers to use 'such force as is reasonable ' to restrain pupils (4); * allowed teachers to detain pupils after school without parents ' consent (5); * raised the limit for periods of exclusion from 15 to 45 days (6); * required local authorities to prepare plans for dealing with children with behavioural difficulties (9); * amended the admission rules for selective schools (10); * amended the admission rules for children who had been permanently excluded from two or more schools (11); * allowed schools to require parents to sign home-school partnership agreements (13); * provided for 'baseline assessment schemes ' (15); * allowed the secretary of state to require governors to set annual performance targets for pupils (19); * abolished the National Council for Vocational Qualifications (NCVQ) and the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (SCAA) and replaced them with the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and a similar body for Wales (21-36); * gave the secretary of state control over courses leading to external qualifications (37); * gave the secretary of state the right to order inspections of local authorities (38); * required all pupils to be provided with a programme of careers education (43); * made changes to the governance of pupil referral units (47); and * limited access to pupils by non-employed adults (49);
 Download the Education Act 1997 (pdf text 996kb).

Other developments
Vocational qualifications
During the late 1980s and 1990s a variety of national bodies and think-tanks from the left to the centre-right produced 'positive and radical proposals ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:15) for vocational education. All acknowledged that Britain had fallen behind internationally and was failing compete with the rest of the world industrially.
In April 1995 Gillian Shepherd invited Sir Ron Dearing to conduct a review of the existing system of post-16 qualifications, with a view to encouraging greater parity of esteem between academic and vocational qualifications. The exercise was a fairly pointless one, because in her letter to Sir Ron (10 April 1995) Shepherd wrote 'Our key priorities remain to ensure that the rigour and standards of GCE A Levels are maintained '. This made any radical overhaul of the system almost impossible.
Nevertheless, Dearing went ahead with his review and published his report in 1996.
As expected, the Major administration chose to ignore its advice and announced that A Levels would be retained, academic and vocational courses would not be integrated, and institutions would not be reorganised into a coherent system - 'though government initiatives hoped to make it look as though this was happening ' (Benn and Chitty 1996:17).
It was another missed opportunity - and a particularly disappointing one, given that the number of students staying on after 16 had begun to rise after the introduction in 1986 of the common GCSE exam.

Middle school closures
As we have seen, the development of middle schools had been extraordinarily rapid during the 1970s, reaching a high point in the early 80s. But they had a relatively short life and began to disappear during the late 1980s, a process which became more rapid during the 1990s. David Crook (2008:122-123) has argued that, in addition to a lack of sustained party political support, there were four main reasons for the demise of middle schools: * they had different age ranges and were accordingly deemed 'primary ' or 'secondary ', so they suffered from an 'identity problem '; * their staffs were often a mixture of former primary and former secondary teachers, so they suffered from a clash of 'two cultures ', as Hargreaves (1986:197-8) pointed out; * their financial viability was questioned - especially in the light of falling rolls; and * their educational justification became problematic following the introduction of the National Curriculum, whose key stages the middle schools straddled.
The last two of these factors proved decisive.
Falling rolls (fewer pupils) made schools more expensive to run. The obvious solution was to close some, but school closures always cause politicians problems - parents naturally like their children to attend nearby schools and don 't want them to have to travel long distances. However, closing a middle school did not generally result in children having to travel any further - they simply went to the local first/lower school (which became a primary school) and then on to the local secondary school (whose age range was extended from 13-18 to 11-18). The result was that both these schools (the new primary and secondary schools) became bigger, resulting in cost savings.
The National Curriculum 's Key Stages 1-3 (covering ages 5-7, 7-11 and 11-14) created a problem for schools in three-tier systems which straddled these age boundaries. First (or lower) schools, which taught the first year or two of KS2, had to liaise with middle schools, which taught the last year or two of KS2, over which areas of each subject they would teach. Similarly, middle schools, which taught the first two years of KS3, had to liaise with upper schools, which taught the last year of KS3, over what areas of each subject in KS3 they would teach.
Bearing in mind that an upper school might have three or four feeder middle schools each teaching different areas in different subjects at KS3, and that a middle school might have six or even more feeder first schools all teaching different areas in different subjects at KS2, it quickly became clear that this was a logistical nightmare. (I had some experience of it myself!) It was much simpler to have the transfer between schools at a break between Key Stages - which effectively meant at age 11.
Many parents and teachers liked the ethos of middle schools and wanted to keep them. When the debate about Oxford 's middle schools got under way in the early 1990s, one of the arguments used by their supporters was that national research showed a drop in attainment in the year or two after children moved into secondary schools. The drop in attainment did not appear to happen when the children stayed on in middle schools for an extra couple of years.
It was also argued that children aged 11-12 fared better socially in smaller middle schools than in larger comprehensives.
But neither argument cut much ice. The decision was made on the two points outlined above (cost and curriculum) and despite a strong campaign by middle school parents and teachers, Oxford 's middle schools eventually closed in 2003.
Middle schools now exist in only a handful of local authorities.
 For more on middle schools see chapters 6 and 10 of this history and the website of the National Middle Schools Forum, which represents the interests and aspirations of middle school head teachers, staff, pupils and governors.

The Labour Party and selection
The Labour Party 's attitude to selection during this period was confused, to say the least. In 1992 education spokesman Jack Straw called for grammar schools to be scrapped. 'There is an overwhelming case for ending selection ', he said.
But two years later Tony Blair, the newly-elected leader of the party, sent his children to the London Oratory, rather than to his local comprehensive. Choice, he argued, would not be sacrificed to political correctness.

Downfall
During their eighteen years in office, the Tories had weakened the power of the local authorities, diminished the influence of the teacher unions and forced the Labour Party to rethink its education policies. But these successes (from their point of view) had encouraged them to ever greater extremism, notably in their promotion of selection and their right-wing vision of 'traditional ' education. As Jones (2003:122) notes:
This triumphalist moment did not last. In many areas - funding, assessment, selection - Conservative policies had provoked strong oppositional movements, for which the principles of equal-opportunity-orientated reform were plainly an issue. Conflict with such movements proved damaging for Conservatism, which by the mid-1990s faced protests over low levels of education spending in the English shires, large-scale opposition in Scotland to 'Thatcherism ' in education, and a boycott by teachers in England and Wales of national assessment procedures. Thus, a peculiar double movement was in process: even while the basic building blocks of its system were assimilated into a two-party consensus, in other respects Conservatism 's educational policies were contributing to the electoral debacle of 1997.
The Tories went into the 1997 general election promising that grant-maintained schools would be allowed to select up to 50 per cent of their intake by ability; technology and language colleges up to 30 per cent; and all other local authority schools up to 20 per cent. And John Major declared that he would like to see 'a grammar school in every town '.
In the end, the government destroyed itself. Having called for a return to 'traditional values ' in his 'back to basics ' campaign, Major found himself leading an administration mired in endless allegations of sleaze and widely regarded as fiscally incompetent - a sin for any Tory government. It was swept away in the general election of May 1997 when Tony Blair 's 'New Labour ' party scored a landslide victory.
The whole country breathed a sigh of relief. But not for long.

Chapter 10 : 1997-2007
The Blair decade: selection, privatisation and faith

Introduction
A new golden age?
Many teachers hoped - some even dared to believe - that the election of the first Labour government for eighteen years, led by Tony Blair (pictured), would usher in a new 'golden age ' in education. Tests and league tables would disappear, chief inspector Chris Woodhead (who had become something of a hate figure for teachers) would be sacked, Ofsted scrapped, and grant maintained (GM) schools would be brought under local authority control.
Perhaps most importantly, selection for secondary education would finally be abolished. There were good grounds for believing this. After all, David Blunkett, then shadow education secretary, had promised the Labour Party conference on 4 October 1995: 'Read my lips. No selection by examination or interview '. And the move would have had widespread public support. An ICM poll in 1996 had shown that 65 per cent of the population supported comprehensive education, while only 27 per cent favoured a selective system (The Guardian 7 February 1996, quoted in Chitty and Dunford 1999:31).
But it was all to prove a delusion. The first 'New Labour ' government, swept to power in May 1997 with a Commons majority of 179, was to prove very different from any previous Labour government. Indeed, in many ways - its belief in market forces and its commitment to globalisation, for example - it would be virtually indistinguishable from its Tory predecessor.
 For more on this topic see my article New Labour - New Values?.

The Adonis Problem
Throughout Tony Blair 's ten years in office, his principal education adviser was to be Andrew Adonis (pictured).
A former journalist and Liberal Democrat, Adonis joined Labour in December 1995 after Blair forced the party to end its commitment to public ownership (The Guardian27 January 2005). He became a member of the Number 10 Policy Unit from 1998 (its head from 2001 to 2003) and in 2005 Blair gave him a life peerage and the post of junior education minister.
He exerted a powerful influence on New Labour education policies, coming up with a constant stream of ideas - including the academies programme - and, according to some, repeatedly interfering, for example over the vexed issue of university top-up fees (The Guardian 1 November 2002).
Several education secretaries suffered as a result of what insiders dubbed 'The Adonis Problem '. They felt that their role was not to make education policy but to promote the policies devised by Adonis and Blair. The most notable casualty was Estelle Morris, who, it was widely believed, resigned because she felt undermined by Adonis (The Observer 27 October 2002). There were suspicions that Charles Clarke was told to keep quiet when he raised questions about the effectiveness of grammar schools. And Ruth Kelly found herself overruled when it came to some of the proposals in the 2005 White Paper (Daily Mail 17 October 2005; The Observer 23 October 2005).

1997-2001 Destroying the comprehensive ideal
The Tories ' Assisted Places scheme had provided public money to pay for 30,000 children to go to private schools. Within two months of coming to power the new administration scrapped the scheme in the 1997 Education (Schools) Act (31 July 1997). It also made a commitment to reduce some class sizes.
 Download the Education (Schools) Act 1997 (pdf text 92kb).
But it quickly became clear that in other respects New Labour 's education policies would be little different from those of Thatcher and Major. 'This meant an endorsement of much of the 1988 Education Reform Act and its successors, in relation both to "parental choice" and to competition between schools in a diverse and unequal secondary school system ' (Jones 2003:145).
Few were surprised, therefore, when David Blunkett (pictured), now secretary of state for education, announced that Chris Woodhead would be keeping his job as chief inspector of schools and head of Ofsted.
In relation to selection, despite Blunkett 's pre-election promise, the warning signs had been clear. The 1995 Labour policy documentDiversity and excellence: a new partnership for schools, for example, had set out the party 's new thinking on grammar schools:
Our opposition to academic selection at 11 has always been clear. But while we have never supported grammar schools in their exclusion of children by examination, change can come only through local agreement. Such change in the character of a school could only follow a clear demonstration of support from the parents affected by such decisions. (Labour Party 1995)

1997 White Paper Excellence in Schools
The new government 's education policies were set out in the white paperExcellence in schools, published in July 1997.
It proposed that: * secondary schools would be encouraged to become 'specialist schools ' which would be allowed to select a small proportion of their pupils on the basis of 'perceived aptitudes '; * class sizes for five, six and seven year olds were to be reduced to 30 or under. Funding would be provided to enable LEAs to meet this target; * at least an hour a day in primary schools would be spent on English and an hour on maths. (The National Literacy Strategy was introduced in September 1998, the National Numeracy Strategy in September 1999); * schools were to have targets for raising standards. School performance tables would show the rate of progress pupils had made as well as their absolute levels of achievement; * achievements of ethnic minority pupils were to be raised and racial harmony promoted; * special educational needs were to be an integral part of the wider programme for raising standards; * there would be better support in schools for pupils with behaviour problems; * secondary schools were to use innovative approaches and mixed ability teaching where effective, but setting was recommended, particularly for science, maths and languages. Schools were to tell parents about their pupil grouping policies; * there would be more family learning schemes where parents and their children could learn together. (Family Literacy courses started in more than 60 LEAs in September 1997); * there would be national guidelines for homework and after-school homework centres; * Education Action Zones would be set up to provide targeted support in deprived areas; * there would be better support for newly qualified teachers and better training for existing teachers focusing on literacy, numeracy and IT; and * there would be a national training scheme for existing and new head teachers.
The white paper made it clear that the Conservative policy of 'selection by specialisation ' would be pursued. It said 'We will ensure that schools with a specialism will continue to be able to give priority to those children who demonstrate the relevant aptitude, as long as that is not misused to select on the basis of general academic ability ' (DfEE 1997:71). The government 's aim was to have 500 specialist schools open by September 2000 and 650 a year later.
Of comprehensive schools, the white paper said:
The demands for equality and increased opportunity in the 1950s and 1960s led to the introduction of comprehensive schools. All-in secondary schooling rightly became the normal pattern, but the search for equality of opportunity in some cases became a tendency to uniformity. The idea that all children had the same rights to develop their abilities led too easily to the doctrine that all had the same ability. The pursuit of excellence was too often equated with elitism. (DfEE 1997:11)
With regard to grammar schools, the white paper argued that 'local parents have an interest in decisions on whether their selective admissions arrangements should continue. Changes in the admissions policies of grammar schools will be decided by local parents, and not by LEAs ' (DfEE 1997:72).

1998 School Standards and Framework Act
The white paper 's proposals were implemented in the School Standards and Framework Act (24 July 1998) which: * allowed maintained secondary schools to 'make provision for the selection of pupils for admission to the school by reference to their aptitude for one of more prescribed subjects ' (Section 102); * defined the responsibilities of LEAs and gave the secretary of state powers to ensure that they fulfilled them; * empowered LEAs and the secretary of state to intervene in schools judged to be 'failing ' by Ofsted - such schools would be given two years to improve or they would be closed or have radical management changes imposed on them; * set out a new framework for schools (to be implemented from 2000) with community schools replacing county schools and foundation schools replacing GM schools. Voluntary schools (mostly the church schools) would stay the same.
 Download the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (pdf text 940kb).
Many teachers and educationists objected to the decision to allow selection by aptitude. Chitty (2004:69), for example, argued that 'in a class-divided and highly competitive society ... specialisms could never be equal: they would rapidly become ranked in a hierarchy of status '. Critics also pointed out that the government 's assumption that children could be tested for particular aptitudes rather than for general ability flew in the face of all the research evidence. In The Guardian (24 March 1998) Professor Peter Mortimore, then director of the London Institute of Education wrote:
Except in music and perhaps art, it does not seem possible to diagnose specific aptitudes for most school curriculum subjects. Instead, what seems to emerge from such testing is a general ability to learn, which is often, but not always, associated with the various advantages of coming from a middle-class home. How can head teachers know if the 'aptitude ' of a ten year old in German shows anything more than the parents ' ability to pay for language lessons? (quoted in Chitty 2004:69-70)
Blunkett 's pre-election promise 'Read my lips. No selection ' now became 'Read my lips, no more selection ', which meant precisely the opposite: selection would remain in those areas which practised it unless parents voted against it locally. Indeed, the mantra of the Blair government 's first term was 'standards not structures ', by which it meant that it would be concerned with raising pupils ' achievement rather than worrying about the types of school which they attended.
It was pointed out by a number of educationists that this was a false dichotomy, since the type of school attended - grammar, secondary modern, comprehensive - did indeed have a significant effect on pupils ' achievement.
Writing in Forum, Peter Newsam demolished the argument - increasingly being implied if not stated outright by government ministers - that comprehensive schools had been a failure:
Where schools that are comprehensive, in the full sense of admitting the full range of ability, have been developed, the pressure of places on them tends to be severe and the notion of middle class or any other form of flight from them is false. Such schools perform consistently well and, if properly supported, will do better still. (Newsam 1998)
And writing in The Guardian, Clyde Chitty commented:
Guided by the oft-repeated 'standards not structures ' mantra, education ministers show a marked reluctance to tackle the anomalies and inequities inherited from the Conservatives. After nearly eighteen months of a Labour government, we have an education system in England and Wales ... that is as unfair and divided as it was during the eighteen years of Conservative rule. It might have been unrealistic to expect Education and Employment Minister David Blunkett to change everything overnight. What is really dispiriting is that New Labour policies are exacerbating rather than removing existing divisions. (Chitty 1998)
He concluded that New Labour was 'clearly basing its education policy on the principles of competition, choice and diversity ', which had been the popular themes of all Conservative White Papers. Under the guise of 'modernising ' the comprehensive principle, the government was 'effectively destroying it '.

Specialist schools
But Blair and Blunkett weren 't listening and the assault on the comprehensive school continued.
1999 saw the inception of the Fresh Start scheme, which aimed to revitalise 'failing ' inner-city comprehensive schools by appointing so-called 'superheads '. Within a year several of them had resigned and the scheme fizzled out.
In January 2000 Tony Blair announced that hundreds of comprehensive schools would be turned into 'specialist colleges ' over the following three years. The scheme, developed by Downing Street (Adonis?) and a new Policy and Innovation Division within the education department, would effectively consign the comprehensive system - the great egalitarian dream of the sixties - to history. Schools would achieve specialist status by raising £50,000 in business sponsorship, setting improvement targets and involving the local community. In return they would get a £100,000 capital grant and £120 extra per pupil per year for at least four years and would be allowed to select up to ten per cent of their intake on the basis of aptitude.
Clearly Blair 's New Labour government was not abolishing selection - it was actually extending it.
A few weeks later, David Blunkett told The Sunday Telegraph (12 March 2000) that it was time to abandon 'Labour 's historic campaign against grammar schools ':
I 'm not interested in hunting the remaining grammar schools ... I 'm desperately trying to avoid the whole debate in education once again, as it was in the 1960s and 1970s, concentrating on the issue of selection, when it should be concentrating on the raising of standards ... There are only 164 grammar schools - let 's get on with the job of giving a decent education to all the kids. (quoted in Chitty 2004:72)
In the same month, the first parental ballot on selection - at Ripon in Yorkshire - resulted in the town keeping its grammar school. 1,493 of the 3,000 parents who were entitled to vote supported the selective system; 748 voted to abolish it. It was pointed out that a quarter of those voting lived outside the school 's area and another quarter had children in independent preparatory schools. Nevertheless, the result was disastrous for supporters of comprehensive education and rendered it 'highly unlikely that groups of parents in other parts of the country would risk wasting time and money on a similar enterprise ' (Chitty 2004:73).
Meanwhile, junior education minister Stephen Byers was busy 'naming and shaming ' eighteen 'failing schools ', a policy which - combined with the effects of league tables and parental choice - inevitably caused poorer schools (usually those in less affluent areas) to become even worse. As these schools become less popular, they found it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain good staff. It was a vicious circle. Rather than improve the situation for pupils in the poorer areas, therefore, government policies actually exacerbated the problem and widened the divide between successful and unsuccessful schools.
Blair 's determination to destroy comprehensive education in England was all the more extraordinary given the direction in which other parts of the UK were travelling.
Research commissioned by the Northern Ireland Office, published in 2000, 'identified a number of the undesirable effects of selection, including the existence of a long tail of underachieving schools and a "polarity of achievement", as well as the under-representation of children from socially disadvantaged backgrounds in grammar schools ' (Jones 2003:152).
Scotland, which was fully comprehensive, had better GCSE results and less social class inequality than England.
And the Welsh Assembly 's first major statement on education, The Learning Country (2001), envisaged 'a fully comprehensive system of learning ' (NAW 2001:8) so that 'inequalities in achievement between advantaged and disadvantaged areas, groups, and individuals ' could be 'narrowed in the interests of all ' (NAW 2001:10).
 Download the The Learning Country (pdf text 508kb).
Thus, as Jones argues:
New Labour has constructed a version of post-war history whose first purpose is to draw a line between itself and the Labour governments which preceded it. In education at least, the evidence that is offered in support of this interpretation is drawn almost exclusively from an English experience and there appears to be little interest in learning from the policy histories of other countries in Britain, even where these contain much that is relevant to thinking about the relationship between educational organisation, opportunity, achievement and social class. (Jones 2003:157)

Privatisation
Education Action Zones
One of the earliest indications of the enthusiasm of New Labour for privatisation of the education service was the setting up of Education Action Zones (EAZs). These consisted of clusters of schools in deprived areas working together, with government grants and sponsorship from local businesses, and assuming some of the functions of the LEA. Schools in EAZs were allowed to dispense with the National Curriculum and were encouraged to innovate.
Blunkett announced the first 25 EAZs in June 1998 and the first twelve of these started work in September 1998 with sponsorship from Blackburn Rovers, Cadbury Schweppes, Nissan, Rolls Royce, Kelloggs, British Aerospace, Tate and Lyle, American Express and Brittany Ferries.
But the government 's enthusiasm for EAZs was short-lived. In March 1999 it began the much larger Excellence in Cities (EiC) initiative, a three year programme to improve the education of inner city children. The aim was to drive up standards to match those found in the best schools - now to be designated 'beacon schools '. Unlike the EAZs, EiC operated through the traditional channels of Whitehall, LEA and school.
73 large EAZs were eventually set up, but in 2001 two reports - by the National Audit Office and the Institute of Public Policy Research - suggested that EAZs had largely failed to generate adequate private sponsorship or deliver on the promises made when they were set up.
And in June 2003 Ofsted reported that in the 73 EAZs, the number of pupils gaining five A*-C grades at GCSE had gone down in two zones, risen in one, and remained static in the others. Truancy by secondary pupils was 'still disturbingly high '.
Businesses were less than enthusiastic about putting money into the EAZs. In Newham, for example, construction giants Mowlem and Laing offered to show pupils round their training centre. That went down as a £40,000 contribution to the zone (The Guardian 9 July 2004).
Contracting out
The government began introducing private contractors into other bits of the education service. Various 'failing ' local authority services were put out to tender (as in Hackney and Islington) and even schools were handed over to private companies. King 's Manor School in Guildford was the first.
In May 2000 school standards minister Estelle Morris (pictured) announced that consultants would be sent into the LEAs in Bradford, Rochdale and Waltham Forest to advise on how improvements could be made after Ofsted uncovered 'serious weaknesses ' in their work.
And the following month she announced the privatisation of Leeds LEA which lost control of its school services following a damning inspection report.
 For more on the events surrounding King 's Manor School see my articleKing 's Manor School - an experiment in privatisation? (1999).
City academies
The creeping privatisation of education took a major step forward in March 2000 when David Blunkett announced that the government intended to create a network of 'city academies ' - effectively private schools paid for by the state - closely modelled on the 'charter schools ' in the US and the Conservatives ' city technology colleges.
City academies were to be public/private partnerships. Businesses, churches and voluntary groups would build and manage them, and they would be outside the control of local authorities. In return for a £2m donation towards the capital costs, sponsors would be allowed to rename the school, control the board of governors and influence the curriculum.
Blunkett described the city academies programme as 'a radical approach to promote greater diversity and break the cycle of failing schools in inner cities '. (The 'city ' was soon dropped to allow for the creation of rural academies).
But, as Francis Beckett pointed out in The Guardian (9 July 2004): the government 's big idea for education turns out to be the one the Conservatives invented 19 years ago, and abandoned as a failure shortly afterwards. It is even run by the same man: Cyril Taylor, the businessman appointed by the Conservatives in 1986 to create 30 city technology colleges.

Curriculum and testing
National Curriculum
The New Labour government seemed to have mixed views on the value of the National Curriculum. It announced that only English, maths, science, IT and swimming were now to be statutory requirements for primary schools, though the schools were still required to provide a 'broad curriculum '.
National Literacy Strategy
In January 1998 schools standards minister Stephen Byers announced ambitious literacy targets for every LEA in England and said he would 'expose ' complacent primary schools which coasted along with above average test results. The targets were designed to raise the proportion reaching the required standard in English tests from 57 per cent in 1996 to 80 per cent by 2002.
In 1999 the Moser Report Improving literacy and numeracy: A fresh start set out the National Literacy Strategy and introduced National Learning Targets. This represented a considerable increase in government interference in the curriculum. Whereas the Tories had told teachers whatto teach, New Labour now told them how to teach it: the 'Literacy Hour ' (and later, the 'Numeracy Hour ') spelt out content and teaching methods in enormous detail.
 Download the Moser Report 's Summary and recommendations (pdf text 131kb).
Special needs
The 1997 Green Paper Excellence for all children: Meeting Special Educational Needs set out how the government proposed to improve the achievements of children with special educational needs in England over the following five years.
 Download the Green Paper Excellence for all children: Meeting Special Educational Needs (pdf text 4.3mb).

Other developments 1997-2001
1998 Education (Student Loans) Act
The Education (Student Loans) Act (27 January 1988) transferred student loans to the private sector.
 Download the Education (Student Loans) Act 1998 (pdf text 88kb).
1998 Teaching and Higher Education Act
The Teaching and Higher Education Act (16 July 1988) established the General Teaching Council (GTC) ( Section 1) and a similar body for Wales (8), allowed the secretary of state to make regulations concerning the induction period for teachers (19), extended the duties of HM Chief Inspector to include teacher training and in-service courses (20), and provided for new rules relating to student maintenance grants and loans (22).
 Download the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 (pdf text 836kb).
2000 Learning and Skills Act
The Learning and Skills Act (28 July 2000) established the Learning and Skills Council for England (Section 1) and the National Council for Education and Training for Wales (30). It set up the Adult Learning Inspectorate (52) and extended the powers of HM Chief Inspector to include further education for 16-19 year olds (60). It allowed city technology colleges to be renamed city academies (130) and made other provisions about education and training.
 Download the Learning and Skills Act 2000 (pdf text 484kb).
Chris Woodhead
Chief inspector and head of Ofsted Chris Woodhead resigned in November 2000 and went off to write tirades against New Labour education policies for the Daily Telegraph. Some saw his departure as 'the final lifting of a deadweight on morale and hope ' (Riddell 2000). He was replaced in December 2000 by Mike Tomlinson.
Green Paper: Schools - building on success
One of David Blunkett 's last acts as Secretary of State for Education was the publication of the green paper Schools - building on success, in which he attempted to rewrite the history of the comprehensive school.
 Download the green paper Schools - building on success (pdf text 1.4mb).

2001-2005 Diversity and faith
With the Tories still in meltdown mode, New Labour won another landslide victory in the general election in June 2001. A Commons majority of 166 - only slightly less than in 1997 - meant that Tony Blair could push further his right-wing educational agenda without worrying too much about the views of his left-wing backbenchers.
The two main themes of his first term - an increase in selection under the guise of specialisation, and the promotion of privatisation - would be taken further in his second term and would be joined by a third theme - a determination to increase the involvement of the churches and other religious groups in educational provision.
Following the election, Estelle Morris took over from David Blunkett as Secretary of State and the DfEE (Department for Education and Employment) was renamed the DfES (Department for Education and Skills).

2001 White Paper Schools - achieving success
In September 2001 the white paper Schools - achieving successproposed: * giving schools more freedom to manage their own affairs, with 85 per cent of a school 's budget directly controlled by the head teacher, and a lesser role for LEAs; * more involvement of the private sector in state provision; * 'Standards Contracts ' to enable private, religious and voluntary organisations to support the management of both failing and successful schools; * greater diversity in secondary education, with more specialist schools and city academies attracting private sponsorship; * 'advanced specialist schools ' to train teachers and lead curriculum innovation; * compulsory use of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) where schools or local authorities were failing, and encouragement of the use of PPPs by successful schools; * allowing successful primary schools to opt out of the National Curriculum and develop curriculum innovations; * improving the quality of teaching and raising standards in the first three years of secondary school; * developing a more diverse 14-19 curriculum with more early entries for GCSE and much greater choice of vocational and work-based courses; * narrowing the gaps in achievement between ethnic groups, geographical areas and genders, improving educational opportunities for Caribbean, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and other minority groups.
 Download the white paper Schools - achieving success (pdf text 1.5mb).

2002 Education Act
These proposals formed the basis of the Education Act 2002 (24 July 2002).
 Download the Education Act 2002 (pdf text 6.4mb).

Faith schools
7,000 of England 's 25,000 state schools were already faith schools - 589 secondary and 6,384 primary. But the government was determined to press ahead and create even more such schools. Among forty projects already being planned were a £12 million Islamic secondary school for girls in Birmingham, an evangelical Christian school in Leeds and a new Jewish school in London. The Salvation Army and the Seventh Day Adventists said they were evaluating 'opportunities created by the white paper '.
There was widespread public concern about the government 's plans for more faith schools. A YouGov/Observer poll of nearly 6,000 people found that 80 per cent were against the proposal and only 11 per cent in favour (The Observer 11 November 2001).
The issue became even more controversial in the spring of 2002 when it was revealed that at least two state funded religious schools in England were teaching their students 'creationism ' as science. Questioned in the House of Commons about the use of taxpayers ' money to fund such teaching, Tony Blair avoided answering the question and claimed that 'a more diverse school system ... will deliver better results for our children '.
Concerns about the place of faith in education continued throughout Blair 's second term. In January 2005 chief inspector David Bell told a meeting of the Hansard Society that the growth of Islamic schools posed a challenge to the coherence of British society. Senior Muslims called his remarks 'irresponsible ' and 'derogatory ' (The Guardian 18 January 2005).
But Bell was supported by Commission for Racial Equality chair Trevor Phillips. 'We can choose ... whether we want to bring our diversity together in a single rainbow or whether we allow our differences to fester into separate cultures and separate communities ', he said (The Guardian19 January 2005).
Schools minister Stephen Twigg urged faith schools to 'promote understanding ' between different religions (The Guardian 18 February 2005).
 For more on faith schools and the row over creationism see my articles:Glass in their Snowballs: the faith schools debate (2001);Creationism: bad science, bad religion, bad education (2002); Never Mind the Evidence: Blair 's obsession with faith schools (2007).

Selection - the end of the comprehensive?
Meanwhile, New Labour 's assault on comprehensive education continued.
In December 2001 school standards minister Stephen Timms announced a £500,000 scheme for partnerships between 28 grammar schools and nearby secondary moderns and comprehensives. It was the first time a Labour government had given extra money to grammar schools as a group.
The scheme met with widespread criticism. Liberal Democrat education spokesman Phil Willis responded 'The last nail has been driven into the coffin of the comprehensive system. A Labour government that promised to end selection has now indicated a return to wholesale selection by ability. This is a sad day for those who believe in the principle of comprehensive education '. And Secondary Heads Association general secretary John Dunford said 'It is a bizarre use of public money to create a more diverse system and then have to provide additional funding for the diverse parts of the system to collaborate ' (The Guardian 8 December 2001).
But the government 's campaign against the comprehensive school was relentless. Blair 's press secretary Alastair Campbell denigrated them as 'bog standard comprehensives ' and in June 2002 Estelle Morris announced that the days of the 'one size fits all ' comprehensive were over. The number of specialist schools would increase to 1,000 in 2003 and to at least 1,500 by 2005, she said. They would be allowed to select up to ten per cent of their pupils by aptitude.
Twisting the meaning of words to a degree that was extraordinary - even for a New Labour minister - Morris wrote:
I believe in the comprehensive ideal. We have to encourage every single one of our secondary schools to develop their own sense of mission and play to their strengths. That 's why we will invest in specialist schools and training schools, beacon schools and city academies, each school choosing its own identity within the comprehensive family. (Morris 2002)
In September 2002 the first three city academies were opened. Head teachers criticised them as divisive.
Estelle Morris resigned in October 2002. Charles Clarke (pictured) was appointed education secretary and immediately announced that he would speed up the creation of specialist schools.
But Clarke appeared to be somewhat shaken at the results of research into the effects of selection undertaken by Professor David Jesson of York University.
Jesson compared the results of two local education authorities with similar profiles, one with a comprehensive system and one with a selective system. His research showed that in the comprehensive authority 52 per cent of pupils achieved five or more good GCSEs. In the authority with grammar schools the figure was 48 per cent (The Guardian 15 October 2002).
In December 2002 Clarke told MPs that he wanted local authorities to take a fresh look at the evidence that selective schools 'inhibited ' educational opportunities for a wide range of young people (The Guardian 12 December 2002).
And in January 2003 he criticised Kent for its poor results. (Kent was - and still is - selective).
After that, however, he said nothing more on the issue, leading some to suspect that he had been told (by Blair and/or Adonis presumably) to keep quiet about it.
But the arguments over selection wouldn 't go away.
In February 2003 a report by the Institute of Public Policy Research said parental choice was an 'illusion ' in London and it urged that control over admissions - including those to grammar schools, church schools and foundation schools - should be handed back to local authorities.
Writing in The Guardian, Fiona Millar, a former adviser to Tony Blair 's wife, argued that the government 's policy on admissions to secondary education was 'neither coherent nor fair '. She criticised the way ministers congratulated 'successful ' schools on their results:
These schools are often wholly or partially selective by ability, or in some cases city technology colleges, former grant maintained or church schools, which are also able to set their own admissions and use opaque "banding" tests or interviews to engineer more favourable intakes for themselves. (Millar 2003)
In May 2003 the Labour-dominated House of Commons Education Select Committee criticised the government for spending £400m on specialist schools without any real evidence that the policy was working and said there was 'a serious mismatch ' between government rhetoric and reality over its claim that specialist schools brought more choice and diversity for parents. The committee also disapproved of allowing specialist schools to select up to ten per cent of their students on the basis of aptitude, which ministers repeatedly insisted was different from ability. 'We are not satisfied that any meaningful distinction between aptitude and ability has been made and we found no justification for any reliance on the distinction between them ', the committee said.
But none of this prevented the government from pursuing its policy of promoting a diversity of different types of school.
In September 2003 nine more academies opened, bringing the total to twelve. Tony Blair opened the first purpose-built new academy - the Business Academy Bexley - a £31m publicly-funded independent school which replaced a former 'failing ' school in Thamesmead, south-east London.
The following month a report by Ofsted and the Audit Commission School place planning: The influence of school place planning on school standards and social inclusion warned the government that its policy of allowing parents to choose their child 's school was polarising the education system and trapping poor children in the worst schools. Chief inspector David Bell said 'Local education authorities must take action to prevent unpopular schools from sinking further, fully aligning their strategies for overall school place provision with their strategies for individual school improvement. The expansion of popular schools is no solution by itself '.
 Download School place planning (pdf text 98kb).
In November 2003 Blair gave a keynote speech on education to launch the next phase of the London Challenge which aimed to improve educational opportunities for inner-city pupils. He announced that five central London boroughs - Islington, Hackney, Haringey, Southwark and Lambeth - had all been identified as needing extra help and monitoring and had agreed improvement plans with the DfES. New academies were planned in Islington, Hackney and Lambeth.

Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners
The government 's five year plan, published in July 2004, formed the basis for its next education white paper.
The plan 'sounded the death knell of the comprehensive system ' (The Guardian 9 July 2004). It proposed: * allowing all schools to become specialist schools; * new 'independent specialist ' schools; * a massive expansion of the controversial academy programme; * schools would be funded directly from Whitehall, rather than through LEAs. (Though in evidence to the Commons education committee, Charles Clarke admitted it was difficult to see how a system of funding 26,000 schools directly from Whitehall could be made to work); * all schools except those deemed to be 'failing ' would be encouraged to become 'foundation schools ', owning their own land and buildings, managing their assets, employing their own staff and determining the membership of their governing bodies; * giving head teachers the power to set budget, pay and pupil selection under a national framework; * successful schools - including the remaining 164 grammar schools - would be able to apply to expand the number of places they offered; * central to all this would be new partnerships with parents, employers, volunteers and voluntary organisations.
 Download the Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners (pdf text 1.2mb).
Launching the plan, Clarke said choice was the key to reform. 'The idea that you go back to the state of affairs where you say "you go to that school, son" is for the birds ', he said.
In amongst all the talk of modernisation there were some extraordinarily traditional ideas, designed to stop middle-class parents taking their children out of the state sector: school uniforms, rigorous discipline, even the 'house system ' popular in independent schools (The Guardian 9 July 2004).
Teacher unions and grassroots Labour supporters were appalled at the proposals and demanded a manifesto pledge to scrap grammar schools and end selection by aptitude (The Observer 11 July 2004). They were, of course, ignored.
NUT general secretary Steve Sinnott warned that 'parents will be faced with a confused and confusing array of schools rather than choice and diversity. Parents will not have the power to choose. Instead, that power will lie in the hands of the governing body and the head teacher - leading to selection by stealth and increased frustration and disappointment for parents ' (The Guardian 8 July 2004).
Scotland 's version of the five year plan was published in October 2004. Scottish ministers said the 12 point programme would be 'the biggest reform in a generation ' for Scottish schools, with a new curriculum for three to 18 year olds, an overhaul of the inspection regime and a new system of monitoring achievement across the country (The Guardian 1 November 2004).

The academies programme
Five more academies opened in September 2004, bringing the total to 17. The five year plan indicated that the government intended to have 200 academies open by 2010, despite the fact that no evaluation had been made of their cost-effectiveness. Charles Clarke himself admitted that academies were expensive and that there was no evidence that they were improving performance.
Concerns about the programme centred around the following issues: * escalating costs; * poor performance; * replacement of schools that were not 'failing '; * imposition of academies where parents didn 't want them; * the involvement of faith groups; * selection by stealth; * pupil exclusions; * lack of LEA control and support; * dubious use of public funds; * a two-tier education system.
Meanwhile, the 'charter schools ' in the US, on which the academies had been modelled, were having their own problems. In August 2004 the American Federal Education Department reported that the performance of charter schools was worse than that of publicly funded schools, and that they usually achieved poorer results than other schools serving similarly disadvantaged communities. Teachers in the UK called on the British government to heed the warning (The Guardian 17 August 2004).
With 17 academies open and 42 planned, the government was, by the end of 2004, nearly a third of the way to its target of 200.
But the problems continued. In March 2005 league tables based on test results for 14 year olds in English, maths and science, showed that nine of the 11 academies came in the bottom 200 schools in England.
The Commons education select committee complained that 'it is difficult to detect a coherent overarching strategy for the government 's proposals for education ' and urged that the projected £5bn budget for setting up 200 academies be withheld until they were proved to be cost-effective (The Guardian 17 March 2005).

Curriculum and testing
National Literacy Strategy
Increasing concerns were expressed about the effectiveness of the National Literacy Strategy. Ministers announced that it would be reviewed, since it had failed to deliver any improvement in reading and writing scores in three consecutive years (The Guardian 9 January 2003).
Many - including some eminent writers - criticised the sterile nature of much of the strategy. In The Guardian award-winning author Philip Pullman wrote of a task recently undertaken by 200,000 eleven year olds in their Key Stage 2 tests:
They were confronted with four crudely drawn pictures of a boy standing in a queue to buy a toy, and they then had to write a story about them, taking exactly 45 minutes. It was a task of stupefying worthlessness and futility, something no one who was serious about the art of storytelling could regard with anything other than contempt. (Pullman 2003)
Bowing to pressure from the teacher unions and others, Charles Clarke announced that primary school tests and targets would be streamlined. The tests for seven year olds would be less formal and would form part of a wider teacher-led assessment (The Guardian 20 May 2003).
In November 2003 the QCA published materials designed to help teachers develop their pupils ' speaking and listening skills.
In December 2004 Ofsted published Reading for Purpose and Pleasure - an evaluation of reading in primary schools, which said that continued improvement in reading standards was being marred by an increasing gulf between schools which successfully tackled weaknesses in reading and those that did not (The Guardian 15 December 2004).
Foreign languages
In 2002 the government published its strategy for the teaching of foreign languages: Languages for All: languages for life.
But in September 2004 new arrangements for the Key Stage 4 (post 14) curriculum - to allow schools to develop a more personalised and flexible programme for pupils - led to a dramatic reduction in the number of pupils learning a foreign language.
Tests, targets and league tables
In February 2004 chief inspector David Bell warned the government that its enforced focus on maths and English in primary schools was creating a 'two-tier curriculum ', with other subjects - particularly geography, history and religious education - being neglected. NUT general secretary Doug McAvoy commented 'history, geography and the arts are suffering because of the government 's obsession with tests, targets and tables ' (The Guardian 5 February 2004).
And a government-commissioned report by former chief inspector Mike Tomlinson warned that exam overload was harming pupils (The Observer15 February 2004).
The obsession with tests, targets and tables applied only to England: Scotland had already abandoned tests in favour of teacher assessment and Wales had abolished tests for seven year olds and school league tables in 2001. Now, Welsh education minister Jane Davidson announced that the tests for 11 and 14 year olds were to be scrapped and replaced with a skills test for 10 year olds, supported by teacher assessments (The Guardian 14 July 2004).
Schools in England, however, would have to go on testing children regularly because the government believed such tests were necessary to drive up standards. Teachers had to share part of the blame. In December 2003 the NUT had balloted its members on a boycott of the tests for 7 and 11 year olds: the proposal was lost because only 34 per cent of the membership had bothered to vote.
In February 2005 David Bell warned that more than ten per cent of state schools in England were failing to show 'sufficient progress ' in raising standards and that only one in three secondary schools had acceptable standards of behaviour (The Guardian 3 February 2005).
14-19 curriculum
In May 2004 Charles Clarke announced an overhaul of the modern apprenticeships programme. There would be apprenticeships for 14 to 16 year olds, with pupils spending up to two days a week in the workplace learning a trade. He rejected criticisms that this amounted to a reintroduction of selection and insisted that the new scheme would attract motivated and able pupils (The Guardian 11 May 2004).
In October 2004 the working group chaired by former chief inspector Mike Tomlinson published its report 14-19 Curriculum and Qualifications Reform.
Tomlinson identified the following problems: * the UK 's poor record on keeping teenagers at school; * low skill levels in numeracy, literacy and ICT; * the poor status of vocational courses and qualifications; * the lack of challenges for bright students; * the difficulty of differentiating between thousands of pupils with A grade A Levels; * exam overload; and * the complexity and lack of transparency in the web of academic and vocational qualifications.
The report recommended: * replacing GCSEs, A Levels and vocational qualifications with a new single modular diploma at four levels: entry (equivalent to pre-GCSEs), foundation (GCSEs at grade D-G), intermediate (GCSE A*-C) and advanced (A Level); * introducing a compulsory 'core ' consisting of 'functional ' subjects (maths, ICT and communication skills) and 'wider activities ' (work experience, paid jobs, voluntary work and family responsibilities); * cutting the number of exams; * replacing coursework with a single extended project; * enabling students to progress at their own rate, paving the way for mixed-aged classes; * stretching the most able students with tougher additional A Level papers; and * providing 'graduates ' of the diploma with a transcript of their achievements which would be available to employers and universities online.
 Download the Tomlinson Report 14-19 Curriculum and Qualifications Reform (pdf text 920kb).
The committee said its proposals would take at least a decade to implement fully, though some elements could be introduced much sooner.
Tomlinson 's recommendations were backed by heads, by the chief inspector of schools and by the head of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA). Barry Sheerman, chair of the House of Commons Education and Skills Select Committee, wrote (in The Guardian 21 February 2005) that the government 's decision would be 'the most significant for education ' during Tony Blair 's premiership.
In the event, the government rejected most of Tomlinson 's recommendations and in its White Paper14-19 Education and Skills (February 2005) opted to introduce a diploma for vocational courses but to keep the existing 'gold standard ' GCSE and A Level exams.
The newly-appointed education secretary, Ruth Kelly (pictured), told the Commons 'there are some who argue that to transform opportunities for our children, we should scrap the current GCSEs and A Levels. I do not agree. We won 't transform opportunities by abolishing what is good. '
The white paper proposed: * retaining GCSEs and A Levels; * a new general diploma for those gaining five GCSE grades A*-C including English and maths; * 14 vocational diplomas; * GCSE maths to be made harder; * the volume of coursework to be cut for GCSEs; and * A Levels to include options to stretch the brightest youngsters.
 Download the White Paper 14-19 Education and Skills (pdf text 524kb).
There was widespread dismay at the proposals. Mike Tomlinson, supported by David Bell, warned that they would reinforce the traditional snobbery towards work-related education (The Guardian 24 February 2005). Ann Hodgson and Ken Spours, of the London Institute of Education, wrote that 'the white paper is ... fundamentally elitist. It emphasises "stretch" and "acceleration" while neglecting inclusion ' (Hodgson and Spours 2005).
Many thought they could detect the hand of Andrew Adonis and the Number 10 Policy Unit behind the white paper. When Kelly appeared before the Commons education select committee to defend the white paper, she was supported by Tory MPs and attacked by Labour members.

2004 Children Act
In 2003, the government published its green paper Every Child Matters, following the death of Victoria Climbié, the young girl who was horrifically abused, tortured and eventually killed by her great aunt and the man with whom they lived.
In November 2004 The Children Act established a Children 's Commissioner to champion the views and interests of children and young people, and required local authorities to make arrangements to promote co-operation between agencies and other appropriate bodies (such as voluntary and community organisations) in order to improve children 's well-being.
To go with the Act, the government published Every Child Matters: change for children (December 2004) which set out the radical changes needed across the whole system of children 's services, including schools.
 Download the Children Act 2004 (pdf text 280kb).

Other developments 2001-2005
Behaviour
In July 2003 the government abandoned a £59m behaviour management training programme for newly qualified teachers because it needed the money to avoid teacher redundancies caused by a shortfall in school budgets (The Independent 29 July 2003).
But concerns continued to be expressed - by David Bell among others - that too many children were starting school lacking even the most basic social and communication skills. As a result, in September 2003 the minister for young people Ivan Lewis announced a £5m pilot programme in 3,500 primary schools to tackle bullying and disruptive behaviour in children as young as five (The Guardian 4 September 2003).
Teachers ' pay and conditions
In August 2002 the government announced that teachers ' pay would, for the first time since the 'payment by results ' scheme in the nineteenth century, be linked to test results or pupils ' behaviour (The Guardian 2 August 2002). 'Workforce remodelling ' began in September 2003. This government initiative aimed to reduce teachers ' workload by employing more unqualified classroom assistants. All the teacher unions co-operated except the NUT, which warned that it would result in larger classes and teaching by unqualified staff. Charles Clarke was so angry that he refused to attend NUT conferences and banned DfES staff from negotiating with NUT representatives.
Eighteen months later two other unions - ATL and NASUWT - expressed anger over the workload agreement. They said heads were refusing to guarantee teachers time for planning and assessment (The Guardian 22, 30 March 2005).
Schools minister Stephen Twigg minister was booed and jeered by head teachers when he told them that no new money would be offered to cover the cost of giving teachers time for marking and preparation (The Guardian 2 May 2005).
2004 Higher Education Act
In January 2003 the government published its White Paper The future of higher education (pdf text 627kb) which proposed allowing universities to charge variable top-up fees. This was highly controversial but the government just managed to get the 2004 Higher Education Act (1 July 2004) through the Commons.
 Download the Higher Education Act 2004 (pdf text 196kb).
Building Schools for the Future
In February 2004 the government announced Building Schools for the Future (BSF), a massive school rebuilding programme. More than £5bn would be spent rebuilding or refurbishing every secondary school in England within 15 years, and a further £3bn would be spent on capital programmes mainly benefiting primary schools. The programme would be financed partly from public funds and partly using the controversial private finance initiative (PFI).
2005 Education Act
The 2005 Education Act (7 April 2005) was wide-ranging but relatively uncontroversial.
Its provisions related to the inspection of schools, child minding, day care, nursery education and careers services, the training of school staff and 'other persons who teach ', the supply of personal information 'for purposes related to education ' and about the attendance of children at educational provision outside schools.
 Download the Education Act 2005 (pdf text 648kb).

2005-2007 Third term extremism
New Labour won a historic third term in office at the general election in May 2005, though with a much reduced majority in the Commons. For the first time ever in a British election, the winning party gained fewer votes than the number of people who didn 't vote at all. Blair berated the public for its apathy.
But it wasn 't apathy that kept people away from the polling booths. It was a combination of disgust at Blair 's decision to support Bush 's Iraq war and the blatant lies which had preceded it; lack of enthusiasm for a Tory opposition which had run a distasteful campaign focused on immigration; and the fact that, in terms of policies, there was little to choose between Blair and the Conservatives.
There was a public outcry when Blair proposed making Andrew Adonis a minister. He had no ministerial experience, had never been elected, and was widely seen as one of 'Tony 's cronies '. Blair ignored the concerns and gave Adonis a life peerage and the post of junior education minister.
Blair 's overall aim in his last term as prime minister was that the state should no longer be primarily a direct provider of services, but instead become a regulator and commissioner of services purchased from public, private and voluntary sectors. In one shape or other, markets are being introduced into the public sector - "contestability", in the jargon - in which providers compete not necessarily over price, but quality. (Wintour 2005)

2006 Education and Inspections Act
The 2006 Act was based on the 2005 white paper Higher Standards, Better Schools for All which clearly demonstrated that the longer a party remains in power, the more extreme its policies become.
It proposed that: * all primary and secondary schools would be encouraged to become independent state schools ( 'trust schools ') backed by private sponsors - businesses, charities, faith groups, universities or parent and community organisations. Like the academies, they would determine their own curriculum and ethos, would appoint the governing body, own their own assets, employ their own staff and set their own admissions policy. They would be required to have parents ' councils which would have a say in the day to day running of the school and on issues such as school meals, uniform and discipline; * schools would be required to 'take note of ' guidelines on admissions and there would be a pupil banding scheme to ensure a mix of abilities; * a school deemed to be failing would be given a year to improve before a 'competition for new providers ' was held. It would then be reopened as an academy or a trust school with a private sponsor; * parents would be given the right to set up new schools, to close 'failing ' ones and to sack head teachers; * good schools would be encouraged to expand or link up with neighbouring schools in federations, and successful schools would be able to apply for new responsibilities such as teacher training; * local education authorities would lose most of their powers and would become 'parents ' champions ' rather than education providers; * teachers would be given the legal right to discipline pupils; * parenting contracts and orders would be extended and parents who failed to fulfil their contractual duties would face fines; * schools would be encouraged to tailor lessons to individual pupils and there would be more support for struggling pupils; and * pupils from low income families would get subsidised transport to any of the nearest three schools within a six-mile radius.
 Download the white paper Higher Standards, Better Schools for All(pdf text 964kb).
The white paper was mired in controversy right from the start. Adonis 's fingerprints were all over it. 'The first half - promoting private intervention, looking to all but abolish local authority involvement in state schools - reads as almost unadulterated Adonis ', commented Will Woodward in The Guardian (Woodward 2005).
This caused problems for education secretary Ruth Kelly, who warned that the proposal to create trust schools was ill-thought through. She was overruled by Adonis and Blair and was warned by colleagues that if she didn 't go along with them her ministerial career would be a short one (Daily Mail 17 October 2005; The Observer 23 October 2005).
But it wasn 't only Kelly who was unhappy with Blair 's proposals. Teachers and Labour MPs were furious and even cabinet members (including Gordon Brown and John Prescott) were worried. Former education secretary Estelle Morris described the white paper as 'one of the most contradictory documents ever produced by government ' (The Guardian22 November 2005).
More than a hundred Labour MPs threatened to rebel. Their main concern centred, once again, around the issue of selection. Blair pointed out that selection on grounds of ability had been illegal in new schools since 1998, but his critics argued that this still left a large - and probably increasing - role for covert selection. The white paper 's proposal to take many more schools out of local authority control and give them greater autonomy in determining their selection procedures would make the situation worse, and the proposed code of admissions did not have statutory force.
In mid December, a group of 58 Labour backbenchers - including nine former ministers - published an alternative white paper. They said the plans for trust schools were likely to 'strengthen rather than break ' the link between being poor and underachieving in education (The Guardian 15 December 2005).
Kelly responded that trust schools were not 'a new category of school ' and would be no more independent from local authorities than existing foundation schools (The Guardian 20 December 2005). This was disingenuous, to say the least, and she was given an extremely hostile reception by local government officials at the North of England education conference in Newcastle (The Guardian 7 January 2006).
By mid January, more than half of Labour backbenchers had signed up to the alternative white paper (The Guardian 18 January 2006). Kelly made matters worse by telling them they 'didn 't understand ' the government 's plans (The Guardian 21 January 2006).
Relations deteriorated even further when it was revealed that Kelly had suppressed a crucial report warning that her plans would widen the educational gulf between rich and poor children (The Observer 22 January 2006). And the Sutton Trust published new research showing that top-performing comprehensives which controlled their own admissions were already excluding poorer pupils (The Guardian 24 January 2006).
As the first reading of the education bill drew nearer, attempts were made to find compromises, especially on the issues of admissions and the role of local authorities. Deputy prime minister John Prescott caved in. 'My ideas have developed about how we can take forward the traditional values of comprehensive education in a modern setting ', he said (The Guardian 4 February 2006).
Having made a number of concessions, Blair refused any further changes to his bill (The Guardian 7, 9 February 2006) and Kelly insisted she would retain her right to prevent local authorities opening new comprehensive schools (The Guardian 27 February 2006).
Many backbenchers deeply disapproved of the mass handover of publicly owned, democratically accountable schools to unelected private bodies. The bill, they argued, represented 'the first irreversible step towards the privatisation of the state schools system ' (Matthew Taylor The Guardian20 February 2006).
The first reading of the Education and Inspections Bill took place on 15 March 2006. As expected, Blair was forced to rely on Conservative MPs to get it through. 52 Labour MPs voted against and a handful abstained (The Guardian 16 March 2006).
During the third reading, in May 2006, 67 backbenchers voted for a rebel amendment which would have required schools to hold a parents ' ballot before they became independent trusts (The Guardian 24 May 2006). But with Tory support, Blair got his bill, by 422 to 98 votes. It was the largest rebellion ever suffered by a Labour government at third reading (The Guardian 25 May 2006).
The main provisions of the Education and Inspections Act (8 November 2006) were: * all schools could become trust schools by forming links with external partners who would be able to appoint the majority of the governors, own their own assets, employ their own staff, set their admission arrangements and be able to apply for additional flexibilities; * local authorities would be required to promote choice, diversity, high standards and the fulfilment of potential for every child, respond to parental concerns about the quality of local schools, act as decision-maker on school organisation matters, ensure that young people have a range of exciting things to do in their spare time, appoint School Improvement Partners for maintained schools, and provide positive activities for young people; and * the admissions framework would reaffirm the ban on new selection by ability, place a ban on interviewing, strengthen the status of the Code on School Admissions, bringing in new powers for admissions forums, and extend the duty on local authorities to provide free transport for the most disadvantaged families.
In addition, the Act: * required governing bodies to promote well-being and community cohesion, and to take the Children and Young People 's Plan into consideration; * created a power for staff to discipline pupils; * extended the scope of parenting orders and contracts; * improved provision for excluded pupils; * put in place a new entitlement to specialised diplomas for young people; * set new nutritional standards for food and drink served in maintained schools; * merged several existing inspectorates to form an enlarged Ofsted, covering the full range of services for children and young people, as well as life-long learning; and * replaced references to 'local education authorities ' with 'local authorities ' in all legislation (Section 162).
 Download the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (pdf text 1.0mb).

The academies programme
Meanwhile, the government was pushing ahead with its academies programme, despite continuing problems and persistent criticisms.
Among the problems: * two sponsors pulled out of major projects (The Guardian 14, 22 June 2005); * GCSE results published in January 2006 showed that half the academies were among the worst-performing schools in England (The Guardian 19 January 2006); * parents campaigned against an academy planned to replace Hurworth School in Blair 's Sedgefield constituency (The Guardian7 March 2006); * it was revealed that 23 of the 27 academies were still waiting to receive the money their sponsors had promised (The Guardian 3 May 2006); * a study at Edinburgh University found that the academies had failed to improve exam results compared with the comprehensives they had replaced (The Guardian 22 May 2006); * parents complained about Trinity Academy at Thorne, near Doncaster (The Guardian 30 May 2006); and * parents mounted legal challenges against the imposition of academies in Islington, Merton and Sheppey (The Guardian 13 June 2006).
Criticisms came from: * PriceWaterhouseCoopers, who reported that academies faced a number of 'significant problems ' including widespread bullying and inappropriate buildings (The Guardian 16 June 2005); * local education authorities, who called the academies programme a 'hugely expensive ' use of taxpayers ' money and an unproven way of transforming failing schools (The Guardian 30 June 2005); * Labour MPs, who were unhappy about the involvement of religious organisations (The Observer 7 August 2005); and * head teachers, who were almost unanimous in their opposition to plans for more academies (The Guardian 13 September 2005).
In addition, Ofsted criticised: * the West London Academy in Northolt for its unsatisfactory curriculum and leadership, poor pupil behaviour and the 'extremely high ' rate of exclusions (The Guardian 4 August 2005); * the Bexley Business Academy in Kent as 'inadequate ' (The Guardian 21 January 2006); * the £26m academy at Peckham as having 'significant weaknesses ' (The Guardian 23 February 2006); and * the Unity City Academy in Middlesbrough for its low attendance rates, poor teaching, inappropriate buildings and 'exceptionally low ' results (The Guardian 20 March 2006).
And in February 2007 the National Audit Office reported that academies achieved poor GCSE results in English and maths, fell well below the national average in performance at A Level, failed to collaborate with other local schools and their communities, and had cost millions of pounds more than anticipated (The Guardian 23 February 2007).
Yet still Blair was determined to pursue the controversial policy - indeed, he now said he wanted to see 400 academies across the country. And in his first public pronouncement on the subject, Gordon Brown praised the 'tremendous success of the academy movement ' (The Guardian 20 March 2007).
 For a fuller account of the history of the academies programme, see my article Axes to Grind: the first five years of Blair 's academies (2007).

Faith schools
The 2005 white paper 's proposal to allow religious organisations to control more schools was widely criticised. A Guardian/ICM poll revealed that two thirds of the public agreed with the statement that 'the government should not be funding faith schools of any kind ' (The Guardian 23 August 2005).
There was mounting concern about the teaching of creationism as science in some of the academies. Organisations representing scientists in 67 countries - including the UK 's Royal Society - warned that scientific evidence about the origins of life was being 'concealed, denied, or confused ' by schools teaching creationism. It urged parents as well as teachers to provide children with the facts about the origins and evolution of life on Earth (The Guardian 22 June 2006).
Faced with the growing tide of hostility to religious schools, the new education secretary Alan Johnson (pictured) announced that the government would require new faith schools to admit up to a quarter of their pupils from families of other faiths or none. The Roman Catholic Church and the Board of Deputies of British Jews expressed outright opposition and the suggestion was dropped (The Guardian 17 October 2006).
Schools minister Andrew Adonis proposed that faith schools should be allowed to favour members of their own religion when appointing support staff. The GMB union and the National Secular Society said the change would extend discrimination (The Guardian 24 October 2006).

Selection
Parents ' leaders called for an end to selective education after exam results showed that most of the worst performing schools were in the shire counties which still had grammar schools (The Independent 20 January 2007).
Conservative leader David Cameron pledged there would be 'no return to the eleven plus ' or to grammar schools under a Conservative government (The Guardian 10 January 2006). Less than a fortnight later a poll showed that three quarters of his party members disapproved of his statement (The Observer 22 January 2006).
Cameron and his shadow education secretary David Willetts ran into further trouble over their grammar schools policy in May. Cameron said 'a pointless debate about creating a few grammar schools is not going to get us anywhere ', and promised instead to concentrate on raising standards and improving discipline in all England 's 24,000 state schools. Willetts argued that 'academic selection entrenches advantage, it does not spread it '. Tory MPs thought otherwise and the new policy was attacked by a dozen backbenchers at a meeting of the 1922 Committee (The Guardian17 May 2007).
While Blair steadfastly defended the existence of England 's remaining 164 grammar schools, in Northern Ireland plans were announced to abolish selection and replace the eleven plus with a new 'pupil profile ' drawn up throughout a child 's primary education and used as a basis for teachers to advise parents which secondary school their child should attend. After 2008, all pupils between 11 and 14 would get a comprehensive education (The Guardian 7 February 2006).
New research by York University 's David Jesson showed that children who did not pass the eleven plus were condemned to lower standards of education than if they went to a comprehensive school in a non-selective area (The Observer 19 February 2006).
Brighton 's Labour-controlled council caused consternation when it announced it would be allocating some places at secondary schools by lottery. Middle class parents fought a bitter war involving death threats, espionage and allegations of gerrymandering over whose children had the right to go to the best schools in the city. Critics warned that Brighton 's most deprived children had been left voiceless and marginalised (The Guardian 1 March 2007).

Curriculum and testing
Curriculum
In November 2005 an NFER report concluded that the £386mExcellence in Cities scheme had failed to raise rates of achievement at Key Stage 3 or at GCSE because pupils were entering secondary schools without 'the appropriate skills and attitudes ' (The Guardian 25 November 2005).
At the end of November 2005 Ruth Kelly announced that primary schools would be forced to teach reading by 'synthetic phonics ', a method which had first achieved prominence in 1998, when a study showed improved reading abilities in Clackmannanshire four year olds. The proposal was universally condemned by experts in the teaching of reading, who pointed out that the study had been tiny and flawed. Kelly ignored them all.
In December 2006 the report of the Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group was published. Chaired by Christine Gilbert (who went on to become head of Ofsted), 2020 Vision set out the Review Group 's recommendations for schooling in the future. The report argued that pupils should have more choice in what they studied, should mark their own work and grade their teachers ' performance. Traditional grades should be replaced by feedback, and pupils should be entered for exams as soon as they were ready, rather than waiting until they reached a certain age. Teachers gave the report a guarded welcome (The Guardian 4 January 2007).
 Download 2020 Vision (pdf text 221kb).
The new arrangements for the Key Stage 4 (post 14) curriculum, which had been introduced in 2004, had led to a dramatic fall in the number of children learning foreign languages. In February 2007, therefore, ministers announced a shake-up of foreign language teaching. Schools would now be allowed to teach Mandarin and Urdu rather than the more traditional French or German (The Observer 4 February 2007).
The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) published new plans for Key Stage 3 (11 to 14 year olds). The proposals were designed to give schools greater flexibility in deciding what to teach and make it easier to allow children of different abilities to progress at their own speeds. There would be a greater focus on 'life skills ' (The Guardian 5, 6 February 2007).
In April 2007 the QCA began consulting on a new secondary curriculum scheduled for introduction in September 2008. The move was part of a major overhaul of teaching at Key Stages 3 and 4. QCA chief executive Dr Ken Boston said the aim was to ensure that all pupils were 'actively and imaginatively engaged in their learning ' (The Guardian 3 April 2007).
Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown, now campaigning to become Labour leader and prime minister, announced a review of the Numeracy Strategy and promised to ensure that by 2010 more than 300,000 pupils would benefit from one-to-one tuition in maths (The Guardian 15 May 2007).
An Ofsted report, Making Sense of Religion, found that the teaching of Christianity was 'often much less rigorous and more fragmented ' than units of work on other faiths and that GCSE syllabuses paid little attention to issues related to religion 's role and significance in contemporary Britain. It argued that a national curriculum for religious education in English schools might be needed to guarantee standards and help improve community cohesion (The Guardian 18 June 2007).
A report for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation challenged the common perception that African-Caribbean, black or Bangladeshi pupils achieved lower standards at school than white working-class pupils. The report called for reform of school league tables, especially at GCSE level, which it said discouraged many schools from admitting pupils who might lower their scores. London School of Economics professor Robert Cassen, the report 's lead author, said:
Disadvantaged children are behind educationally before they enter school and need more pre-school help. Improvements could be made to identify and support children who are late in learning to read and write at primary school, and to address their problems before they become entrenched. It is expensive - but even more expensive not to do it. (The Guardian 22 June 2007)
Tests and exams
QCA chief executive Ken Boston admitted that pupils faced a huge and excessive exam load which had distorted the balance of what was taught in schools. He said he was determined to reduce the number of tests that pupils in England and Wales were forced to sit (The Observer 26 March 2006).
Schools minister Jim Knight announced that GCSE exams in English and maths were to be made harder as part of a major government drive to raise basic educational skills (The Observer 20 August 2006) and education secretary Alan Johnson said that primary school maths lessons would focus more on mental arithmetic. Children would be expected to master their multiplication tables by the age of eight (The Guardian 8 September 2006).
In January 2007 Johnson announced that pupils in England would face more but shorter national tests if pilot schemes in ten local authorities were successful. National targets and league tables would remain. They were 'non-negotiable ', he said (The Guardian 9 January 2007).
The General Teaching Council for England (GTC) called for all national school tests for 7, 11 and 14 year olds to be scrapped. It pointed out that children in England took around 70 different tests before the age of 16, making them the most tested in the world. GTC chief executive Keith Bartley said:
Of course there still needs to be a way of testing pupils when their standard education comes to a close ... But placing added stress on pupils, teachers and parents on a regular basis before that time is not creating the best environment for learning. We need to ... let them [teachers] do what they are trained for. (The Guardian 11 June 2007)
The GTC 's demand was supported by the Liberal Democrats and by Jon Cruddas, one of the candidates for Labour 's deputy leadership, but firmly rebuffed by the government and the Conservatives.
The Cambridge Primary Review
The Cambridge Primary Review was launched in October 2006. Sponsored by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and led by Professor Robin Alexander, the review aimed 'to gather evidence from a wide range of sources, sift facts from rhetoric, and stimulate debate about the future of this vital phase of education '.
 For more on the Cambridge Primary Review see the next chapter of this history (section on Curriculum reviews); the website of the Cambridge Primary Review; and my summary of the Review 's final report Children, their World, their Education.

Behaviour
2005 Steer Report: Learning behaviour
The Practitioners ' Group on School Behaviour and Discipline, chaired by Sir Alan Steer, presented its report Learning behaviour in October 2005.
The report listed six 'core beliefs ' about behaviour in schools: * The quality of learning, teaching and behaviour in schools are inseparable issues, and the responsibility of all staff; * Poor behaviour cannot be tolerated as it is a denial of the right of pupils to learn and teachers to teach. To enable learning to take place preventative action is the most effective, but where this fails, schools must have clear, firm and intelligent strategies in place to help pupils manage their behaviour; * There is no single solution to the problem of poor behaviour, but all schools have the potential to raise standards if they are consistent in implementing good practice in learning, teaching and behaviour management; * Respect has to be given in order to be received. Parents and carers, pupils and teachers all need to operate in a culture of mutual regard; * The support of parents is essential for the maintenance of good behaviour. Parents and schools each need to have a clear understanding of their rights and responsibilities; * School leaders have a critical role in establishing high standards of learning, teaching and behaviour. (DfES 2005:2)
 Download the Steer Report Learning behaviour (pdf text 979kb).
Truancy
In January 2006 the Commons public accounts committee said the government had squandered £885m over seven years in a futile attempt to reduce the number of truants. It found that, despite numerous initiatives to improve attendance and behaviour, the number of children missing lessons each day in England had risen by almost 5,000 in a year.
And in September 2006 DfES figures revealed that nearly 1.4 million children - one in five of all pupils in England - had played truant from school in the previous year (The Guardian 22 September 2006).
Bullying
The Commons education select committee called for a national inquiry into the scale of bullying in schools. It feared that the problem was being downplayed by schools anxious to protect their reputations and singled out Roman Catholic schools in particular. It condemned the Catholic church for refusing to follow government guidelines urging schools to set up specific policies against homophobic bullying (The Guardian 27 March 2007).
Other developments 2005-2007
Building Schools for the Future
A survey by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment found that half the schools built between 2000 and 2005 were poor, with only 19 per cent rated as excellent or good. Nine of the ten worst-designed new schools were built using the controversial private finance initiative (PFI) (The Guardian 4 July 2006).
The chief executive of the government 's £45bn Building Schools for the Future scheme admitted that the plans were 'over-ambitious and not deliverable ' and that local authorities were struggling to manage the complex construction contracts (The Guardian 16 January 2007).
Middle schools
By 2006 only three local authorities - the Isle of Wight, Bedfordshire and Northumberland - were still exclusively three-tier. A few other authorities had small areas with middle schools.
Bedfordshire 's 33 middle schools remained open in September 2006 following a successful parents ' campaign. In Northumberland parents had lobbied hard to keep their middle schools and no decision on their future had yet been made. In Suffolk, where about half the schools were in a three-tier system, ideas for restructuring were being considered.
97 per cent of children in England were now in two-tier systems with transfer at age 11 (The Guardian 5 September 2006).
 For more on middle schools see chapters 6 and 9 of this history and the website of the National Middle Schools Forum, which represents the interests and aspirations of middle school head teachers, staff, pupils and governors.
Ofsted
A new Ofsted inspection regime was introduced in September 2005. Inspections were now to be shorter and sharper and schools would only be given only a couple of days ' notice of inspectors ' visits. David Bell described the changes as 'the most radical since Ofsted was set up in 1992 ' (The Guardian 30 August 2005).
Christine Gilbert (pictured) replaced David Bell as head of Ofsted and chief inspector of schools on 1 October 2006. She had been a teacher and a head and had had various local government posts including that of chief executive of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.
On 1 April 2007, as decreed by the 2006 Education and Inspections Act, Ofsted became 'The Office for Standards in Education, Children 's Services and Skills '. In addition to its existing schools inspection role, the new Ofsted took on responsibilities from three other existing inspectorates: the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI); the work relating to children of the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI); and the work relating to the children and family courts of HM Inspectorate of Court Administration (HMICA).
Higher education
In February 2006, six months before the introduction of student tuition 'top-up ' fees, the university admissions service UCAS reported a 3.4 per cent drop in the number of people applying to university - the first fall for six years (The Guardian 16 February 2006).
Research carried out by a team led by Nick Foskett at Southampton University suggested that those worst hit by tuition fees would be middle-class students whose families were just above the threshold for financial support (The Guardian 3 April 2006).
Top-up fees came under attack again in July 2006 when figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency showed a small drop in the proportion of young first-year university students from low-income families. The percentage of students coming from state schools and colleges had also fallen (The Guardian 20 July 2006).
And in October 2006, UCAS revealed that 15,000 fewer students had started university compared with the previous year. Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman Sarah Teather said 'The evidence is now undeniable - top-up fees deter people from going to university. Ministers must reconsider this mistaken policy that has such a negative impact ' (The Guardian 19 October 2006). (Her view would not prevent her from voting for a tripling of tuition fees when she became a coalition government minister in 2010).
Head teachers
In September 2006, the General Teaching Council reported that schools in England were facing a leadership crisis with only 4 per cent of teachers wanting to become heads within the next five years. At the same time, more than a third of head teachers said they were planning to retire by 2011 (The Guardian 5 September 2006).
A report for the DfES by PricewaterhouseCoopers said schools should be allowed to appoint business executives as heads, even if they were not qualified as teachers (The Guardian 18 January 2007).
School leaving age
Education secretary Alan Johnson proposed that all teenagers should stay in some form of education and training up to the age of 18. He hoped that this change in the school leaving age - the first since 1973 - might be implemented in 2013. The idea was broadly welcomed, though teacher unions warned that it would need to be properly funded (The Guardian13 January 2007).
Two months later, Johnson warned that teenagers who broke the proposed new leaving age, to be phased in from 2013, could face £50 fixed penalty fines or Asbo-style attendance orders. National Union of Teachers general secretary Steve Sinnott warned that 'Criminalising young people is no way to ensure committed involvement. It will only serve to alienate and undermine any desire disaffected young people feel towards continuing their education ' (The Guardian 23 March 2007).
Tim Brighouse
In April 2007 Tim Brighouse (pictured), whose career had spanned three decades, announced his decision to retire.
He had been chief education officer in Oxfordshire (where he once interviewed me for a job - which I didn 't get!) and then, after a brief professorship at Keele University, chief education officer in Birmingham, whose LEA Ofsted described in 2002 as 'an example to all others of what can be done, even in the most demanding urban environment '.
Finally, in his role as London schools commissioner, he had overseen the London Challenge, a scheme to make the capital 'a world leader in education '.
Peter Wilby noted that Brighouse had been described as 'charismatic, visionary, inspirational, even saintly ' and he quoted a former Downing Street aide as saying 'He 's wonderful. Everybody will tell you that ' (Wilby 2007).
Miscellaneous
Following a series of revelations in the media, Ruth Kelly announced new measures to prevent sex offenders from working in schools (The Guardian 20 January 2006).
An employment tribunal in Leeds decided that Aishah Azmi, a Muslim teaching assistant who had refused to remove her veil when male colleagues were present in the classroom, was not the victim of religious discrimination. She was sacked (The Guardian 20 October, 25 November 2006).

The Blair legacy
Tony Blair ended his decade as prime minister by offering the Church of England a multi-million-pound expansion programme which, over a five year period, would see the number of church-run academies increase by a hundred. It was, perhaps, an unsurprising gesture by a man whose enthusiasm for faith schools had become almost an obsession.
Whether or not it was unsurprising, for many people it was certainly unwelcome. National Secular Society president Terry Sanderson commented
The Church of England cannot get children into church, so it is determined to bring church into school, where the children have no choice and no escape. It is Mr Blair 's final, self-indulgent gift to the religious establishment. (The Guardian19 May 2007)
Blair left 10 Downing Street at the end of June 2007. He was said to have been very concerned about his 'legacy ' and worried that he would be remembered for just one thing: the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq. On that, only time will tell.
In education, the high hopes of many on that spring morning in May 1997 had been sadly dashed. Instead of trying to repair some of the damage done by the Thatcher and Major governments, Blair and his adviser Adonis had actually made the situation worse: they had extended covert selection under the guise of specialism, expanded privatised provision of schools and services, further diminished the role of local education authorities, and hugely increased the role of churches and other faith groups in educational provision.
Then there were the fiascos: David Blunkett 's vicious rows with Ofsted chief Chris Woodhead; the botched introduction of Curriculum 2000 leading to the crisis in AS and A Levels in 2002 when 300,000 papers had to be remarked; Estelle Morris 's denigration of comprehensive schools and her resignation; and Ruth Kelly 's decision not to implement Tomlinson 's diploma proposals.
Writing in The Guardian (8 December 2009) Polly Curtis observed that the Blair decade had seen a trend towards a more traditional style of education: 'rigorous approaches to behaviour, the rise of the uniform, increasing setting in schools and thorough testing '. Schools had certainly benefited from a vastly increased budget - a 56 per cent increase over the ten years. Exam results had improved: the proportion of pupils getting five good GCSEs including English and maths had risen from 40.7 per cent in 2000 to 47.3 per cent in 2008. But she warned that under pressure from league tables, targets and Ofsted, some 'perverse incentives ' had emerged:
Schools rushed to introduce more vocational qualifications to allow them to climb the league tables. When maths and English were included in the league table measure, schools began entering children early for those exams, then allowing them to drop the subjects once they had attained the all-important C grade. It also drove schools to focus on children on the C/D borderline at the expense of others. (Curtis 2009)
Peter Mortimore summed up the period thus:
Much needed to be done when this government came into office in 1997. And many teachers wanted to help improve schools and make our society more equal. But, instead of the formulation of a long-term improvement plan based on the two big questions - what sort of education system is suitable for a modern society, and how can excellence and equity be made to work together - schools got top-down diktat. Successive ministers, and especially their advisers, thought they knew 'what works '. They cherry-picked research, suppressed evaluations that gave them answers they did not want, and compounded the mess. Trusting teachers - which is what ministers do in the best-performing countries - was not on the agenda. (Mortimore 2009)
Simon Jenkins was equally disillusioned. He noted that the 1944 Education Act and the abolition of the eleven plus in the 1960s had 'sought to break the dominance of religion and class over public sector schooling in Britain ' and that 'to a large extent they succeeded '. But he warned: 'Ever since, religion and class have been fighting their way back. Blair and Adonis are their latest champions. This is archaic ' (Jenkins 2006).
If only Blair and Adonis had heeded the advice of Chitty and Dunford in 1999:
Only when the Labour government understands the importance of creating a single unified system of fully comprehensive secondary schools under local democratic control and without selective enclaves, will the country have an education system of which we can truly be proud. (Chitty and Dunford 1999:32)

Chapter 11 : 2007-2010
Brown and Balls: mixed messages

The new administration
Brown and Balls
Tony Blair was replaced as prime minister by former chancellor of the exchequer Gordon Brown (pictured). His new administration immediately announced that the education department would be split in two: the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) with Ed Balls as secretary of state, and the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) under John Denham. (Balls 's official title was 'Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families ', though he was usually referred to as 'the children 's secretary ').
There was some logic to this division. DCSF brought together all policy relating to children and young people: in addition to overseeing schools, it shared youth justice with the Ministry of Justice, child poverty with the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions, children 's health with the Department of Health, and youth sport with the Department for Culture. It also took the 'respect ' agenda from the Home Office. DIUS took science and innovation from the Department for Trade and Industry and would be responsible for the development, funding and performance of higher education, both teaching and research; together with adult learning, including Train to Gain and basic skills. It would oversee the £4bn adult portion of the Learning and Skills Council budget. One of its main aims was the improvement of graduate skills.
But there were complications in the arrangement. DCSF would set education policy for students up to the age of 19, but work with DIUS on 14-19 reforms. School pupils in the 14 to 19 age group and sixth form college students would come under DCSF, but general further education college students and apprentices aged 16 to 19 were the responsibility of DIUS, though they would be funded via local education authorities. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) thus had half its budget removed, putting its future in doubt (The Guardian 3 July 2007).
In the event, DIUS only lasted two years. In June 2009 it was abolished and its responsibilities subsumed into a new Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), led by Lord (Peter) Mandelson.
In his inaugural statement, the new children 's secretary Ed Balls (pictured) said he would introduce legislation to raise the school leaving age to 18, improve school discipline, remove barriers to further expansion of the academies programme, and give teachers more scope to decide when pupils should be tested. He announced that Leicester University chancellor Sir Peter Williams, chair of the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education, would conduct a review of maths teaching in primary schools. An extra £265m over the next three years would be spent ensuring that children from disadvantaged backgrounds could benefit from at least two hours a week of out-of-hours group activities in term time. Secondary teachers would be given an extra training day a year, and a scheme to encourage graduates to teach in inner-city schools would be expanded beyond London. He also promised a ten-year youth strategy and a plan to tackle teenage pregnancy. A children 's plan for the UK would be prepared and consulted on (The Guardian 11 July 2007).
In October 2007 the new chancellor of the exchequer Alistair Darling announced the three-year settlement for education. A 2.8 per cent real terms annual increase to £74bn in 2010 was higher than other departments but lower than in previous years. Teachers ' leaders pointed out that the budget for each pupil would rise from £5,500 in 2007-8 to £6,600 in 2010-11 but that this was still far short of the cost of a private school education. Darling also promised £250m to fund the Children 's Plan scheme to make sure children arrived at school ready to learn and able to benefit from personalised support (The Guardian 10 October 2007).
In his first major speech on education, Gordon Brown told an audience of educationists at Greenwich University that 'failing ' schools would have five years to improve their pupils ' GCSE results or they would face take-over or closure. He set out wide-ranging plans to expand childcare, eradicate illiteracy and introduce more work-based apprenticeships to persuade more 16 year olds to stay on in education. 'This is a determined and systematic agenda to end failure ', he said. 'We will see it through. We will not flinch from the task ' (The Guardian 1 November 2007).
As we saw in the previous chapter, Lord (Andrew) Adonis had wielded enormous influence over education policy in the Blair administration. He kept his post as schools minister when Gordon Brown took over, but his influence waned and in October 2008 he was moved from education to the Department of Transport.

Cameron and Gove
Meanwhile, Conservative party leader David Cameron (pictured) announced that the Tories would 'revolutionise ' education by supporting the formation of parent-run co-operative schools paid for by local authorities. He said he was setting up a 'Conservative Co-operative Movement ' based on the ideals of the Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers, the world 's first successful co-operative.
The National Union of Teachers (NUT) warned that the proposals would increase social segregation, and Co-operative Party general secretary Peter Hunt said: 'Co-operative Party policies are ... rooted in Labour philosophy. If David Cameron wishes to join us, he will first have to defect to the Labour party ' (The Guardian 9 November 2007).
The new shadow education secretary was Michael Gove (pictured).
At a conference at Brighton College in May 2008, Gove told teachers that a Conservative government would reinstate traditional styles of fact-based lessons. Generations of children had been let down by so-called progressive education policies which had taught skills and 'empathy ' instead of bodies of knowledge, he said.
He condemned the 'pupil-centred learning ' theories which had gained support in the 1960s for 'dethroning ' the teacher:
It is an approach to education that has been called progressive, but in fact is anything but. It privileges temporary relevance over a permanent body of knowledge which should be passed on from generation to generation ... We need to tackle this misplaced ideology wherever it occurs.
NUT acting general secretary Christine Blower said: 'Gove 's attack on child-centred learning is an absurd caricature of reality ... If there has been a dethroning of teachers, it has been because successive politicians have decided that they know better than teachers about how children learn ' (The Guardian 9 May 2008).

The Children 's Plan
In December 2007 the government published its Children 's Plan Building brighter futures. This important and ambitious document was based on widespread consultation involving children, young people, parents, teachers and policy makers, and was designed to underpin and inform all future government policy relating to children, their families and schools. It aimed to eradicate child poverty and reduce illiteracy and antisocial behaviour by 2020. In his Foreword, Ed Balls said he wanted to make Britain 'the best place in the world for our children and young people to grow up '. (DCSF 2007:3)
The plan was based on five principles: * government does not bring up children - parents do - so government needs to do more to back parents and families; * all children have the potential to succeed and should go as far as their talents can take them; * children and young people need to enjoy their childhood as well as grow up prepared for adult life; * services need to be shaped by and responsive to children, young people and families, not designed around professional boundaries; and * it is always better to prevent failure than tackle a crisis later. (DCSF 2007:5-6)
It set ten goals to be achieved by 2020: * enhance children and young people 's well-being, particularly at key transition points in their lives; * every child ready for success in school, with at least 90 per cent developing well across all areas of the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile by age 5; * every child ready for secondary school, with at least 90 per cent achieving at or above the expected level in both English and mathematics by age 11; * every young person with the skills for adult life and further study, with at least 90 per cent achieving the equivalent of five higher level GCSEs by age 19; and at least 70 per cent achieving the equivalent of two A levels by age 19; * parents satisfied with the information and support they receive; * all young people participating in positive activities to develop personal and social skills, promote well-being and reduce behaviour that puts them at risk; * employers satisfied with young people 's readiness for work; * child health improved, with the proportion of obese and overweight children reduced to 2000 levels; * child poverty halved by 2010 and eradicated by 2020; and * significantly reduce by 2020 the number of young offenders receiving a conviction, reprimand, or final warning for a recordable offence for the first time, with a goal to be set in the Youth Crime Action Plan. (DCSF 2007:14)
The plan attempted to address a series of highly critical reports on British childhood by Unicef and others, and to demonstrate evidence of Gordon Brown 's administration 's much talked-of 'vision '. There would be new playgrounds and youth centres, personal tutors and one-to-one classes to give struggling pupils a chance to catch up and their parents a contact at school. There would be radical reform of the curriculum and testing regimes, and a mandatory master 's-level qualification for all new teachers. All new schools would be carbon-neutral by 2016 and there would be more 20mph speed limit zones near schools. A dozen strategy reviews - on areas including drugs and alcohol, sex education, bullying and the commercialisation of childhood - would determine how the targets were to be met.
Children 's campaigners welcomed the plan.
Children 's Society chief executive Bob Reitemeier said: 'The responsibility for childhood rests with us all and we are encouraged that the children 's plan looks beyond education to address fundamental areas such as parents and play. '
Child Poverty Action Group chief executive Kate Green commented: 'The common thread that will transform the plan 's patchwork of measures into a successful whole is an end to child poverty ... It is now up to the Treasury to make sure that ... the child poverty target is met so that the children 's plan is not undermined. '
Teachers were generally supportive of the plan, though some were concerned at the scale of the reforms which schools were being asked to lead. John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said the plan would make 'massive demands on schools ' which would need the support of the full range of public services. 'If schools are to be placed at the core of social reform for children, as the breadth of the children 's plan suggests, this places tremendous expectations on schools and their leaders ', he said (The Guardian 12 December 2007).
 Download The Children 's Plan (pdf text 640kb).

Legislation
There were three major education acts in this period: * 2008 Education and Skills Act; * 2009 Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act; * 2010 Children, Schools and Families Act (much reduced in scope because of the impending general election).

2008 Education and Skills Act
The Education and Skills Bill was jointly sponsored by DCSF and DIUS.
The Act (26 November 2008): * raised the education leaving age to 18. Young people would be required to participate in education or training until their 18th birthday through:
- full-time education or training, including school, college and home education;
- work-based learning, such as an Apprenticeship; or
- part-time education or training, if they were employed, self-employed or volunteering more than 20 hours a week; * rationalised the regulation and monitoring regime for independent schools and non-maintained special schools; * improved careers education for 11 to 16 year olds; * transferred responsibility for delivering the 'Connexions ' service (which offered a wide range of support to young people) to local authorities; * empowered local authorities to arrange learning difficulty assessments in a person 's final year of compulsory education and up to the age of 25 for any young person who would benefit from one; * placed a duty on the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to ensure the free provision of basic skills and first full level 2 qualification courses; * placed a duty on the LSC to ensure that 19 to 25 year olds who were undertaking their first full level 3 qualification did not have to pay tuition fees; * required school governing bodies to invite and consider the views of pupils on policy matters which affected them; * gave young people the right to express a school preference for sixth-form education and to appeal against any decision made; * required local authorities to produce annual reports on school admission arrangements in their area; and * made minor changes to the legislative regime governing the National Curriculum so that, from 2009, Key Stage 3 tests would no longer be compulsory.
 Download the Education and Skills Act 2008 (pdf text 672kb).

2009 Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act
This Act (12 November 2009): * created a statutory framework for apprenticeships and a right to an apprenticeship for suitably qualified 16-18 year olds; * gave employees the right to request time off for training, and required employers to consider such requests seriously; * abolished the Learning and Skills Council; * transferred responsibility for funding education and training for 16-18 year olds to local authorities; * made provisions with respect to the education of offenders; * created the Young Person 's Learning Agency, the Skills Funding Agency, the Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator (Ofqual), and a new agency to carry out the non-regulatory functions currently performed by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority; * strengthened the accountability of children 's services; * amended intervention powers in respect of schools which were causing concern; * established a new parental complaints service; * changed the school inspection arrangements; * created a new negotiating body for support staff pay and conditions; and * made provisions in respect of pupil and student behaviour.
The bill gave Ed Balls and John Denham 153 new powers. 'Is this the most centralising education bill in history? ' asked Warwick Mansell. He noted that under the 1944 Education Act the minister of education had had just three central duties: 'to promote the education of the people of England and Wales '; 'to promote the progressive development of schools and colleges '; and 'to secure that local authorities execute the national policy for providing a very comprehensive educational service '. But in the last twenty years, he argued, there had been 'a steady growth in the powers of central government, with the introduction of the national curriculum, national teaching strategies, and the targets and league table regime, all overseen and directed by ministers and civil servants ' (Mansell 2009a).
Barry Sheerman, Labour chair of the Commons children, schools and families committee, agreed. 'There does seem to be a general feeling out there, in the evidence the committee has received on several inquiries, of people desiring a swing back towards local autonomy ', he said. 'Ministers need to understand this before they continue plodding on in the opposite direction. '
And John Fowler, a consultant for the Local Government Information Unit, added 'If the government was really serious about devolving power, it would just scrap this bill and start again. I cannot see that happening. ' It didn 't.
 Download the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 (pdf text 1.0mb).

2009 White Paper: Your child, your schools, our future
Before the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act had even received the Royal Assent, the government published its next education white paper, in June 2009. Your child, your schools, our future was to form the basis for the 2009 Children, Schools and Families Bill (which was intended to become the 2010 Children, Schools and Families Act, though most of it would be lost in the run-up to the general election).
The white paper signalled the abandonment of what many had seen as Blair 's most significant education reform - the National Strategies for literacy and numeracy. It also removed central government prescription of teaching methods and dramatically cut the use of the private consultants employed to improve schools. Schools would have more freedom and would be enabled to establish networks of school-to-school support to help drive up standards in a 'new era of localism '. Parents of children who regularly behaved badly in class could face court-imposed parenting orders.
The white paper 's key points were: * a pupil guarantee setting out new entitlements to personalised support for every child, matched by a parent guarantee for every parent; * all schools to have good behaviour, strong discipline, order and safety; * all pupils to be taught in a way that meets their needs; * all pupils to have opportunities to take part in sport and cultural activities; * all schools to promote their pupils ' health and well-being; * schools to work in partnership with other schools and with wider children 's services; * local consortia to offer a choice of every one of the new diplomas to 14-19 year-olds; * partnerships of primary schools to share specialist teaching; * develop a system for accrediting good education providers who wish to run groups of schools; * more academies and trust schools; * develop a system for accrediting good education providers to run groups of schools; * strong accountability and rapid intervention when needed to further improve schools; * expand the role of 'School Improvement Partners ' (SIPs); * develop a new School Report Card (SRC); * give schools greater flexibility and encourage greater innovation; * improve the relationship between central government, local authorities and schools; * new Masters degree in Teaching and Learning; * better development of support staff; and * governing bodies ' fundamental duties to children, young people and the wider community to be enshrined in law.
 Download the White Paper Your child, your schools, our future (pdf text 2.2mb).

2009 Children, Schools and Families Bill
These proposals formed the basis of the Children, Schools and Families Bill.
One of the bill 's provisions, first announced by ministers in October 2008, was that sex education from the age of five would be made a compulsory part of the national curriculum in primary and secondary schools. Schools would not be allowed to opt out, and faith schools would be given guidance on how to provide sex and relationship education - to include contraception, abortion and homosexuality - alongside conflicting religious beliefs (The Guardian 24 October 2008).
But religious groups objected, and the government amended the new regulations, which were due to come into effect in September 2011. While all schools would still be required to teach sex education, it now said that parents could withdraw children under 15 from the lessons, which would only be compulsory for 15 and 16 year olds (The Guardian 5 November 2009).
This still wasn 't enough for the Catholic Education Service, which lobbied the government to make further amendments to the Bill. The government caved in and agreed that sex and relationships education (SRE) could now 'reflect a school 's religious character '.
Campaigners said the change would allow faith schools to discourage the use of contraception and teach that homosexuality was wrong. The Accord Coalition (a newly-formed group of Hindu, Christian and Humanist organisations campaigning to stop state-funded schools from discriminating against students and teachers on the grounds of religion) accused Balls of implicitly condoning homophobia in schools and undermining his own attempts to tackle homophobic bullying. Chair of Accord Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain said:
It is astonishing that the government plans to deny young people of their right to accurate, balanced SRE ... Children at faith schools have just as much right to information that could help them avoid an unwanted pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection. (The Guardian 18 February 2010)
A DCSF spokesman dismissed the complaints:
All maintained schools will be required to teach full programmes of study in line with the principles outlined in the bill, including promoting equality and encouraging acceptance of diversity. Schools with a religious character will be free to express their faith and reflect the ethos of their school, but what they cannot do is suggest that their views are the only ones. (The Guardian 18 February 2010)
In other words, a Catholic school would be required to teach children the facts about contraception, but would be allowed to try to persuade them that its use was immoral.
Balls insisted the amendment would not 'water down ' the bill: it would still require state schools to teach pupils about the importance of stable relationships, including civil partnerships, and it would forbid the promotion of homophobia.
Liberal Democrat schools spokesman David Laws accused ministers of being in a 'terrific muddle ' over the issue and said the amendment 'completely undermines the objectives of this part of the bill ' (The Guardian 23 February 2010).
Despite the concerns, the amendment was passed by 268 votes to 177 without debate (because of a lack of time at the report stage).
Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) education policy adviser Alison Ryan said: 'We believe this amendment is unhelpful and unnecessary because it upsets the balance of the bill by placing the religious character of the school above the promotion of equality and tolerance of diversity. '
National Secular Society executive director Keith Porteous Wood commented: 'The government have once more bowed to pressure from the Catholic church, betraying the children in faith schools who have a right to objective and balanced sex education ' (The Guardian 24 February 2010).
And an editorial in The Guardian commented:
This looks like a case of the government being led away from the path of righteousness by ecclesiastical lobbying, which has happened several times before. There was, for instance, the climbdown over the plan to force faith schools to take some children from outside their own flock. There was also section 37 of the 2008 Education Act, which undercut Labour 's solid record on discrimination at work by allowing schools to hand-pick staff on the basis of their creed. Many devout people - and many believers in faith schools - are represented by the Accord Coalition, which argues that no state-funded institution should be exempted from norms that all other public bodies must follow. Unless all religious schools are required to see the light, the contradictions will become unsustainable. The recurring pattern of church lobbying and Whitehall climbdowns is testing society 's faith in church schools as being a force for good. (The Guardian 24 February 2010)

2010 Children, Schools and Families Act
In the event, with the general election just a month away, all the sex education provisions (and many others) were lost from the Children, Schools and Families Act (8 April 2010).
 Download the Children, Schools and Families Act 2010 (pdf text 124kb).

Other Acts relating to children and young people
In addition to the three major education acts summarised above, there were three other acts relating to children and young people during this period:
2007 Further Education and Training Act
The Further Education and Training Act (23 October 2007) made provisions about: * the Learning and Skills Council for England; * institutions within the further education sector; * industrial training levies; * the formation of, and investment in, companies and charitable incorporated organisations by higher education corporations; and * the making of Welsh Assembly Measures in relation to the field of education.
 Download the Further Education and Training Act 2007 (pdf text 196kb).
2008 Children and Young Persons Act
The Children and Young Persons Act (13 November 2008) made provisions about: * the delivery of local authority social work services for children and young persons; * the functions of local authorities and others in relation to children and young persons; * the enforcement of care standards in relation to certain establishments or agencies connected with children; and * the independent review of determinations relating to adoption.
 Download the Children and Young Persons Act 2008 (pdf text 228kb).
2010 Child Poverty Act
The Child Poverty Act (25 March 2010): * set targets relating to the eradication of child poverty; and * made other provisions about child poverty.
 Download the Child Poverty Act 2010 (pdf text 140kb).

Curriculum reviews
Three major reviews of the curriculum were undertaken in this period: * the government 's 'Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum ' (IRPC), conducted by Sir Jim Rose, published its interim report in December 2008 and its final report in April 2009; * the Cambridge Primary Review, which had begun work in 2006, published Towards a new primary curriculum in February 2009 and its final report Children, their World, their Education in 2010; * the House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee (CSFC) published its report on the National Curriculum in April 2009.

Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum
As the Cambridge Primary Review was getting into its stride, Ed Balls threw a spanner into the works. On 9 January 2008 he wrote to Sir Jim Rose inviting him to conduct 'an independent review of the primary curriculum ' with a view to making 'final recommendations to the Secretary of State by March 2009 so that the new primary curriculum can be introduced from September 2011 '.
The government 's justification for this new review of primary education was presumably that it had already commissioned a review of the secondary curriculum and had introduced an early years 'foundation stage '. As Rose put it, you couldn 't 'just extend one backwards, the other forwards, tie a knot in the middle and say that 's primary education ' (Wilby 2008).
However, given that the Cambridge Review - the biggest investigation of primary education since Plowden - was already under way, many felt that the Rose review was designed as a spoiler. The government was fed up with adverse headlines like 'Poor performance linked to substandard classrooms ', 'Government policy has created impersonalised education ', and 'Study reveals stressed out 7 to 11 year olds ' (Wilby 2008). It was also concerned that the Cambridge Review would condemn England 's testing regime - the hated SATs. So it created the IRPC as a diversion, 'with a suspiciously similar email address, a claim that it too is independent, and an identical deadline for its final report of spring 2009 ' (Wilby 2008).
There were other concerns about the IRPC. One was that the Qualifications and Curriculum Agency (QCA) was required to produce draft programmes of study based on the report 's recommendations during the consultation period, effectively rendering redundant most of the responses. Another was that the views of representatives of local authorities and teachers ' professional associations who attended meetings during the 'informal ' consultations were apparently excluded.
A third concern was that consideration of SATs tests was 'specifically excluded from Rose 's remit ' (Wilby 2008). Introducing the IRPC 's interim report on 8 December 2008, Rose urged ministers to review the arrangements for SATs (already abolished in all parts of the UK except England). 'I 'm ruled out of making recommendations about testing ', he told Polly Curtis. 'That 's not to say every school doesn 't ask about testing. It 's the elephant in the room ' (The Guardian 8 December 2008).

IRPC Interim Report
The report 's main recommendations were: * there should be a smoother transition between early years and primary education, and between primary and secondary education; * subjects should be combined with cross-curricular study; * teachers should have more flexibility within a richer curriculum; * there should be more and better computer education; * the value of play to children 's learning and development should be made explicit in any revisions to the primary curriculum; * primary schools should focus on teaching only one or two foreign languages; * children should acquire a range of personal, social and emotional qualities essential to their health, well-being and life as a responsible citizen in the 21st century; and * summer-born children should start primary school in the September after their fourth birthday, with some children starting part-time.
The report proposed that the primary curriculum should comprise six 'areas of learning ': * understanding English, communication and languages; * mathematical understanding; * scientific and technological understanding; * human, social and environmental understanding; * understanding physical health and well-being; and * understanding the arts and design.
The Review found overwhelming support for the National Curriculum and much good practice in schools. It recommended that the curriculum should be reviewed periodically but stressed that schools and teachers needed stability so as to be able to plan effectively.
 Download the IRPC Interim Report (pdf text 2.1mb).

The Cambridge Primary Review - Towards a new primary curriculum
In order to contribute to the final IRPC report, the Cambridge Review brought forward publication of its material on the curriculum. Towards a New Primary Curriculum was published on 20 February 2009 in two parts: Past and Present (pdf text 623kb) and The Future (pdf text 737kb). Its authors commented:
Some readers may become impatient with the history, the account of witnesses ' concerns and our apparent preoccupation with the problematic. For them, solutions are more important. They are of course welcome to turn straight to Part 2. Yet it is only by understanding the history, recognising the deeply-rooted and often cyclic nature of the problems, and by accepting the inadequacy of some of the surrounding discourse, that we can make progress. That is why the grounding provided by Part 1 is essential. Without it, we shall simply repeat past mistakes. (Alexander and Flutter 2009a:1)
It bemoaned the politicisation of the curriculum and warned that children 's lives were being impoverished by the government 's insistence that schools focus on literacy and numeracy at the expense of creative teaching. It argued for a broad, balanced and rich curriculum including art, music, drama, history and geography.
In the authors ' view, a future primary curriculum must: * 'confront and attempt to address the problems and challenges in current arrangements; * be grounded in explicit principles of design and implementation; and * pursue and remain faithful to a clear and defensible statement of educational aims and values. ' (Alexander and Flutter 2009b:21)

CSFC Report on the National Curriculum
The House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee published its report on the National Curriculum on 2 April 2009.
The key points in its 32 conclusions and recommendations were: * the National Curriculum was in 'urgent need of significant reform ': it should prescribe as little as possible, parents should be better informed, the Programmes of Study for the new secondary curriculum were 'overly complex '; * the Early Years Foundation Stage and the Early Learning Goals should be reviewed; * the curriculum freedoms that academies enjoyed should be immediately extended to all maintained schools; * a system of Single Level Tests linked to targets, and potentially to funding, could further narrow the curriculum; * the idea that there was one best way to teach was not supported by the research evidence and so should not be the basis for the delivery of the National Curriculum; * the Department should cease presenting the National Strategies guidance as a prop for the teaching profession and adopt a more positive understanding of how schools and teachers might be empowered in relation to the National Curriculum; * the Department should spend less on producing guidance and more on the dissemination of research findings; * the theory and practice of curriculum design should be given a much higher profile within the standards for Qualified Teacher Status; * the Department should show how it would support the move to a much less prescriptive curriculum and less centrally-directed approach to its delivery; * there should be better continuity and coherence in the current National Curriculum - and across the National Curriculum, Early Years Foundation Stage and 14-19 arrangements; * the Department should take more account of the views of children and young people; * the Department should put in place a cycle of around five years for curriculum review and reform and avoid initiating additional change outside that cycle: reviews should scrutinise the Early Years Foundation Stage, National Curriculum and 14-19 arrangements as a continuum, not as discrete 'chunks '; * the agency with main responsibility for the development of the National Curriculum should be truly independent from the Department; * like the Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator (Ofqual), the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency (QCDA) should be independent of Ministers and required to report to Parliament through the Select Committee; * there should be 'an overarching statement of aims for the National Curriculum ' to provide it with 'a stronger sense of purpose, continuity and coherence '; * a statement of provision for learners from 0 to 19 should be introduced; * there should be 'an overarching diploma ' which would replace all other qualifications for learners aged 14 to 19; and * these changes must be accompanied by improved communication and co-ordination between teachers and practitioners across the different phases of education. (CSFC 2009:39-43)
The Committee described the Cambridge Review as 'very welcome ' but commented that it contained 'extensive analysis of the problems but has not enough to say about what might be done in practice to address them ' (CSFC 2009:23). It went on:
The Rose Review and the Cambridge Review both recognise that the primary curriculum is overly full, but neither offers a practical basis that appeals to us for reducing the load. As we have indicated, we would see greater merit in stipulating a basic entitlement for literacy and numeracy and offering general guidelines on breadth and balance to be interpreted by schools and teachers themselves. (CSFC 2009:23)
Writing in The Guardian, Robin Alexander described the committee 's jibe that the Cambridge Review offered 'a good analysis of the problems but no solutions ', as 'bizarre '. He continued:
Apart from the detailed proposals on curriculum aims, substance, structure, development and implementation, which the committee appears not to have noticed, other ideas from the Cambridge review appear, almost verbatim, in the committee 's own recommendations: abandoning the national strategies in their present form; supporting local ownership; reconfiguring the roles of national agencies, local authorities and schools; making Curriculum Matters central to initial teacher training. More bizarre still, the committee 's report includes as an appendix a comparison of the Rose and Cambridge curriculum reports, which says enough to contradict its criticisms of both of them. (Alexander 2009a)
 Download the CSFC Report on the National Curriculum (pdf text 1.5mb).

IRPC Final report
The IRPC 's final report was published on 30 April 2009. Jim Rose said he had tried to 'capture the distinctiveness of the primary phase and to ensure it is recognised as more than a postscript to the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) and a prelude to secondary education ' (DCSF 2009a:9).
The report 's key points were: * subjects, and the essential knowledge, skills and understanding they represented, were important but were not sufficient - cross-curricular studies were important, too; * there should be a stronger focus on curriculum progression; * by the age of seven, children should have a secure grasp of the literacy and numeracy skills they needed to make good progress thereafter; * the teaching and learning of information and communication technology (ICT) should be improved; * there should be greater emphasis on personal development through a more integrated and simpler framework for schools; * there should be stronger links between the EYFS and Key Stage 1, and between Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 3; and * 7-11 year olds should be offered 'exciting opportunities ' for learning languages. (DCSF 2009a:10-12)
Writing in The Guardian, Mike Baker compared the Rose review with the Plowden report of 1967. He noted that the Plowden committee had had 25 members, including several heads, and had benefited from having six school inspectors and one local authority inspector seconded to it throughout. It had taken three years and produced 556 pages covering 'the physical development of children, the growth of the brain, parental attitudes, social change, health and social services, and the ways schools were organised, designed and equipped '.
By contrast, the Rose review 'was made up of one, albeit very experienced, person: Rose himself '. He had an advisory group of leading heads - which met just five times, his report was only 154 pages long and restricted in scope - his remit didn 't even allow him to consider the question of tests.
Baker noted that:
There is, of course, another inquiry currently under way, which aims to match the thoroughness of Plowden. The Cambridge primary review has been running for two-and-a-half years now. Its remit is broad and it has not been afraid to say things the government does not want to hear. And there is the rub. In the past, governments set up big independent education inquiries; now they prefer to have their own short, sharp reviews - and seem scarcely interested in anything else. (Baker 2009)
A statutory consultation on the IRPC 's recommendations followed by publication of revised programmes of study and guidance should have enabled the new primary curriculum to be implemented, as planned, in September 2011. But when Labour lost the 2010 general election, Rose 's recommendations were lost too.
 Download the IRPC Final Report (pdf text 3.3mb).

Cambridge Primary Review - Children, their World, their Education
The Cambridge Primary Review published its final report on 16 October 2009. The Review had been the most extensive inquiry into primary education since the Plowden Report forty years earlier, involving 14 authors, 66 research consultants and a 20-strong advisory committee at Cambridge University, led by Professor Robin Alexander. Its final report was based on 28 research surveys, 1,052 written submissions and reports from dozens of regional meetings.
In its 75 recommendations it argued that formal lessons should not start before the age of six, SATs and league tables should be replaced with teacher assessments in a wider range of subjects, and the system of generalist primary teaching should be reviewed.
The report was critical of political decision-making processes. It condemned: centralisation, secrecy and the 'quiet authoritarianism ' of the new centres of power; the disenfranchising of local voice; the rise of unelected and unaccountable groups and individuals taking key decisions behind closed doors: the 'empty rituals ' of consultation; the replacement of professional dialogue by the monologic discourse of power; the politicisation of the entire educational enterprise so that it becomes impossible to debate ideas or evidence which are not deemed to be 'on message ', or which are 'not invented here '; and, latterly coming to light, financial corruption. (Alexander 2009b:481)
It noted that since 1989, and especially since 1997, national government had 'tightened its control over what goes on in local authorities and schools '; and warned that 'the power of government and its agencies has reached far more deeply into the recesses of professional action and thought than is proper in a democracy or good for schools themselves ' (Alexander 2009b:508).
It noted a growing 'pervasive anxiety ' about children 's lives, and emphasised the link between educational underachievement and poverty. 'What is worrying is the persistence of a long tail of severely disadvantaged children whose early lives are unhappy, whose potential is unrealised and whose future is bleak ' (Alexander 2009b:71).
The Review 's conclusions were backed by all the teacher unions. National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) general secretary Mick Brookes said:
This comprehensive study of primary education must be taken seriously by government. The fact the work in progress has been completely ignored by the government is a sign of weakness. This report is truly independent, unlike work commissioned and controlled by the DCSF which largely says what it wants to hear. There are recommendations in this report that could transform the primary ethos and turn pessimism into hope. (The Guardian 16 October 2009)
NUT general secretary Christine Blower said:
It is absolutely extraordinary that the government has decided to ignore the Cambridge Review recommendations. Any government worth its salt, particularly in front of an impending general election, would have embraced this immensely rich report as a source of policy ideas. It is not too late for the government to recognise that not all good ideas emanate from the minds of civil servants. (The Guardian 16 October 2009)
And Nansi Ellis, head of education policy and research at the ATL, warned that 'primary education must not become a battlefield in the forthcoming election - children and their learning will be the first casualties ' (The Guardian 16 October 2009).
Unsurprisingly, the report was rubbished by the government. Schools minister Vernon Coaker said the government was already reforming the curriculum and testing, and accused Alexander 's report of suggesting a 'woolly ' accountability system:
It 's disappointing that a review which purports to be so comprehensive is simply not up to speed on many major changes in primaries. The world has moved on since this review was started. If every child making progress and reaching their potential is what matters, then Professor Alexander 's proposals are a backward step. ' (The Guardian16 October 2009)
And just to rub salt into the wound, Balls announced that every four year old in England would be offered a place at school or nursery so that they could start full-time education a year earlier. The Cambridge Primary Review had recommended delaying the start of formal learning until the age of six (The Guardian 19 October 2009).
Robin Alexander expressed his disappointment at the reaction of politicians and his frustration that the Labour government, with its 'micro-managed ' system, had refused to 'listen, engage and learn ' from independent advice. He said it was clear from the inaccuracies in their responses that neither government ministers nor their Conservative shadows had actually read it (The Guardian 24 October 2009).
Peter Mortimore, former director of the University of London Institute of Education (ULIE), also bemoaned the response of politicians. Writing inThe Guardian, he commented:
Weep, Cambridge team. Your efforts to produce clear analyses and innovative ideas in the interest of fostering something better than political point-scoring, repetitive myths and ideological rigidity have been strangled at birth. Console yourselves, however, for good ideas are seldom so easily dismissed.
He concluded:
The pity is that politicians, who pollsters tell us are only trusted by 13% of the population, can so easily make such fools of themselves by endeavouring to close down all thinking outside their own. How much wiser to welcome new ideas and give civil society, including teachers - who are trusted by 82% of the population - the chance to debate how best to improve the education of our youngest learners. (Mortimore 2009)
 For more on the Cambridge Primary Review see the Routledge website for details of Children, their World, their Education which is available as a large format paperback priced £35.99; the Cambridge Primary Review website, where many of the Review 's other reports are available free; my summary and review of Children, their World, their Education.

Nuffield Review of 14-19 education and training
In addition to these three major reviews of the curriculum, in February 2008 the Oxford-based Nuffield Foundation published its final report on education and training for 14-19 year olds.
Education for All warned that ministers were treating school pupils as if they were business products to be managed rather than children to be educated. The government 's aim of boosting the British economy was overshadowing the true role of schools in young people 's lives. Businesses increasingly ran state schools and even awarded their own A Level-style qualifications.
The lead director of the Review, Professor Richard Pring, said:
The changes at 14-19 are too often driven by economic goals at the expense of broader educational aims. This is reflected in the rather impoverished language drawn from business and management, rather than from a more generous understanding of the whole person. We need to give young learners far more than skills for employment alone, even if such skills are key to the country 's economy.
Inevitably, the DCSF rubbished the report. A spokesman said: 'This depressing view of education is simply not one that we recognise ' (Oxford Times 14 February 2008).
 Various documents, including a summary of Education for All, can be downloaded from the website of the Nuffield Review of 14-19 education and training.

Testing and assessment
Concerns about the level of testing in English schools - and particularly about the annual SATs tests - intensified during this period.
The QCA urged schools to stop 'drilling ' pupils for the tests. Chief executive Ken Boston warned that 'in many schools too much teaching time is taken up with practice tests and preparing for the key stage tests in English, mathematics and science, at the expense of actual teaching in these core subjects and other areas ' (The Guardian 11 August 2007).
Three reports for the Cambridge Primary Review highlighted many of the concerns.
One found that national tests at 7 and 11 left most children stressed and led to a 'pervasive anxiety ' about their lives and the world they were growing up in. Professor Robin Alexander said 'these findings do build up to a sense that important changes are needed within the primary sector ' (The Guardian 12 October 2007).
Another noted that English children were among the youngest in the world to start formal learning and were the most tested throughout their education. It found that parents were increasingly seeking alternative forms of education such as home schooling or Steiner schools to free their children from the state sector 's regime of testing and targets (The Guardian 8 February 2008).
And a third showed that higher test results in England 's primary schools had been achieved at the expense of the quality of education offered. Teacher-pupil relationships had been eroded by a focus on whole-class teaching and preparation for 'high stakes ' national tests (The Guardian 29 February 2008).

CSFC Report on Testing and Assessment
A further report, this time by MPs themselves, reached similar conclusions. The House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Select Committee report on Testing and Assessment, published in May 2008, warned the government that SATs tests had distorted the education of millions of children because schools focused on getting them through the tests rather than improving their knowledge and understanding. Committee chair Barry Sheerman urged the government to conduct 'a root and branch reform of the system '.
The report recommended: * an inquiry to find the extent of the problem of schools 'teaching to the test '; * a reduction in the number of times children were tested; * more use of internal teacher assessment; * whole-cohort tests should be replaced with sample testing of a handful of pupils in each school; and * the exams watchdog should conduct 'a full review of assessment standards ' as ministers had failed to address concerns about grade inflation.
 Download Testing and Assessment (pdf text 631kb).
Although the government was adamant it would keep the tests in England (they had already been abolished in other parts of the UK), it did at least make some attempt to respond to the worries about them by trialling new 'lighter touch ' tests. More than 400 schools took part in the two-year 'Making Good Progress ' pilot project in which children were tested when their teachers felt they were ready rather than at the end of the key stage. Ministers hoped the new tests, which formed part of the Children 's Plan, would replace the existing SATs tests from 2010 (The Guardian 9 May 2008).
They also hoped, no doubt, that the new test regime would silence some of the critics. But disaster was about to strike.

SATs fiasco
First, schools reported widespread IT problems with the summer 's SATs tests: markers struggled with the new online marking system and schools were unable to log on to register students at the start of this week 's tests (The Guardian 16 May 2008).
Then the publication of results for 11 and 14 year olds was delayed. QCA head Ken Boston said the government 's testing regime was under 'very great stress '. He told an emergency Commons select committee meeting that he was considering legal action against ETS, the American company which had failed to deliver the year 's SATs results on time. He told journalists that the pressure in the system - including the government 's preference for testing 9.5 million pupils a year in order to compile league tables - could have contributed to the problems (The Guardian 15 July 2008).
Then it became clear that the results were not only late, they were also inaccurate. ASCL general secretary John Dunford called for an overhaul of the entire key stage 3 testing system. He said:
The government and Ofsted use the SATs results to make judgements about whether schools will fail their inspections and heads can lose their jobs as a result. The results need to be accurate and schools will be much angrier at lack of accuracy than delay. Results will be scrutinised this year as never before and the number of appeals is almost certain to rocket. (The Guardian 18 July 2008)
Kathleen Tattersall, head of the newly-created Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator (Ofqual) warned that if the results proved to be as inaccurate as reports suggested, the government should annul them.
And two of the three major exam boards confirmed that they were not bidding for the five-year £165m contract to run the SATs because they did not believe there was a strong enough educational rationale for them (The Guardian19 July 2008).
Ministers ordered an inquiry into the fiasco, to be led by Lord Sutherland.
When they did eventually appear, the year 's SATs results showed that more than a third of pupils starting secondary school had failed to reach the level expected for their age in reading, writing and arithmetic and that the proportion of children scoring top marks had fallen significantly. Head teachers said it could be because schools were neglecting the brightest pupils so as to focus their effort on getting as many pupils as possible up to the national targets (The Guardian 6 August 2008).
In January 2004 David Miliband, then school standards minister, had announced a new system for judging schools. Since then, schools had been given a 'contextualised value added ' score (CVA), which took into account the number of students on free school meals and with special educational needs, ethnicity, age, gender and the spread of ability. Miliband had said CVA would be a 'fairer ' way to judge schools.
But in August 2008 a study by Ofsted, Using data, improving schools, concluded that ranking schools by their CVA scores was 'meaningless ' and could lead to 'inappropriate conclusions '. Its author, David Jesson, professor of education at the University of York, warned the government to use CVA 'with care ' and 'recognise its limitations '. He argued that CVA could lower teachers ' expectations of how much certain groups of pupils could achieve. 'Misusing the data to predict future performance could depress expectations of groups of pupils that have performed less well in previous years ', he said (The Guardian 6 August 2008).
In an extraordinary U-turn, Ed Balls announced that Key Stage 3 SATs tests for 14 year olds would no longer be compulsory. (The change was made in the 2008 Education and Skills Act). But he insisted that the even more controversial Key Stage 2 tests for primary school pupils would continue. He told parliament that there would be extensive changes to the national testing system which would halve the testing burden on schools, and a new 'report card ', based on a New York scheme, which would grade every school in England and give parents more information (The Guardian 15 October 2008).
Teacher unions welcomed the scrapping of the Key Stage 3 tests but expressed 'bitter disappointment ' at ministers ' resolve to preserve those at Key Stage 2. NAHT general secretary Mick Brookes said: 'We are dismayed at the decision to keep the current test arrangements for 11 year olds. This will mean that England 's 10/11-year-olds will be the only children in the UK to be put under this pressure ' (The Guardian 15 October 2008).
The government 's announcement that Key Stage 3 SATs were effectively to be abolished resulted in a dramatic drop - around fifty per cent - in the number of teachers taking part in courses run by the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC). Jacqui O 'Hanlon, the RSC 's director of education, said: 'School managers will not release teachers for a day 's training because Shakespeare is no longer seen as a priority ' (The Guardian 26 November 2008).
Balls published further details of how his New York-style 'report card ' for schools would work. It would pull together all the information currently available about schools into a single annual document, including test scores, ratings of how quickly children progressed, Ofsted scores and measures of child well-being through parent and pupil surveys. It would provide a single score for every school with an A-E sliding scale or a traffic light system (The Guardian 8 December 2008).
QCA chief executive Ken Boston resigned three days before the publication of Lord Sutherland 's report on the summer 's SATs problems, saying he was 'taking responsibility ' for the worst exam fiasco to hit schools in recent years. Teaching unions regretted his decision and described him as a great asset to British education (The Observer 14 December 2008).
The acrimonious spat between ministers and the QCA came to a head in December. The QCA board disbanded the National Assessment Agency (NAA), responsible for the SATs tests, and suspended the agency 's chief executive, David Gee. It also suspended Boston, having refused to accept his resignation. Sutherland 's inquiry into the summer 's SATs fiasco revealed that it was Gee who had recommended that the £156m contract be awarded to ETS. Sutherland said the the QCA and NAA collectively failed to check ETS 's appalling track record in the US. The report blamed everyone involved: ETS was 'not fit for purpose ', the QCA had failed to prevent the marking process spiralling into chaos, and DCSF officials had ignored the warning signs (The Guardian 17 December 2008).
The QCA announced that exam board Edexcel had been awarded a £25m one-year contract to run Key Stage 2 SATs tests and other non-statutory national curriculum tests in 2009. Edexcel had previously held the SATs contract from 2005 to 2007. But the QCA warned that the rush to appoint Edexcel to run the 2009 tests had left little time to test marking systems to ensure they did not collapse again. Before he was suspended in mid-December Ken Boston had written to Balls, warning him that whilst Edexcel was committed to achieving the deadline, there was 'no guarantee that events will not cause them to miss it ' (The Guardian 31 December 2008).

SATs boycott
At their annual conference in April 2009 NUT members voted to boycott the Key Stage 2 SATs tests. But instead of debating the sound educational reasons for doing so, they demanded a ten per cent pay rise and a minimum of a day a week to mark and prepare work. In The Guardian, Jenni Russell commented:
What timing. What judgement. Here were militant employees with secure jobs and good pensions picking this particular moment in our economic history to demand less work for more money. Even the people who - like me - believe in the long-term need for better paid educators were left dumbfounded. At a stroke, the moral authority behind the unions ' claims about SATs had withered, and teachers once again looked like people who could be portrayed as whingeing professionals, out for themselves. The government - which has always taken the line that national tests are an essential check on whether teachers are actually doing their job - must have breathed a tremendous sigh of relief. (Russell 2009)
Just days after NUT members voted to boycott SATs, members of the rival NASUWT union did exactly the opposite: they threatened to strike if ministers abolished the tests. Ed Balls thus faced the possibility of industrial action whatever he chose to do (The Guardian 16 April 2009).
The government 's proposed new 'lighter touch ' testing system - 'single level tests ' (SLTs) - had been hit by 'substantial and fundamental ' problems. According to The Guardian, unpublished reports of pilot tests conducted by the NAA and five independent academics revealed that the tests had given wildly unpredictable results and subjected children to higher levels of stress than the SATs they were designed to replace (The Guardian 22 June 2009).
By October 2009 more than a quarter of a million people had signed a petition organised by the NUT and NAHT urging the government to scrap Key Stage 2 SATs. The two unions began exploring with their members whether there would be widespread support for a boycott of the tests (The Guardian 2 November 2009).
In April 2010 head teacher members of the NUT and NAHT in England voted overwhelmingly for a boycott (The Guardian 16 April 2010).
Ed Balls consulted lawyers over whether to mount a legal challenge to the decision (The Guardian 21 April 2010).
Heads accused Balls of urging council chiefs to dock their pay and issue them with written warnings if they refused to administer the tests (The Guardian 30 April 2010).
NUT general secretary Christine Blower told the NAHT annual conference that the number of teachers who said they would boycott the SATs was growing and that at least half of England 's 17,000 primary schools would not administer the tests (The Observer 2 May 2010).
The SATs began on Monday 10 May - four days after the general election. A quarter of all primary schools boycotted them - a significant proportion but disappointing, given the level of support for the boycott expressed by heads and teachers and the hostility to the tests among the wider public.

Exams and qualifications
GCSE
GCSE results in 2007 showed an overall pass rate of 98 per cent with comprehensive schools improving more than independents and grammars in performance at the top grades. Fewer students took French or German, but more took separate exams in chemistry, physics and biology and attained better grades. ASCL general secretary John Dunford said:
GCSE students this year submitted over 26m papers and pieces of coursework. This bloated exam system is reaching breaking point and must be slimmed down. Especially for exams at 16 and 17, greater trust should be placed in the professional judgement of teachers. (The Guardian 24 August 2007)
The government barred state schools from offering Cambridge University exam board 's new elite International GCSE in core subjects, raising fears that the divide between state and private schools would grow as independent schools were enthusiastic about the new qualification (The Guardian 4 November 2009).

A Levels
The QCA said it would - for the first time - intervene in the setting of A Level papers to ensure they were more rigorous. Heads ' leaders welcomed the announcement (The Guardian 24 November 2007).

Ofqual
The Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator (Ofqual) was launched on 16 May 2008. Its head, Kathleen Tattersall, promised to investigate the 'reliability ' of exams (The Guardian 16 May 2008).

Diplomas
The first five of the government 's new diplomas - in construction, media, engineering, IT and society, and health and development - were due to be introduced in September 2008 for 40,000 students in 900 schools and colleges. By 2011 14 vocational diplomas would be available, and in October 2007 Ed Balls announced that three more diplomas, in science, languages and humanities, would be added to these. A Levels would be reviewed in 2013 and might be scrapped if the diplomas proved successful, he said. NUT general secretary Steve Sinnott said the move represented a 'fundamental change of heart ' by the government, which, under Tony Blair, had rejected Mike Tomlinson 's 2004 proposals to end the historic divide between academic and vocational education (The Guardian 24 October 2007).
In March 2008, Balls announced that an extended diploma with more emphasis on academic skills to prepare students for university would also be introduced in 2011. He hoped the new qualification would be backed by the universities. Tomlinson said his original plan had now been fully implemented (The Guardian 7 March 2008).
But the diplomas were not without their critics: * the Commons Children, Schools and Families Select Committee report on Testing and Assessment, published in May 2008, warned that the introduction of diplomas for 14 to 19 year olds was in danger of being undermined by insufficient teacher training, and urged ministers to end uncertainty in schools by deciding whether to abolish A Levels and GCSEs after the diplomas were introduced; * leading independent schools said the diplomas were too complex and decided to opt out; * researchers at ULIE warned of a widening gap between vocational and academic education, as private schools increasingly opted for a new range of academically elite qualifications, including the international baccalaureates and Cambridge University 's Pre-U (The Guardian 30 June 2008); and * in October 2008 the Commons public accounts committee warned that the government 's plan to introduce diplomas to replace A Levels and GCSEs in England was at risk because the new qualification was not seen as credible by parents, employers and universities. Nearly £30,000 had been spent for each of the 20,000 students who had just started diplomas and it was intended that the courses should be available to every 14 to 19 year old within five years. But, the MPs said, the government didn 't know the future costs of the scheme, many schools and colleges were not ready, and students were confused about the purpose of the diplomas. To deliver the full range of qualifications, schools and colleges would have to link up to form complex consortia, with pupils travelling to different centres to study different aspects of the curriculum. The report commended the aim of ending the academic-vocational divide but warned that careers guidance was so poor that pupils might be confused by the extra option of diplomas on top of the GCSEs, A Levels and vocational courses already available (The Guardian 7 October 2008).

Election battleground
Qualifications rapidly became a key election issue. As the 2009 exam results season began, the Conservatives accused the government of encouraging children to give up academic GCSEs in favour of vocational qualifications. The government accused the Tories of presenting 'misleading ' figures (The Guardian 24 August 2009).
There was a clear divide between the aims of Ball and Gove. Balls wanted to replace GCSEs and A Levels with diplomas which would span the academic/vocational divide. Gove wanted all children to have a purely academic grounding at least until the age of 16. Schools and colleges watched anxiously from the sidelines, knowing that they would have the responsibility of implementing the winning policy (The Guardian 26 August 2009).
Andrew Hall took up his post as the new chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency (QCDA), facing the possibility that if the Conservatives won the forthcoming general election he might quickly be out of a job (The Guardian 3 November 2009).

Schools
Building Schools for the Future
The Commons education select committee published its report on the early stages of the £45bn Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. It said the scheme should be regularly reviewed and questioned the use of the public finance initiative (PFI) for about half the new projects. Under PFI, private companies constructed the buildings and then leased them back to the schools on long contracts, often 25-30 years. The committee noted that central government often pressured local authorities into accepting academies as part of the BSF scheme and it argued that local authorities should have more freedom over the regeneration of schools (The Guardian 9 August 2007).
In October 2007 the new Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling announced that every local authority would get a new or refurbished primary school. A £200m fund would pay for building work for 75 schools by 2011, doubling the planned primary school building programme over the next three years (The Guardian 10 October 2007).
But the BSF programme had been beset with problems over its four-year history, as local authorities struggled to set up the PFI partnerships which provided most of the funding. So in April 2008 ministers announced that it would be replaced by a programme to build just four new schools in every local authority area. A DCSF spokesman said there were still 'ambitions ' for every school to have a plan in place, even if building work hadn 't started by 2020 (The Guardian 10 April 2008).
And an audit conducted by the government 's architecture watchdog, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), said that eight out of ten designs for secondary schools proposed under the BSF initiative were 'mediocre ' or 'not yet good enough ' and only one in five were considered to be 'good ' or 'excellent '. Problems identified in the forty proposed designs which were reviewed by CABE included bullying hotspots in secluded yards, noisy open plan areas which made teaching difficult, and classrooms which were too dark or prone to overheating on sunny afternoons (The Guardian 21 July 2008).

Academies and trust schools
While Tony Blair had been prime minister, Gordon Brown seemed to have little enthusiasm for academies and trust schools - at least, he had said very little about them until three months before Blair resigned. Then, in his first public pronouncement on the subject, he had praised the 'tremendous success of the academy movement ' (The Guardian 20 March 2007).
As prime minister, however, he seemed happy enough for Ed Balls to continue - indeed, to expand and intensify - the policy of handing over the education of the nation 's children to used car salesmen, carpet manufacturers and, of course, 'faith groups '.
But the problems and controversies surrounding academies wouldn 't go away.
Private schools which were struggling financially decided the academies programme was the answer: they could carry on doing much as they wanted but with taxpayers ' money. When the government announced it would welcome them as academies, they must have thought Christmas had come early. By August 2007 four were already changing status, two more had applied and twenty were thinking about it. Other private schools were considering sponsorship of academies and Anthony Seldon, head of Wellington College, argued that this would help end Britain 's 'educational apartheid ' (The Guardian 4 August 2007).
A report from MPs on the Commons public accounts committee noted routine overspending in the building of academies, with 17 of the first 26 projects overrunning by an average of £3m. And it warned that academies were still using exclusions to get behaviour under control, breaking laws by procuring services from their sponsors, and failing to engage with local communities (The Guardian 18 October 2007).
Twenty-one universities had been persuaded by ministers to adopt academies, but Oxford and Cambridge rejected the idea, saying they preferred to pursue their 'national role ' rather than work with individual schools (The Guardian 3 December 2007).
Arms company BAE Systems, which was under criminal investigation in Britain, the US and Europe over corruption allegations, offered £400,000 to sponsor an academy in Barrow-in-Furness, where it built nuclear submarines. Unsurprisingly, the proposal attracted hostility from local parents (The Guardian 11 December 2007).
Major changes at the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT) saw its forty-strong council replaced with a new board of twelve directors, and Sir Cyril Taylor, who had chaired the Trust for twenty years, replaced by Sir James Hill, chair of governors of a Bradford academy. Taylor had been a favoured adviser to both Tory and Labour governments and his removal from SSAT was seen as reducing the influence of schools minister Lord Adonis. Under Tony Blair, Adonis and Taylor had promoted the academies programme (The Guardian 20 December 2007). Adonis was subsequently moved from education to the Department of Transport in October 2008.
Desperate to find more sponsors, Ed Balls had already exempted some universities, colleges and schools from raising the £2m fee to sponsor an academy. Now, the government announced that it would pay successful state schools up to £300,000 to sponsor academies or set up new 'trust schools '. 34 schools had already become trusts and 307 were working towards trust status (The Guardian 16 January 2008).
The Church of England announced plans to convert some existing cathedral schools into academies as part of its target of establishing a hundred of the schools. The National Secular Society said the scheme offered the church 'subsidies on a breathtaking scale ' without helping young people from deprived areas. Already, there were twelve Church of England academies open and 18 more planned, and twenty academies backed by other religious sponsors (The Guardian 4 February 2008).
Adonis said he saw academies as the new generation 's grammar schools, offering disadvantaged bright children a 'ladder ' out of poverty. He said:
My vision is for academies to be in the vanguard of meritocracy for the next generation in the way that grammar schools were for a proportion of the post-war generation - providing a ladder, in particular, for less advantaged children to get on, and gain the very best education and qualifications, irrespective of wealth and family background, but without unfair selection at the age of 11.
Anti-academy campaigners said that setting up 'quasi-grammar schools ' would lead to a two-tier system of education (The Guardian 8 February 2008).
In a paper published by the Reform think-tank, Richard Tice, chairman of Northampton academy and member of the United Learning Trust (ULT) board, the largest academy sponsor, said the government should make it easier for academies to exclude the worst-behaved pupils (they were already excluding ten times as many pupils as other state schools) and sack poorly performing teachers. Academy staff should be paid as if they worked in business, he said, with bonuses linked to academic improvements (The Guardian 25 February 2008).
Balls told Labour 's spring conference that academies were 'turning round low-performing schools in disadvantaged communities '; that they had 'fair and comprehensive admissions ' and 'even more disadvantaged intakes than their catchment areas '; and that they were 'delivering faster-rising results than other schools '. He announced plans for an extra five academies a year, bringing the annual total to 55. Balls believed that the changes he had made to the governance, curriculum requirements and sponsorship regime of academies would remove concerns that they were going to be selective and outside the local authority structure (The Guardian 29 February 2008).
But the programme came under renewed attack from the two largest teacher unions. At their annual conference in Birmingham, members of the NASUWT passed a motion to ballot members on industrial action in schools which were forced to become academies against the wishes of the staff. And the head of the NUT said academies were compelling teachers to choose either to sign legal documents committing them to the 'values ' of their new sponsors or to leave their jobs without compensation (The Guardian 26 March 2008).
The government announced 115 new trust schools, including the first co-operative trust school, in Stockport, Greater Manchester, where pupils, parents and teachers were to be involved in decision-making (The Guardian 10 April 2008).
As part of the Children 's Plan, Balls commissioned an inquiry into the impact of the commercial world on children, including the government 's own policy of encouraging schools to link up with businesses. It was to be led by David Buckingham, a professor at ULIE and a leading authority on children and the media (The Guardian 19 May 2008).
Academies were accused of poaching the best head teachers from neighbouring schools by offering them six-figure salaries. Ministers claimed that academies had almost doubled the proportion of their pupils getting five good GCSEs but teacher unions said this had been at a cost to other state schools, which were helpless to compete against the high salaries paid by academies (The Guardian 9 June 2008).
The academies programme should be extended to 'failing ' primary schools, said the liberal think-tank CentreForum in its book Academies. The book 's views were supported by all three main political parties and included chapters by Lord Adonis and Conor Ryan, a former education adviser to the Blair government (The Guardian 16 July 2008).
Fifty-one new academies opened in September 2008. Ministers claimed that academies had out-performed other schools in GCSE results but neglected to mention that in nine of the 36 oldest academies GCSE scores had declined (The Guardian 30 August 2008).
According to research by insurance company Zurich, private schools were rejecting the government 's attempts to encourage them to sponsor academies - just six per cent of independent schools had considered doing so (The Guardian 12 September 2008).
Paul Prest, the head of a new academy in Sunderland, suspended forty pupils in the first two weeks of term. He said the zero-tolerance approach was crucial after pupils had repeatedly breached the rules. Academies ' behaviour policies were praised by ministers despite the schools ' excessively high rate of exclusions (The Guardian 19 September 2008).
Amey plc, the private sponsor of Middlesbrough 's Unity City Academy, told the government it no longer wished to sponsor the school (The Guardian 10 October 2008).
The City Academy Bristol, which the government had listed as one of its 'National Challenge ' schools because of its poor performance, announced that it was proposing to open fee-charging branches in Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The move was promoted by Anthony Seldon, head of Wellington College, which was also planning to open a number of foreign branches. Ray Priest, the head teacher of the City Academy Bristol, said opening 'branded schools ' overseas would help to establish his academy as a 'global educational establishment ' (The Guardian 10 October 2008).
An independent inquiry into the academies programme by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), commissioned by the government, showed that results had improved markedly but that the proportion of pupils the schools took from the poorest homes had shrunk, supporting claims by critics that more able students were being selected to improve results. The inquiry raised doubts about the planned expansion of the programme and warned of shortages of heads and sponsors. Separate figures, obtained by the Liberal Democrats through a parliamentary question, revealed the extent of the drop in the number of pupils on free school meals in academies. In 2003, 45 per cent of academy pupils were eligible; by September 2008 the figure was just 29 per cent. The 16 per cent drop in academies compared with a 1.7 per cent fall across England as a whole (The Guardian 14 November 2008).
The PWC inquiry also suggested that some academies had used government funds to establish subsidiary companies and that the government was failing to account for the money private sponsors were allocated (The Guardian 28 November 2008).
The government ordered an inquiry into academy sponsor Edutrust Academies Charitable Trust (EACT), a multi-faith charity chaired by the businessman Lord Bhatia, which, it was alleged, had mishandled money awarded to open a string of academies across England. The DCSF launched an inquiry into concerns raised by the charity 's former chief executive, whose contract was terminated days after he complained of irregularities in 'governance and financing ' at the organisation (The Guardian 28 November 2008).
Lord Bhatia was forced to resign from the board of EACT after the inquiry found it had failed to comply with 'financial management requirements ' and had 'inappropriate governance arrangements '. Ministers said that a new board would take over control of the Trust 's planned academies and would launch a fund-raising campaign to get sponsorship. EACT was due to open eight of the 80 academies being launched in September 2009 (The Guardian 13 March 2009).
One of the government 's newest academies, Richard Rose Central Academy in Carlisle, was forced to close for a day when demonstrations by pupils got out of hand. Staff threatened to strike over pay cuts, parents demanded an emergency Ofsted inspection, the school failed and was placed in special measures. Chief executive Peter Noble and head teacher Mark Yearsley resigned. Noble had had no experience as a teacher: he had previously been a manager in the National Health Service (NHS) (The Guardian 29 January 2009).
Schools minister Jim Knight confirmed that the government would consider applications for academy status from private schools struggling to stave off closure. Anthony Seldon, head teacher of Wellington College, said becoming an academy would not be the 'move of choice ' for many private schools, but it could be their only option. Teachers ' leaders said it amounted to a 'bail-out ' for failing private schools. Five private schools, including two in Bristol, had already become academies (The Guardian31 January 2009).
By 2009, academies were seen by both Labour and the Conservatives as the future of education. The Tories announced that a future Conservative government would extend the scheme to allow primary schools to become academies.
But there was still opposition from parents and local communities: * in Furness parents raised a 6,000-signature petition against the imposition of an academy, four campaigners had been elected to the district council, and the campaign group Our Schools Are Not for Sale was expected to win seats on the county council; * in Northampton plans to replace Unity College, a Church of England secondary school, with an academy were shelved for a year after parents presented a 1,000-signature petition against it; * in Croydon an advertisement for the role of principal of one of two academies planned for the borough was published before consultation meetings had taken place; * in Durham the county council and sponsors planned to open three new academies in 2012: there was strong local opposition and teachers considered industrial action; and * there was also strong opposition to academies in Derby, Dudley, Preston and Tamworth and some sponsors withdrew. (The Guardian 5 May 2009)
The government warned academy sponsors to expect cuts in funding but said it was still planning to expand the number of academies. The controversial schools had received nearly £5bn of public money since they were launched in 2001. 130 academies were already open, 67 were due to open in the autumn term 2009 and a hundred more were planned for September 2010. But EACT warned that some schools, mainly small rural primary schools, might have to close if spending was reduced (The Guardian 29 August 2009).
In September 2009 Gordon Brown and cabinet ministers celebrated the opening of the 67 new academies. Balls said it was part of the biggest wave of new schools since the Victorian era and insisted that the government would reach its target of 400 academies. In a sign that ministers were desperate to keep the academies programme going, he announced that the government would abandon its policy of charging charities, businesses and individuals a £2m sponsorship fee to run the schools. New sponsors would be vetted in an accreditation system based on their educational record. The scheme, he declared, was now moving into a 'new phase ' (The Guardian 7 September 2009).
But, Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, warned:
The case hasn 't been made for academies. We have a target which will mean one in ten secondaries are academies and the jury is still out on whether academies work. Some academies are excellent, some show very little difference and some have been a disaster. It can be a dangerous experiment. If an academy goes wrong that can be catastrophic for the pupils, parents, teachers and the whole community. (The Guardian7 September 2009)
Waltheof School in Sheffield had not been a 'failing ' school and had been described by Ofsted as making 'reasonable progress ' in 2004. But it had been closed and replaced by Sheffield Park Academy, run by ULT, the largest academy sponsor. In July 2009 school inspectors rated it 'inadequate ' in all categories. It was the third academy to have failed an inspection. ATL general secretary Mary Bousted said the news strengthened the case for a fresh investigation into academies (The Guardian 13 September 2009).
Sheffield Park wasn 't the only ULT academy causing concerns. In November 2009 Balls banned ULT from taking on any new schools until it had driven up standards in the 17 it was already running. ULT, an Anglican charity chaired by former Tory education minister Angela Rumbold, also ran ten private schools (The Guardian 5 November 2009).
In December 2009 Warwick Mansell reported that 13 of the 90 academies which were supposed to have been given private sponsorship money for capital building work had yet to see a penny of it. In total, sponsors had so far paid barely two-thirds of the £145m they were supposed to have paid towards capital costs in the seven years since the first of England 's 200 academies had opened, despite the fact that these financial commitments were written into the contracts academy sponsors had had to sign 'to gain control of decisions on the curriculum, staffing and assets of these quasi-independent institutions, funded mainly by taxpayers ' (Mansell 2009b).
Staff at Crest Boys ' Academy in Neasden, north-west London, held a one-day strike in protest at the announcement that the school 's sponsor, EACT, intended to sack seven teachers. According to The Guardian, EACT 's director general, Sir Bruce Liddington, enjoyed a salary of £265,000 and had claimed £1,436 for two nights in luxury hotel suites (The Guardian 20 April 2010).

Faith schools
Conscious of growing public unease at the increasing number of religious schools, Balls and leaders of the major faiths published Faith in the System. In return for state funding of their schools (ninety per cent of building costs and all running costs), faith groups agreed to 'promote social cohesion '. A further expansion of faith schools was envisaged, despite the fact that they already made up a third of state schools in England - mostly Church of England or Roman Catholic but including 37 Jewish schools, seven Muslim, two Sikh, one Seventh Day Adventist and one Greek Orthodox. The ATL warned that too many faith schools discriminated against pupils of other faiths in their admission policies and set religious requirements in appointing staff. ATL questioned why schools 'in which the majority of funding comes from the state, should, as the government proposes, nurture children in a particular faith ' (The Guardian 10 September 2007).
Meanwhile, in Northern Ireland the Roman Catholic Church was instructing its schools to disband Amnesty International support groups because of the organisation 's pro-abortion stance (The Guardian 18 September 2007).
Worse, Bishop of Lancaster Patrick O 'Donoghue issued a 66-page document in which he instructed Catholic schools in his area to stop 'safe-sex ' education, put a crucifix in every classroom, use science to teach about the 'truths of the faith ', only mention sex within the 'sacrament of marriage ', insist that contraception was wrong and prohibit support for charities 'that promote or fund anti-life policies, such as Red Nose Day and Amnesty International, which now advocates abortion '. The Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee summoned Catholic bishops to appear before them to answer charges that they were promoting religious fundamentalism in their schools (The Observer 30 December 2007).
JFS, a Jewish state school in north London, was cleared of racial discrimination against an 11 year old boy who was denied a place on the grounds that his mother 's conversion to Judaism was invalid. High court judge Mr Justice Munby said 'The core aim of JFS is to educate those whom it, in common with the OCR [Office of the Chief Rabbi], considers to be Jews, irrespective of their practice or observance, and in an ethos which is avowedly Orthodox Jewish. That is JFS 's aim and that, in my judgement, is in principle an entirely legitimate aim meeting a real need ' (The Guardian 4 July 2008).
In September 2008 it became legal for state-funded faith schools to include religion as a selection criterion for teaching and non-teaching posts. In response, a coalition of Hindu, Christian and Humanist organisations launched the 'Accord ' campaign to stop state-funded schools from discriminating against students and teachers on the grounds of religion. Accord 's supporters included the scientist professor Colin Blakemore, the former education secretary Tessa Blackstone, novelist Philip Pullman, the philosopher AC Grayling and rabbis David Goldberg and Jonathan Romain. Goldberg said faith schools caused people 'to live parallel lives ' (The Guardian 30 August 2008).
Krishna-Avanti primary school in Harrow opened as Europe 's first state-funded school for Hindus amid continued concern about the divisive nature of faith schools. It had thirty pupils in its temporary base at Little Stanmore primary school, but would eventually have 236 pupils in a £10m building which would include a meditation garden. Jonathan Romain, commented: 'Some parents will feel reassured by a school that shares their faith and cultural background, but everybody should also be aware of the impact this may have - limiting their children 's knowledge of and interaction with children from other cultures, and also depriving other community schools of Hindu participation ' (The Guardian 15 September 2008).
Year eight pupils at St Monica 's Roman Catholic High School in Prestwich, Greater Manchester, were to have been vaccinated against cervical cancer as part of the government 's £100m programme to vaccinate all 14 to 18 year old girls. But the school 's governors banned the girls from having the vaccination at school, against the advice of the Catholic Education Service, which backed the government 's campaign against the human papilloma virus (The Guardian 25 September 2008).
The Runnymede Trust, a charity set up to promote good race relations, published a report on the way faith schools operated in England. It said the schools should stop selecting pupils according to their religion and do more to serve the most disadvantaged children. Rob Berkeley, the trust 's deputy director and author of the report, said:
Given the importance of issues around cohesion, it 's time for a shift, so that schools that are funded by taxpayers are responsive and reflect the needs of all pupils and not just those of a particular religion. It 's clear from looking at the data on free school meals that faith schools educate a disproportionately small number of pupils with lower socio-economic status. (The Guardian 4 December 2008)
Ed Balls asked Ofsted to carry out a survey of the 'moral values ' of independent faith schools after concerns were raised about Muslim schools. Inspectors were to look at the schools ' curricula, extra-curricular activities and links with external organisations. Since 2003, independent schools had been required to enable pupils to develop their self-knowledge, self-esteem and self-confidence, to distinguish right from wrong, to respect the law, to have a broad general knowledge of England 's public institutions and services and to appreciate and respect their own and other cultures in a way that promoted 'tolerance and harmony between different cultural traditions ' (The Guardian 9 March 2009).
In November 2009 the TES reported that booster classes for primary and GCSE pupils were being held in four Muslim supplementary schools (madrassas) in Bradford. The pilot scheme, funded with £550,000 of public money over three years, was said to be making a difference to pupils ' exam results, but the scheme was controversial. National Secular Society president Terry Sanderson said:
These institutions are devoted almost entirely to pumping Islam into the heads of their pupils. We need to know who will keep tabs on these indoctrination centres to ensure taxpayers ' money is properly spent. Although there is no suggestion that the Yorkshire scheme is suspect, if this kind of idea rolls out, who knows what will happen? (TES 6 November 2009)
Covert selection by faith schools
Schools minister Jim Knight warned schools he would crack down on any breaches of the new admissions code, which had been in operation for twelve months and was designed to prevent selection and social segregation, after it emerged that nearly eighty schools - mainly faith schools - had been reported to the admissions watchdog and accused of covertly selecting more able students (The Guardian 18 January 2008).
Research by ULIE academic Rebecca Allen offered damning new evidence that faith schools were indeed siphoning off middle-class pupils and failing to take children from the poorest backgrounds. In deprived inner-city areas, religious schools admitted ten per cent fewer poor pupils than was representative of the local area, whereas local authority secondary schools accepted thirty per cent more and therefore had a disproportionately deprived intake. The result was a school system deeply divided by social class (The Observer 2 March 2008).
Allen 's research also showed that faith schools admitted over fifty per cent more pupils in the top quarter of the ability range (The Guardian 13 March 2008).
The chief schools adjudicator, Philip Hunter, said more than half of all school authorities - local councils and faith schools - were breaching the new admissions code, which aimed to prevent the covert selection of pupils. There had been 'widespread ' failure by schools to remove discriminatory questions about parents ' marital and employment status from application forms and to make clearer the definitions in their admissions rules. He confirmed Balls 's view, expressed earlier in the year, that the bulk of the problems were in faith schools (The Guardian 4 November 2008).
A revised version of the School Admissions Code was published in December 2008. It banned schools from holding interviews or asking parents to make financial contributions or offer practical support. All admissions authorities - including faith schools - were to consult with parents and the local community and improve the information parents received on the admissions process (The Guardian 4 December 2008).

Selection
In June 2008 Balls launched a concerted attack on selective education and the 164 remaining grammar schools. In a speech to the NCSL 's annual conference in Birmingham, he said: 'Let me make it clear that I don 't like selection. I accept though that selection is a local decision for parents and local authorities. But I do not accept that children in secondary moderns should be left to fall behind. ' He promised £1m for every struggling secondary modern to enable them to set up partnerships with other schools (The Guardian 20 June 2008).
Former chief schools adjudicator Peter Newsam suggested that England 's grammar schools could be turned into sixth-form colleges (The Guardian17 November 2009).
Meanwhile, in Northern Ireland Sinn Féin education minister Catriona Ruane had abolished the official 11 plus test but Roman Catholic grammar schools in the province - along with 34 state grammar schools whose pupils were mostly Protestant - were determined to fight the decision. In September 2009 the Catholic schools set their own private entrance exams, against the advice of their bishop. Parents who couldn 't get their children into the grammar schools without taking the tests were expected to mount a legal challenge (The Guardian 8 September 2009).
Ulster Unionists refused to support the transfer of policing and justice powers to the Stormont assembly on 7 March - the 'Hillsborough ' deal which was vital to keep the assembly in operation - unless an agreement could be reached on testing primary school children (The Guardian 12 February 2010).

Private schools
The Charity Commission issued new guidance warning private schools that they could be stripped of their charitable status - along with £100m a year in tax concessions - if they were found to be operating as 'exclusive clubs ' for the rich. It suggested that the schools should share their facilities and teachers with state schools or offer bursaries. Independent school leaders welcomed the guidance, but some MPs said it did not go far enough (The Guardian 16 January 2008).
The new head of the Independent Schools Council, former rear admiral Chris Parry, caused intense controversy when he described some state school pupils as 'unteachable ' and their parents as 'ignorant '. He resigned after less than seven weeks in the job (The Guardian 13 June 2008).

'Failing ' schools: The National Challenge
In February 2008 Balls told The Guardian that he was planning to send teams of expert leaders into 638 'failing ' state secondary schools. Local authorities had until the summer to develop individual 'action plans ' for the schools and if they didn 't improve they would have to become academies or trust schools, or close altogether (The Guardian 25 February 2008).
A fortnight later, Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling warned that the deadline for the 638 schools to improve or face closure would be brought forward to 2011. He announced a £200m plan to give the schools intensive support (The Guardian 13 March 2008).
Balls launched the 'National Challenge ' on 10 June 2008, with funding of £400m. Its target was that at least thirty per cent of pupils in each secondary school should achieve a minimum of five A*-C grade GCSEs including English and maths by 2011.
It aimed to tackle 'the link between deprivation and attainment ' and offered 'targeted help for teaching and learning ', support to develop strong leadership, the flexibility to design 'local bespoke solutions ' and 'more radical changes ' such as the setting up of academies and National Challenge Trusts 'where this would benefit the school '.
Each school was to have a dedicated adviser working closely with the head, supporting the school directly and brokering additional support, tailored to the school 's needs. The formation of partnerships between schools would be encouraged.
But the language was not all positive. Local authorities were told (yet again) to produce within fifty days detailed 'action plans ' for each of the 638 secondary schools which the government deemed to be 'failing '. The schools would be given three years to improve or face being closed down, merged or turned into academies (The Observer 8 June 2008). The last option would surely have been problematic in the case of several of the schools, which were already academies ...
ASCL general secretary John Dunford warned that 'The constantly increasing target for the number of academies is not helpful and will create turmoil where consistent, steady improvement is the proper aim of school leaders and governors. ' While the £400m injection was welcome, schools would 'not be helped by the threat of closure or academy status which will hang over many of these schools for the next three years ', he said (The Guardian 11 June 2008).
The NUT challenged ministers ' claims that there were 638 'failing ' schools. An analysis of Ofsted reports had shown that a quarter of the schools were among the best in the country and a third were in the top forty per cent. Half were considered to be satisfactory and meeting pupils ' needs. NUT acting general secretary Christine Blower wrote to the heads of the 638 schools offering support in fighting against the 'arbitrary target ' and threat of closure. Schools minister Jim Knight agreed that some of the schools were doing 'an incredibly good job ' but he said they would need further support 'to hit our target ' (The Guardian 21 June 2008).
Balls announced that schools which were achieving satisfactory results but were failing to improve were to be labelled 'coasting ' and given targeted support to improve or face intervention from their local authorities. Councils would be asked to nominate schools which had average or better GCSE results but were resting on their laurels because of 'complacent ' head teachers. Hundreds of schools were expected to be identified, including some grammar schools. Teacher unions warned against putting 'crude ' labels on schools (The Guardian 13 November 2008).
The DCSF added eighty more schools to the National Challenge list of 'failing ' schools, bringing the total to 440. However, data in the annual school league tables showed that more than 200 of these schools had done well enough to move above the government 's threshold of thirty per cent of pupils getting five good GCSEs including English and maths. 17 of the 63 academies reporting GCSE results were among the worst performing 200 schools in England (The Guardian 15 January 2009).
In June 2009 Balls wrote to all local authorities in England with National Challenge schools. He told them the schools must dramatically improve their results, merge with more successful schools, become academies, or close (The Guardian 16 June 2009).

Other developments
Curriculum
The QCA published plans for a reduced curriculum for 11 to 14 year olds in England, to be introduced from September 2008. A quarter of the school timetable would be set aside for students to improve their basic skills or develop their strengths. The new regime would include cookery (though unions feared many schools no longer had the facilities for this), citizenship (to include work on 'British values ' and 'national identity '), and an optional 'economic well-being and financial capability ' strand in PSHE, which was now said to refer to 'personal, social, health and economic well-being ' (The Guardian 13 July 2007).
In September 2007, Balls announced a catch-up programme for writing skills in primary schools, and the establishment of an independent exam standards body reporting directly to parliament. Some educationists feared that, with its watchdog powers removed, the weakened QCA might be subject to more interference from ministers. Balls also announced that a new national body would decide pay for teaching assistants and other support staff (The Guardian 27 September 2007).
Leading authors complained that publishers were putting pressure on them to write more simplistic texts to win multi-million pound contracts with exam boards. Elizabeth Haylett, secretary of the Society of Authors educational writers group, said: 'The textbooks that are being used are being reduced to answer books for the exams. There 's no opportunity for children to read beyond the test. They are learning parrot-fashion. ' One science textbook author had even been told to write a factually incorrect answer because there was an error in the curriculum and the book had to match (The Guardian 1 December 2007).
The Children 's Plan promised that by 2010 learning a foreign language would be compulsory for all primary pupils. But there were problems at secondary level. In 2007 the number of candidates taking GCSE French was eight per cent lower than in the previous year, German more than ten per cent lower. Research for the National Centre for Languages showed that more than half of England 's secondary schools were now teaching languages to less than half their GCSE pupils. To attempt to revive language teaching in schools, ministers announced that a £53m package (£5m more than in the previous year): pupils would be offered intensive language classes and university students would be sent into schools as 'ambassadors ' for languages (The Guardian 20 December 2007).
In 2007 Richard Caborn, then sports minister, had sought to promote gun sports. In the year following his remarks, gun groups claimed that the number of schools providing rifle ranges for pupils had 'surged '. One local authority was planning to introduce shooting at 16 of its schools, and an academy due to open in September 2008 in a deprived area of south Bristol was to have a shooting range. Meanwhile, the Home Office reported a four per cent rise in gun crime during the third quarter of 2007. Lyn Costello, co-founder of Mothers Against Murder and Aggression said:
There is no reason why children should play with toy guns at five let alone real ones at 15. In the present climate we should not be encouraging children to use guns. We have to stop this ... It 's disgusting that on a weekly basis young people are being killed and then we 're spending taxpayers ' money on teaching them to shoot. (The Guardian 26 January 2008)
The government committed £775m over three years to increase the minimum amount of school sport from two to five hours a week by 2012. Specialists said that without major changes to the system, particularly in specialist teacher training, the five-hour target might not be achievable (The Guardian 2 February 2008).
At their annual conference in Torquay, members of the ATL heckled schools minister Jim Knight when he suggested it was 'perfectly acceptable ' to teach maths to pupils in classes of up to 70 (The Guardian 20 March 2008).
A study of the progress of 500 children by researchers from ULIE into theEvery Child a Reader project showed that individual tuition helped to reduce the gender gap (The Guardian 9 May 2008).
The government was determined that young children should be taught to read using basic phonics, to write short sentences and to use punctuation. It commissioned academics at ULIE to look into the effectiveness of these policies. Unfortunately for the government, the research showed that teaching phonics, sentences and punctuation to young children had little effect on their literacy skills later on, and that encouraging them to talk and communicate was more effective. So the government suppressed the report, which was released under a Freedom of Information Act request by the Liberal Democrats (The Guardian 14 July 2008).
As the new school year began, heads warned that pupils and teachers faced some of the biggest education reforms in twenty years, including: * a new early years foundation stage with nurseries having to assess pupils as young as three; * a new secondary curriculum for 11 to 14 year olds; * new requirements for GCSEs ( 'functional ' maths and English tests); * changes in A Level syllabuses; * new diploma qualifications; and * the raising of the school leaving age to 17 by 2013 and to 18 by 2015.
ASCL general secretary John Dunford said: 'There 's never in my experience been so many changes in such a short time. Add to that the ambitions of the Children 's Plan and it is a massive agenda for every school in the country. It 's too much at once. Each of these changes has merit but the problem is the numbers that are coming at one time ' (The Guardian 30 August 2008).
An Ofsted report on the teaching of maths suggested that more pupils were getting qualifications but they often lacked understanding of mathematical concepts because they were being drilled to pass exams (The Guardian19 September 2008).
Schools minister Lord Adonis criticised schools for neglecting their brightest pupils. Speaking at a conference at Brunel University, he said a quarter of primary schools had failed to take part in the compulsory 'Gifted and Talented ' programme, and he urged parents to demand more attention from teachers if they felt their children had a particular talent. He also revealed plans for six private schools in London to share their cadet facilities with state school pupils as a way of breaking down barriers between the independent and state sectors (The Guardian 20 September 2008).
A report by the National Council of Education Excellence, a body set up by Gordon Brown, suggested that schools in England should be rated according to the proportion of their pupils who went on to top universities (The Guardian 3 October 2008).
A report from the National Audit Office said the Labour government 's drive to improve the nation 's mathematical skills had levelled off, with nearly a quarter of 11 year olds failing to reach the expected level at the end of primary school. Girls were falling behind boys and needed particular attention. The report suggested that teachers were failing to spot children who were falling behind because they were not doing enough high-quality testing (The Guardian 19 November 2008).
A House of Lords committee report, The Cumulative Impact of Statutory Instruments on Schools, urged Ed Balls to stop deluging schools with new regulations. Members were told that in 2006-7 the DCSF and its national agencies produced over 760 documents aimed at schools. 'No single part of the department was aware of the totality of what was being offered ', the report said. Head teachers welcomed the report. ASCL general secretary John Dunford said a 'juggernaut of policies, laws and regulations hurtles at ever increasing speed towards us, seemingly out of control '. Schools in England had been besieged by 79 policy consultations and at least 300 announcements from the DCSF in 2008 and expected an even greater number in 2009 (The Guardian 13 March 2009).
Dunford was also concerned that the government was promoting what he described as the 'Tesco model ' of schools. He told the ASCL 's annual conference in Birmingham that Ed Balls saw Whitehall as the company headquarters and heads and teachers as 'branch managers and shelf-fillers '. He went on:
This Tesco management model of England Schools plc ... is all summed up in that dreadful word 'compliance '. Compliance, I used to read in management books, is the lowest form of commitment, to be encouraged in those who have no job flexibility, no initiative and limited intelligence. Is this what ministers really want of their school leaders? I sincerely hope not. Yet that is how it sometimes feels.
He said 'delivery ' was the job of postal workers and midwives, not teachers and head teachers (The Guardian 15 March 2009).
Ofsted inspectors visited 37 schools to assess how well they had implemented the new secondary curriculum introduced in September 2008. Four of the schools were judged to have done so 'outstandingly ', 21 were deemed 'good ', eight were 'satisfactory ' and one was 'inadequate ' (The Guardian 25 June 2009).
In 2007 the government had announced plans to introduce a single funding mechanism for all nurseries, in the state and private sectors, for the free 12.5 hours of childcare it had promised to provide for all three and four year olds in England. It now asked local authorities to confirm by April 2010 how they would meet that pledge for September, when the entitlement would rise to 15 hours. State nurseries had historically received far more funding than private ones, and head teachers warned that, with no extra money on offer, the result would be a large transfer of government funding from state nurseries to private ones run for profit (The Guardian 2 November 2009).
Ofsted visited 54 schools to evaluate the effectiveness of the national literacy and numeracy strategies. It found that in more than half the secondary schools and a third of primary schools, the programme had not rooted out 'weaknesses in basic teaching skills '. The concentration on English, maths and science had 'risked the neglect of other subjects ' and teachers and local authority officers felt burdened by the deluge of initiatives which accompanied the strategies. Ed Balls had already announced that the national strategies would be scrapped as part of a move to end centralised control and promote more collaboration between schools (The Guardian 24 February 2010).

Ofsted
Summerhill
Summerhill, the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) Suffolk independent boarding school where children decide how to spend their time, swearing is allowed and, weather permitting, staff and students can sunbathe in the nude, had had a long battle with the government. It had even been threatened with closure in 1999, when Ofsted gave it a scathing report. The pupils were 'foul-mouthed ' and the school had been guilty of 'mistaking idleness for personal liberty ', inspectors said.
But Ofsted 's 2007 report on the school was glowing. 'Pupils ' personal development, including their spiritual, moral, social and cultural development, is outstanding ', the inspectors concluded. Students were 'courteous, polite and considerate ', made 'good progress ' and were 'well-rounded, confident and mature ' when they left (The Guardian 1 December 2007).
The inspection regime
In December 2007 Ofsted announced plans to improve the system for monitoring classroom standards. From 2009 its inspectors would conduct 'snap visits ' to schools without giving the normal 48 hours ' notice and would make greater use of 'local intelligence ' - complaints from parents - to investigate schools where standards were feared to be slipping (The Guardian 13 December 2007).
Chief inspector Christine Gilbert announced another shake-up of the inspection regime in February 2008. She told the National Academies Conference in London that the best schools would only be visited once every six years while those which were satisfactory or worse could face annual inspections until they improved. She added that Ofsted would focus more on the 'shocking ' number of pupils who left primary schools without mastering the three Rs (The Guardian 8 February 2008).
ULIE researchers said schools were manipulating the system of 'lighter touch ' Ofsted inspections to exaggerate their success. Self-evaluation forms, introduced in 2005, allowed head teachers to give rosy judgements of their success which inspectors then failed to investigate, they said (The Guardian 24 March 2008).
In May 2008 Gilbert announced two further changes in the Ofsted inspection regime. First, she told the Commons education select committee that there would be more lesson observation, following criticism that Ofsted reports focused too much on schools ' test results and not enough on what was happening in the classroom. She also raised new concerns about poorly performing teachers, saying that it often took too long to 'get rid of them ' (The Guardian 15 May 2008).
Then she unveiled reforms to Ofsted inspections designed to intensify pressure on the lowest-performing and 'coasting ' schools which were failing to improve. Standards had 'stalled ', she said, and 'the gap between outcomes for specific groups of children and young people and the majority remains too large ' (The Guardian 20 May 2008).
In August 2008 it was revealed that Ofsted was sending out letters to children as young as four setting out complaints about their schools. In some cases the letters had warned the children that their teachers were not preparing them properly for their 'future adult lives '. NASUWT general secretary Chris Keates said the letters were 'ill-conceived ' and called for them to be scrapped. 'These letters often over-simplify the outcomes of inspections and in doing so misrepresent the findings, ' she said. 'The letters in effect give licence to pupils to question the professionalism of the school and its staff. ' An Ofsted spokeswoman said the letters were 'a valuable tool in engaging pupils in both the inspection and subsequent school improvement ' (The Guardian 16 August 2008).
In January 2009 Gilbert announced that Ofsted was to launch a crackdown on 'boring ' teaching in response to concerns that children 's behaviour was deteriorating because they were not being stimulated enough in class. Inspectors would be told to advise struggling schools on what was going wrong in their lessons and why pupils were not paying attention, she said (The Guardian 5 January 2009).
Ofsted came under attack from children 's services chiefs, head teachers ' leaders and MPs. It was accused of being 'flawed, wasteful and failing '. Its new inspection regime was forcing social work departments to focus on passing inspections instead of looking after children, good schools were rated as mediocre on routine technical matters and some sub-contracted inspectors were not fit for the job. Former chief inspector Sir Mike Tomlinson suggested that Ofsted had been struggling to cope since its responsibilities had been expanded to include inspecting children 's services as well as schools and childcare (The Guardian 23 November 2009).
Ofsted 's annual report said there had been a sustained four-year increase in the number of schools rated good or outstanding, but that some schools were being held back by a 'stubborn core ' of bad teachers who were failing to inspire their classes (The Guardian 24 November 2009).

Teachers
The new head of the General Teaching Council (GTC), Keith Bartley, said around 17,000 'substandard ' teachers were struggling in classrooms and failing to inspire their pupils. Middle-aged male teachers were a particular worry. Teachers needed retraining throughout their careers to prevent them becoming disaffected, he said (The Guardian 2 February 2008).
NUT Conference March 2008
At their annual conference in Manchester NUT members threatened to strike if the government did not promise to cut classes to no more than twenty pupils by 2020. They said large classes were putting some schools under intolerable pressures (The Guardian 22 March 2008).
The conference heard evidence of a crisis in children 's happiness and mental health and debated calls to scrap the most restrictive elements of the national curriculum and reverse a government order that literacy be taught through phonics. NUT general secretary Steve Sinnott said teachers wanted a system which was 'liberal and flexible ' and not imposed by government. 'We want a return to a time when there was a potential for magic moments in the classroom ', he said (The Guardian 24 March 2008).
NUT members expressed concern about research which showed that faith schools were fuelling social, ethnic and religious segregation and flouting admissions laws. Extraordinarily, their solution was to prevent the establishment of more single-faith schools but to provide religious facilities - faith-based instruction, prayer rooms and visits by imams, rabbis and priests - in all schools. Secularists were not impressed. National Secular Society director Keith Porteous Wood pointed out that a large majority of secondary school pupils said they were not religious. 'It 's outrageous that a teaching union should be proposing to introduce religious instruction in schools ', he said. 'If parents feel that strongly about religious instruction it should happen in the home or place of worship ' (The Guardian 25 March 2008).
Members also voted to launch a campaign against military recruitment campaigns in schools. The union said it had complained to Ed Balls that 'misleading propaganda ' in some lesson materials prepared with Ministry of Defence (MoD) backing undermined schools ' legal duty to present controversial issues in a balanced way. One worksheet supplied by the MoD said the British army was 'helping the Iraqis to rebuild their country after the conflict and years of neglect '. It did not mention the US-led invasion, the countless Iraqi civilian deaths or the fact that not a single weapon of mass destruction had ever been found (The Guardian 26 March 2008).
One-day strike
NUT members staged a one-day strike on 24 April 2008 and warned that there would be more if the government did not improve its pay offer (The Guardian 25 April 2008). It was the first national NUT walk-out since 1987, when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister.
Head teachers
The shortage of head teachers became an increasing concern during this period.
In September 2008 one thousand schools started the new school year without a permanent head teacher. Teachers ' leaders, already alarmed at the growing number of vacancies in both primary and secondary schools, were furious when it was revealed that the DCSF had drawn up a secret list of heads and senior teachers who could be poached to run academies when positions arose (The Observer 14 September 2008).
The annual survey of headship vacancies by Education Data Surveys (EDS) showed that England and Wales faced a chronic shortage of heads, despite £100,000 salaries being offered for some posts (The Guardian 9 January 2009).
Ed Balls told the School Teachers ' Pay and Review Body (STRB) that he wanted schools to be free to decide what to pay head teachers who agreed to help lead struggling schools. He told parliament:
To recognise the greater responsibility associated with running a number of schools, I will be encouraging governing bodies to make responsible use of the flexibilities that they already have to determine an appropriate level of pay for these heads in a way that is not constrained by the maximum of the leadership pay range but is appropriate, fair and transparent. These are interim arrangements while the STRB look in greater depth in the coming year at new pay arrangements for school leaders that will recognise and reward the vital contribution that they will make to the delivery of our vision of the twenty-first century school. (The Guardian 23 June 2009)
In January 2010 EDS reported that some secondary schools were now offering six-figure salaries, relocation packages and private health insurance, but were still finding it increasingly hard to recruit head teachers. Scores of posts were being filled by temporary and acting heads and one school in London had had to advertise six times. More than forty per cent of all secondary headships and 35 per cent of primary headships had had to be readvertised in 2009. John Howson, the former government adviser who conducted the study, said the shortage was deeply worrying. 'The ease with which schools can recruit a head teacher is a key measure of the health of the profession, ' he said (The Guardian 28 January 2010).

Behaviour
At their annual conference in Torquay, members of the ATL heard the results of a survey of behaviour in UK schools. Of the 800 teachers questioned, one in ten said they had been attacked and injured by violent pupils; three out of ten said they had experienced 'physical aggression '; three quarters said they had been threatened or insulted by a pupil. Almost all reported problems with low-level disruption. ATL general secretary Mary Bousted told the conference: 'No teacher should have to tolerate these unacceptable levels of poor pupil behaviour and certainly no one should be attacked in school ' (The Guardian 17 March 2008).
Ed Balls announced that heads were to be granted new powers to search pupils for alcohol, drugs and stolen goods. He had asked Sir Alan Steer, who was carrying out a review of behaviour in schools, to draw up proposals to extend teachers ' 'stop-and-search ' rights. Heads already had the right to search pupils suspected of carrying knives and had been given guidance on how to use airport-style metal detectors to screen young people (The Guardian 27 March 2008).
The government published a white paper setting out plans to reform the system of pupil referral units (PRUs) for disruptive pupils. £26.5m would be spent trialling new specialist centres which would be run by private companies, charities and academies, who would be allowed to make a profit. Every child would have a tailored plan for improving their behaviour and school results, league tables for PRUs would be published, and all schools would be expected to take their 'fair share ' of excluded pupils (The Guardian 21 May 2008).
The government announced that secondary schools and colleges in England would receive £720,000 over two years to train 'pupil mentors ', who would learn how to defuse arguments through discussion and listen sensitively to classmates with family problems. Ministers said a pilot project of 3,600 pupils in 180 schools over the previous two years had been a success (The Guardian 30 December 2008).
Steer Report: Learning Behaviour: Lessons Learned
Commissioned by Ed Balls and published in April 2009, this was a follow-up to the Steer committee 's first report Learning Behaviour which had been published in 2005.
Steer said good teaching was a prerequisite for good behaviour: 'The need for consistent good quality teaching, as the basis for raising standards and reducing low level disruption, has been highlighted both by Ofsted and fellow practitioners ' (DCSF 2009b:3).
The report stressed: * the importance of early intervention and of disseminating good practice advice to schools; * appropriate engagement of and support for pupils, withdrawal from classes where appropriate; * the engagement of parents should be supported and strengthened, with more consistent use of parenting contracts; * the role of local authorities in prioritising support for schools and making provision for excluded pupils; and * the roles of local authorities and children 's trusts in relation to behaviour and attendance partnerships.
 Download the 2009 Steer Report Learning Behaviour: Lessons Learned (pdf text 2.1mb).

Bullying
Ed Balls launched a £3m scheme to train teenagers to counsel their younger schoolmates and offer 'conflict resolution ' to tackle bullying (The Guardian 15 November 2007).
A British Council survey found that almost half of UK secondary school pupils regarded bullying as a problem in their school - a higher proportion than in the rest of Europe. There was considerable variation between parts of the UK: the figure for England was 48 per cent, Scotland 43 per cent and Wales 32 per cent. However, 42 per cent of UK students said they were happy in school most of the time compared with 33 per cent on average in the rest of Europe (The Guardian 29 February 2008).
Homophobia
A Stonewall survey of gay school students found that 41 per cent reported physical attacks and half said teachers themselves had made homophobic remarks. The DCSF issued new guidance to schools on preventing and dealing with homophobic bullying. Ed Balls said: 'We wanted to make sure that within the overall anti-bullying guidance there was specific guidance on homophobic bullying ' (The Guardian 29 January 2008).
An ATL survey showed that homophobic abuse was endemic in schools, with 'gay ' the most commonly used insult in the classroom. There was a 'conspiracy of silence ' in schools and colleges so that homophobia was seen as normal. Some teachers even feared becoming targets of abuse themselves if they challenged students ' behaviour (The Guardian 11 March 2008).
Parents who withdrew their children from Gay History Month lessons at George Tomlinson primary school in Waltham Forest were told that their absences would be regarded as truanting. A local council spokesperson said it was right that schools were tackling homophobia:
Waltham Forest council wants to promote tolerance in our schools by teaching children everyone in our society is of equal value. This is a core part of the national curriculum for all schools in the country. We are supporting teachers and schools in taking positive and innovative steps to develop children 's ability to respect people 's differences.
A group of rabid homophobes from a Baptist church in Kansas threatened to picket George Tomlinson school but their leader, Fred Phelps, was barred from entering Britain to stop him spreading 'extremism and hatred ' (The Guardian 20 March 2009).
In March 2009 Stonewall published its Teachers ' Report Homophobic bullying in Britain 's schools as part of its Education for All campaign. Its key findings were that: * nine in ten secondary school teachers and more than two in five primary school teachers said children and young people, regardless of their sexual orientation, experienced homophobic bullying, name calling or harassment in their schools; * secondary school teachers said that homophobic bullying was the second most frequent form of bullying after bullying because of weight and was three times more prevalent than bullying due to religion or ethnicity; * 95 per cent of secondary school teachers and three quarters of primary school teachers reported hearing the phrases 'you 're so gay ' or 'that 's so gay ' in their schools; * eight in ten secondary school teachers and two in five primary school teachers reported hearing other insulting homophobic remarks such as 'poof ', 'dyke ', 'queer ' and 'faggot '; * nine in ten teachers and non-teaching staff at secondary and primary schools had never received any specific training on how to prevent or respond to homophobic bullying; * more than a quarter of secondary school staff said they would not feel confident in supporting a pupil who decided to come out to them as lesbian, gay or bisexual; and * half of secondary school teachers who were aware of homophobic bullying in their schools said the vast majority of incidents went unreported.
 Download Homophobic bullying in Britain 's schools from the Stonewall website.

Social mobility
In 2007 Ofsted 's annual report warned that social, economic and racial factors still determined how well children performed at school (The Guardian 18 October 2007).
A report by Jo Blanden and Stephen Machin for the Sutton Trust, Recent Changes in Intergenerational Mobility in Britain, published in December 2007, showed that by the age of seven the most able children in Britain 's poorest homes were outperformed by the least gifted children from wealthy homes. It concluded that social class was still the biggest predictor of school achievement, the likelihood of getting a degree and even a child 's behaviour; and suggested that the advantages of being born in a privileged home had not changed in thirty years.
 Download Recent Changes in Intergenerational Mobility in Britainfrom the Sutton Trust website.
Research conducted at Bath University by Harry Daniels and Jill Porter for the Cambridge Primary Review showed that a child 's chances of receiving extra help for a special educational need was dictated by geography, class, race and gender, rather than the nature of the learning difficulty. Middle class children received better support more quickly, and powerful lobby groups, such as those for dyslexia and autism, received disproportionate levels of funding. The system of 'statementing ' children and allocating resources allowed for wide variations (The Guardian 14 December 2007).
A government-backed study by Dr Steve Strand at Warwick University found that white working-class teenagers performed worse than their black and Asian classmates in GCSE exams (The Guardian 28 March 2008).
Thursday 's Child, a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), a think-tank close to the government, recommended that the long summer holiday should be shortened. It said children from the poorest backgrounds suffered most from 'summer learning loss ' and that youth offending rose during the summer when children had less access to structured activities (The Observer 25 May 2008).
A study on social mobility, funded by the American Carnegie Corporation and presented at a private conference in New York hosted by the Sutton Trust, was attended by leading UK education figures and politicians including Cabinet Office minister Ed Miliband. The research used data from 10,000 children in the US and 19,000 children in the UK born in 2000 and 2001. It found that children 's vocabulary, cognitive abilities and behaviour were closely linked to family income, with children from the poorest homes much less well equipped to deal with starting school. The effects of being from a low-income home were more pronounced in the UK than the US because of the UK 's wider difference in incomes (The Guardian 7 June 2008).
Meanwhile, politicians traded statistics. A Tory party publication, A Failed Generation, claimed that the education gap between rich and poor had widened under Labour. Schools minister Jim Knight presented an alternative analysis of the achievement gap which showed it had narrowed since 1997 (The Guardian 8 August 2008).
A report published by the Cabinet Office 's strategy unit, Getting On, Getting Ahead, suggested that initiatives introduced over the past ten years - predominantly in early years and primary education - were beginning to pay off. Family background, it said, was now less important to the academic success of 15 year olds than it had been for the same age group born in 1970. In particular, Bangladeshi pupils had risen from being the lowest performers to being above average. Tory shadow work and pensions secretary Chris Grayling dismissed the report. 'This has all the hallmarks of a government propaganda exercise ', he said. 'The reality in Britain today is that we have some of the lowest social mobility in the industrialised world. '
Writing in The Guardian, John Crace argued that 'the truth lies between the two ':
There have been significant improvements in raising attainment levels in some areas, particularly among minority ethnic groups, but one large section of the population has missed out on the decade of rising standards - the white working class. (Crace 2008)
He noted the findings of a report commissioned by the NUT and the National College for School Leadership (NCSL) and written by Denis Mongon and Chris Chapman at Manchester University 's school of education. Successful Leadership for Promoting the Achievement of White Working Class Pupils argued that the cycle of underachievement had been endemic in this group since mass education was introduced in Victorian times. Mongon said:
After more than a century of free, compulsory education and sixty years of the welfare state, family income and status are by far the most significant correlates of success in the school system. Although gender is also an independent and significant factor, the social class attainment gap at 16 is three times as wide as the gender gap. (quoted in Crace 2008)
The government 's aim to close the social gap in exam results was certainly proving difficult to achieve. In 2008, just 16 per cent of white boys on free school meals reached the target of five good GCSEs including English and maths, compared with the national average of 48 per cent (The Guardian12 December 2008).
Figures released in parliament showed that a million children living below the poverty line were not receiving free school meals because the income threshold to qualify was lower than the current level used to define poverty. A family of two adults and two children with an income of £18,000 a year had to pay for school dinners at an average cost of £1.70 a day per child. Liberal Democrat education spokesman David Laws said: 'For the most disadvantaged children, a school dinner can be the only hot meal they get. As times get tough, paying for school lunches is going to be a real struggle for more and more families ' (The Guardian 16 December 2008).
Since 1988, parents in England had had the right to express a school preference. Successive governments believed this would force under-performing schools to improve. But in Parental choice of primary school in England: What type of schools do parents choose?, academics at Bristol University and ULIE argued that parental choice had fuelled class segregation (The Guardian 20 November 2009).

School meals
Rose Hill Primary School in Oxford abandoned its policy of using only halal meat in its school meals after complaints from parents (The Oxford Times 20 February 2008).
A survey by the School Food Trust, set up by ministers in 2005 to encourage children to eat healthier food, found that secondary schools had, on average, 23 fast-food outlets within a mile of their buildings. The Trust suggested that, to prevent pupils from buying junk food, schools should not allow them to leave the premises at lunchtime. School leaders said the proposal was unworkable (The Guardian 28 March 2008).
Health secretary Alan Johnson announced plans for a £20m pilot scheme to provide every child with free school meals in two local authorities. If the two-year trial improved health, school standards, pupils ' behaviour and take-up of school meals, it could be expanded to every local authority, he said (The Guardian 25 September 2008).
Catering firms belonging to the Local Authority Caterers Association warned the government that new rules on schools meals due to come into force in secondary schools in September 2009 would lead to even more pupils deserting canteens for fast-food outlets and could make the school meals service no longer viable (The Guardian 23 March 2009).
Five years after the outcry over 'Turkey Twizzlers ', led by TV chef Jamie Oliver, the Food for Life Partnership warned that progress towards healthier school meals would stall if budgets for ingredients were cut (The Guardian 15 December 2009).

Budget cuts
The global recession, which began in 2008, forced governments around the world to review their spending. Britain was no exception. In a sign of things to come, Ed Balls urged schools to save £750m a year by turning off lights, cutting back on heating and sharing cleaners. Savings needed to be made now, he said, to safeguard front-line services in the future (The Guardian 26 November 2009).
The message was reiterated three months later at a conference run by the NCSL, only this time heads were asked to make 'efficiency ' savings of £1bn without reducing front-line staff. The government was promising a 0.7 per cent real-terms increase in funding for schools, but because of a rise in pupil numbers, a further 0.9 per cent would be needed to maintain the status quo. NAHT general secretary Mick Brookes said it would be difficult for heads to find £1bn without threatening front-line staff: teaching assistants could be particularly vulnerable (The Observer 7 February 2010).

School uniform
In October 2007 the government published new guidelines on school uniforms. Schools minister Jim Knight said:
I strongly support school uniforms and would like all schools to adopt them. They can instil pride and unity, support a strong school ethos and prevent the jealousy, rivalry and conflict that can arise when children wear different clothes. But the cost of uniforms must never be a barrier for poorer families. (The Guardian 5 October 2007)

Steiner course
The only dedicated university course for Steiner school teachers had struggled to recruit new students since the government cut funding for second degrees. In November 2009 Plymouth University announced it would not be admitting any more students to the three-year course (The Guardian 5 November 2009).

Higher education
Within a week of becoming prime minister in 2007 Gordon Brown had surprised universities by promising to increase the number of students eligible for grants. The pledge had been welcomed by students as a sign that the new prime minister was serious about Labour 's target of getting half of young people into university by 2010. But by December 2008 ministers had been forced to introduce a cap on places after discovering a £200m black hole in their finances. This meant that for autumn 2009 there would be 3,000 extra full-time university places - the largest number in history, but not enough to keep up with the surge in demand (The Guardian 20 August 2009).
In November 2009 Lord Mandelson (whose Department of Business, Innovation and Skills had assumed responsibility for higher education in June) launched A New Framework for Higher Education which set out a ten to fifteen year strategy for universities, designed to aid the country 's economic recovery and pave the way for an overhaul of student tuition fees.
Its key points were: * a 'consumer revolution ' to give students more information about courses and future earnings potential; * a drive to make universities work more closely with industry in designing courses and funding them; and * a new focus on universities as engines of social mobility, encouraging the use of 'contextual data ' in selection processes to identify hidden talent among pupils from low-performing schools. (The Guardian 3 November 2009)

The election campaign
In the summer of 2009 the date of the forthcoming general election had not yet been announced but most commentators assumed (rightly) that it would be in May 2010. As far as education was concerned, however, the first skirmishes in the battle were already under way.
The Centre for Policy Studies, a right-wing think-tank, recommended that a Conservative government should abolish at least eight quangos, including the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, the exams regulator Ofqual, the Training and Development Agency for Schools and the National College for School Leadership. Ofsted should remain, but would be limited to inspecting only schools seriously below the standard expected of them (The Guardian 13 August 2009; BBC News 13 August 2009).
Shadow schools secretary Michael Gove announced that he would build technical schools in every city to train a new generation of builders, technicians and engineers - a plan developed by former Conservative education secretary Lord (Kenneth) Baker. Labour pointed out that it was already doing just that: the DCSF had approved a technical school in Birmingham, to be sponsored by Aston University, and had provided officials to work with Baker on expanding the scheme (The Guardian 5 October 2009).

Gove 's view of education
Gove 's technical schools policy was a throwback to the 1950s, but there was worse to come. He upset the teaching unions - and just about everybody else involved in education - by promising to destroy the 'educational establishment ' he claimed was responsible for 'dumbing down ' schools. He told the Conservative Party conference that he would sideline local authorities, scrap the curriculum agency, sack the worst head teachers, have fewer Ofsted inspections for good schools, encourage competitive sports, and insist on traditional values in the classroom, with former soldiers imposing discipline and pupils expected to wear ties. The state monopoly over schools would be abolished by allowing every school the chance to become an independent academy with greater control over the curriculum, the pay of teachers and the organisation of the school day (The Guardian 7 October 2009).
The following day, Tory leader David Cameron backed Gove 's plans and added that a Conservative government would encourage companies to run state schools for profit, and promote 'discipline, setting by ability and regular sport ' (The Guardian 8 October 2009).
Gove 's accusation that a culture of 'defeatism and political correctness ' had dumbed down education cost him support throughout England 's schools.
In a letter to The Guardian, the head of the ASCL and 26 leading head teachers wrote:
As leaders of state secondary schools, and therefore presumably fully paid-up members of the 'educational establishment ' to which Michael Gove referred in his speech to the Conservative party conference, we would like to challenge the image of the state education sector portrayed in that speech. 'Faddy ideologies ' have been resisted by schools. Recent years have seen a strong focus on raising the quality of teaching and learning, increasing the number of young people who achieve well, improving their behaviour and broadening their opportunities and life chances. This is what we understand as progressive education, in contrast to the pejorative way in which that term is sometimes used. (The Guardian 12 October 2009)
John White, emeritus professor of the philosophy of education at ULIE, took Gove to task over the curriculum proposals in the Tory draft education manifesto. Writing in the TES he said: 'For him, there is only one vehicle to get us to these destinations: the traditional school subject. He sets his face against everything else. Cross-curricular teaching is out. Projects and themes are anathemas. ' Under a Tory government, there would be no regrouping of subjects into wider 'areas of learning ' as recommended in the Rose review of the primary curriculum. Subjects like maths, science and history were the only way forward. 'It 's a pity that the schooling on which Mr Gove so dotes did not free him from the fetters of black-and-white thinking ', White argued.
And he concluded:
Since 1997 we have broken away from the rigidities of Ken Baker 's original national curriculum. Not fast enough for many of us, perhaps, but in the right direction. Mr Gove would wind the clock back to the 1988 curriculum, itself a virtual copy of the curriculum for the new state secondary schools introduced in 1904. This is conservatism indeed. But is this creation of a horse-drawn, narrowly franchised, imperial age the beacon we should be following a century and more later? (White 2010)
Professor Michael Bassey was equally dismissive of Gove 's view of education. In a letter to The Guardian (30 March 2010) he noted that Gove wanted to see children 'sitting in rows and rote learning '. Gove had told one newspaper that 'the best training of the mind ' would be 'learning the kings and queens of England, the great works of literature, proper mental arithmetic, algebra by the age of 11, modern foreign languages '. Yet he 'd also said that 'A Conservative government would ... free teachers and leaders in schools from bureaucracy to give them more space to innovate, to excel, and by excelling, to inspire others. ' Bassey commented: 'The freedom that the Conservatives offer seems to be the freedom to spend the next ten years teaching the chronology of the monarchy to children sitting in straight lines '.
Meanwhile, David Cameron accused 'failing ' schools of pandering to a culture of defeatism and 'dumbing down to the lowest common denominator '. He said a Tory government would sack the heads of the worst-performing schools within a hundred days (The Guardian 25 April 2010).

Free schools
Gove 's other big idea was to establish up to 2,000 Swedish-style 'free schools ' - independent schools run by or for parents but paid for by the state. He had first proposed these in September 2008. 'We have seen the future in Sweden and it works ', he declared. 'Standards have been driven up. If it can work there, it can work here. '
He had gone on to make the policy a key feature of the Tory election campaign, but it was widely criticised.
Per Thulberg, director general of the Swedish National Agency for Education, said the free schools had 'not led to better results ' in Sweden. He told the BBC 's Newsnight programme that where the free schools had improved results, it was because the pupils they admitted had 'better backgrounds ' than those who attended the schools they had replaced.
Furthermore, recent international studies had shown that England was ranked higher than Sweden for pupils ' maths and science knowledge and in the 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and Science StudySweden 's ranking for science had fallen further than any other country 's (The Guardian 9 February 2010).
Stephen Ball, professor of the sociology of education at ULIE, said Tory plans for more academies and free schools amounted to the breaking up of the model of state education which had operated in England since 1902:
It 's a process of the dissolution of state schooling. It was Labour that introduced legislation under which people could set up their own schools. This is taking it a step further and opening it up to more diverse providers being able to set up schools. This is the beginning of the end of state schools as we know them. (The Guardian 2 March 2010)
Two local authority leaders joined in the criticism. Kent County Council leader Paul Carter said giving parents and other groups the funds to start free schools would threaten local education budgets, and Hampshire 's cabinet member responsible for schools, David Kirk, insisted that local authorities should be allowed to improve existing schools rather than being forced to give parents the power to set up new ones.
Leading education lawyer Graham Burns, who was acting for three parent groups trying to set up schools in anticipation of a Conservative administration, told The Guardian that parents from from poor neighbourhoods would be unable to set up their own schools because they lacked money and influential friends (The Guardian 26 April 2010).
And finally, just four days before the election, it was revealed that one of the first state schools to take on a private partner had had to be 'rescued ' by its local council after it was deemed inadequate by inspectors. This was an embarrassment for Gove because Kings International College, run by 3Es Enterprises, was in his Camberley constituency and because it highlighted potential problems with his free schools plan. Local Liberal Democrat councillor David Whitcroft commented: 'Michael Gove has been talking about what is going on in Sweden; it might be more useful if he looked at what is going on in his own constituency ' (The Observer 2 May 2010).
Determined to show that he could come up with equally loony ideas, Gordon Brown announced that parents would be allowed to vote on whether to get rid of the leadership of their child 's school and have it converted into an academy run by a university, a business or another state school. These 'sponsors ' - the first to be named was carpet shop owner Lord Harris - would be allowed to run chains of poorly performing primary schools. Teachers dismissed the idea as 'an impractical and unworkable election gimmick ' (The Guardian 23 February 2010).

Primary education
As the general election approached, Robin Alexander noted that there was 'a great deal of unfinished business ' in relation to primary education:
The Rose proposals for the primary curriculum have disappeared in the pre-election legislative wash-up, leaving schools confused and frustrated. The long-running SATs conflict is heading for its high noon. Rumblings continue about inspection. The national strategies have come and are about to go, leaving an uncertain legacy. A growing appetite for genuine and lasting reform competes with teachers ' understandable longing for a period of stability after 13 years of constant change. (Alexander 2010)
With the Labour government having rejected the recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review, and the Tories highly unlikely to adopt them, he appealed directly to teachers to take forward the Review 's agenda and announced the launch of a network supporting those who were keen to build on the report 'and in many cases have begun to do so ':
Many of the priorities we nominate will be advanced only if teachers, and the communities they serve, seize the opportunity and the evidence provided by initiatives such as the Cambridge Primary Review, and use them to debate the central educational questions which too often go by default: what primary education is for; what constitutes an enabling and balanced curriculum; how research on learning and teaching can be translated into classroom practice that fully engages every child; in what kinds of decisions about their lives and learning young children can or should be involved; how educational quality and standards should be defined and assessed; and how - individually and in partnership - schools should be organised. (Alexander 2010)

Coalition
The general election was held on Thursday 6 May 2010. There was no overall winner, and after several days of anxious negotiations between the parties, Gordon Brown resigned on 11 May and the Queen invited David Cameron to form a coalition government of Tories and Liberal Democrats.
 For an analysis of the party manifestos and the policies of the new coalition government, see my article Hobson 's Choice: education policies in the 2010 general election (2010).

Summary of the period
What are we to make of education in England under Ed Balls? It 's a very mixed picture.
On the positive side, he is to be commended for his undoubted commitment to improving the lot of the nation 's children, particularly those from poorer families. The Children 's Plan was, as we have seen, an ambitious attempt to take a holistic view of the lives and prospects of children and to bring some much-needed coherence to policy-making by drawing together all the government departments and agencies which impinged upon them. This approach was refreshingly new.
He was very opposed to selection for secondary education and took steps to prevent schools - especially faith schools - from covertly selecting pupils from more affluent backgrounds. He was also determined to crack down on homophobic bullying in schools.
On the negative side, it is to be regretted that he was so adamantly committed to maintaining the indefensible testing and league tables regime in England 's schools, in the face of widespread hostility from parents, teachers and governors, and despite clear evidence of the damage it was causing, not least to the children themselves.
It is also regrettable that he was content to ignore the wishes of parents and teachers by continuing to increase the number of academies and trust schools, and that, despite his obvious concerns about faith schools, he was apparently happy to see their numbers grow too.
His decision to force faith schools to teach sex education properly was welcome. His capitulation in the face of religious lobbying was not.
And finally, like many politicians he talked much about returning decision-making to schools and local communities. So it 's odd that he still insisted on, for example, compelling schools to use a particular method of teaching reading - 'synthetic phonics ' - against the advice of the world 's experts in the teaching of reading.
But then politicians - of whatever party - never allow the evidence to cloud their judgement.

Chapter 12 : 2010
What future for education in England?

The new administration
As I write this last chapter of my Brief history (in December 2010), the 'coalition ' government has been in power for seven months. David Cameron (Conservative) (pictured) is Prime Minister; Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrat) is his deputy.
With George Osborne (Conservative) as Chancellor of the Exchequer, the government 's main preoccupation has been to plan for drastic cuts in public expenditure.
In education, its first decision was to rename the Department. It is now the Department for Education (DfE) - as it was between 1992 and 1995 - with Michael Gove (Conservative) (pictured) as the Secretary of State for Education and Sarah Teather (Liberal Democrat) and Nick Gibb (Conservative) as Ministers of State.
David Willetts (Conservative) is Minister of State for Universities and Science; Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat) heads a separate Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.
On 20 May the Cabinet Office published the Coalition 's Programme for Government, which included sections on Families and Children (section 14), Schools (26) and Universities and Further Education (31).
 For an analysis of the party election manifestos and the policies of the new coalition government, see my article Hobson 's Choice: education policies in the 2010 general election.

Education policies
What has the new government done so far, and what is it planning to do? The list is already a depressing one: * expansion of the academies programme; * creation of 'free schools '; * drastic budget cuts; * scrapping of the new primary curriculum, school sports partnerships, diplomas, QCDA and the schools rebuilding programme; * fewer places in higher education and vastly increased tuition fees.

Expansion of the academies programme
The New Labour government had opened 203 academies and planned to increase that number to 400. Michael Gove was determined to go much further. In his first month as education secretary, he wrote to all primary and secondary schools in England inviting them to become academies. Furthermore, he declared that he had 'no ideological objection ' to businesses making profits from the new generation of academies and free schools (The Guardian 31 May 2010).
His Academies Bill was created in haste and rushed through parliament. It: * removed local authorities ' power to veto a school becoming an academy; * dispensed with parents ' and teachers ' legal right to oppose such plans; and * allowed schools categorised by inspectors as 'outstanding ' to 'fast-track ' the process of becoming academies.
There was widespread concern at the proposals.
Education barrister David Wolfe said:
It is hard to escape the conclusion that this bill is undemocratic. What this does is remove the public process. Nobody, apart from the education secretary and the governors will be able to stop the process. It seems to be entirely out of kilter with the idea of a 'Big Society '. You are handing power to the governors to steal the school. If they want to change the ethos or make the pupils wear the uniform of Etonians, they will be able to, and parents and teachers will be powerless to stop them. (The Guardian 6 June 2010)
John Bangs, head of education at the NUT, said: 'This is astonishing: it is more centralised than anything that Labour ever considered. There is no requirement to consult parents, staff or anyone locally when an academy gets set up. ' He said local communities were being 'completely disempowered ' from having a say in the establishment of a new form of school. 'For all that we have heard from the new government about devolving power, this is actually a much more highly centralised system of control ' (The Guardian 6 June 2010).
There was concern, too, at the lack of debate in parliament. Former education secretary Estelle Morris warned that:
A bill that is intended to fundamentally change our school system is likely to become law with no green or white paper, no formal consultation and having completed all its Commons stages in eight days. That speed is usually reserved for emergency legislation that has wide support - hardly a description of the academies bill. (Morris 2010)
And Polly Toynbee worried about excluded pupils:
Expect exclusions to increase, as schools will be able to keep their funding for the year for pupils they exclude, instead of handing it over to whoever takes in that child. Ministers say this will 'remove the disincentive to exclude ' - but how perverse to add a very strong financial incentive to throw out those who risk lowering an academy 's standards. (Toynbee 2010)
Gove insisted that his plan to transform England 's schools was urgently needed to improve the chances of the poorest children, and claimed the country was falling behind the rest of the world in science, literacy and maths. He told MPs that the legislation would bring 'new dynamism ' to a programme that had lifted standards for all children and helped the disadvantaged most of all. The change was urgently needed, he said, because more than 1,900 schools had expressed an interest in converting to academy status and more than a thousand had already applied to do so. (The Guardian 19 July 2010)
The Academies Bill was passed by 317 votes to 225, a government majority of 92. Six Liberal Democrat MPs voted for an amendment calling for more consultation with parents but it was defeated by 77 votes. One of the rebels, John Pugh, said: 'To change the status of a school without allowing the parents at the school a decisive voice is extraordinarily hard to justify ' (The Guardian 27 July 2010).
In fact, it 's very surprising - and disappointing - that any Liberal Democrats voted for the bill at all. It 's worth recalling that at their spring conference in March 2009 they had agreed an education policy document Equity and Excellence which said that a Liberal Democrat government would replace academies with sponsor-managed schools which would be 'under the strategic oversight of local authorities and not Ministers in Whitehall ' (Liberal Democrats 2009:26).
Now, Liberal Democrats found themselves supporting a government which was massively expanding academies and which was determined to reduce the role of local authorities to the point where they were 'out of the picture ' altogether, according to a Whitehall source quoted in The Guardian (14 May 2010).
The Academies Act received the Royal Assent on 27 July.
 Download the Academies Act 2010 (pdf text 104kb).
It was then revealed that the number of schools which had actually applied for academy status was only 153 (The Guardian 29 July 2010). Of these, just 32 opened as academies in September (The Independent 2 September 2010).
Hostility
Meanwhile, the problems with academies - and the widespread hostility to them - showed no signs of abating.
Shireland Collegiate Academy in Sandwell - a school which, before it became an academy, inspectors had rated as 'outstanding ' and whose head had been knighted for services to education - was now classified as 'inadequate '. ATL general secretary Mary Bousted commented:
This shows up the idea that changing a school 's status to academy - simply changing its name, divorcing it from its local authority and separating it from its local community of schools - will automatically lead to improvements is a fallacy, and it will be shown to be one at great cost over the next few years. (The Guardian 28 May 2010)
Oxfordshire County Council announced its intention to close Oxford School and reopen it as an academy, despite overwhelming opposition from governors, staff and parents. Only one in five of those who responded to a council questionnaire were in favour of the change and parents submitted a 600-signature petition against it. Oxfordshire 's Tory council ignored public and professional opinion and announced it would go ahead anyway (The Oxford Times 12 August, 2 September 2010).
Children 's charity Barnardo 's warned that unfair admissions practices were resulting in schools having intakes that did not reflect their neighbourhoods, and that the expansion in the number of academies and the creation of parent-led 'free schools ' risked widening the gap. It recommended the use of ability bands to achieve a truly comprehensive mix.
Martin Narey, Barnardo 's chief executive, said:
Secondary school admissions fail to ensure a level playing field for all children. Instead we are seeing impenetrable clusters of privilege forming around the most popular schools. Allowing such practice to persist - and almost certainly expand as increasing numbers of schools take control of their own admissions - will only sustain the achievement gap in education and undermine the prospects of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable children. (The Guardian 27 August 2010)
Phil Beadle warned that the academies programme had little to do with raising standards, as the Tories claimed:
First, there is little evidence of real general success by academies, and what there is has been hotly contested. Second, the initial tranche of schools that Gove and Cameron are seeking to improve has already been judged as outstanding while under local authority control, and probably don 't really need their standards being driven up a further minuscule amount. (Beadle 2010)
Rather, the policy was about reducing the power of local authorities and the teacher unions:
By implementing a system that requires education to be funded by the state, but controlled by an ever-increasing number of voluntary sector sponsors, they destroy the unions ' ability to negotiate pay and conditions centrally and, in doing so, make it virtually impossible to retain any cohesive national pay agreement. (Beadle 2010)
Fiona Millar was concerned about how children with special educational needs (SEN) would fare in the thousands of new academies and free schools the government was proposing. Former Ofsted inspector Anne Hayward, now a consultant working with special and mainstream schools, foresaw difficulties in holding the new schools to account:
Many parents of SEN children aspire to schools in their local communities where their children can get high-quality SEN support. But local authorities already have very little access to academies to monitor outcomes, or the curriculum, which could lead to SEN children having ... a much poorer experience. They may also miss out on local networks that share expertise between mainstream and special schools. (quoted in Millar 2010)
Two weeks after the passing of the Academies Act, a Guardian/ICM poll revealed that only a quarter of those who had voted Liberal Democrat at the election approved of the government 's education policies, while more than a half disapproved. The figures for the population as a whole were similar (The Guardian 18 August 2010).

Free schools
Gove was also determined to press ahead with the creation of thousands of 'free schools ', a policy he had made much of during the election campaign.
However, his propensity for exaggeration was as pronounced in relation to free schools as it had been in the case of academies. In June he claimed that 700 of the schools would be open in 2011. Three months later he was forced to admit that the actual number was 16. Almost half would be faith schools: three Christian, two Jewish, one Hindu and one Sikh. (The Guardian 6 September 2010)
Writing in The Guardian, Simon Jenkins pointed out that the free schools policy - creating schools which were not 'under local authority control ' - was just another version of the 'dreary abuse of local democracy ' which had been pursued by Thatcher and Blair:
Transient private corporations or parents ' groups cannot realistically stand proxy for a community, let alone for a town or city ...
The key to the politics of education in Britain lies not in governance but in admissions. All else is euphemism. 'White flight ' may be called parental choice. Catchment areas may be derided as postcode lotteries. But the one really creditable effort of British education since the war has been the battle for some equality of opportunity within the state education sector, even if in big cities it has not always worked.
If Cameron and Gove really mean to reverse this, to revert to 11-plus selection and educational segregation, they had better say so, and face the political music. (Jenkins 2010a)
And Peter Wilby argued that, because of the difficulties of running a school - the need to know about curriculum, pedagogy, employment law, building regulations, health and safety etc - free schools would almost inevitably end up being run by private firms:
The vision the Conservatives sold to the public during the election campaign was of parents and public-spirited individuals running schools as they run baby and toddler groups, Scout groups and Rotary clubs. But it won 't be like that. DIY schools will need expert management help, and private companies are the obvious candidates to provide it. (Wilby 2010)
He concluded:
Once, a profit-making school was unthinkable, and one that received state funds even more so. But for private capital, it is a win-win situation: a guaranteed income stream from the government and the likelihood of state rescue if everything goes wrong. And the last 30 years suggest that what private capital wants, it usually gets in the end. (Wilby 2010)
The National Secular Society (NSS) wrote to Lord Hill of Oareford, Parliamentary under-Secretary of State for Schools, asking whether the government would legislate to prevent extremist ideologies being introduced through the new free schools and academies system. Lord Hill replied: 'we do not think it appropriate to legislate in this area ' (NSS 2010).
Yet three Muslim girls ' schools (in London, Lancaster and Leicester) were already forcing pupils as young as eleven to wear the niqab or burka as part of the school uniform, a practice which Ed Husain, co-director of the counter-extremist think-tank Quilliam, described as belonging to 'another century and another world ' (NSS 2010). They were currently private schools, but, as Terry Sanderson pointed out, there would be 'nothing to stop them applying for academy or free school status in the future ' (NSS 2010).
In November, a consultation document suggested that the government would allow the conversion of pet shops, funeral parlours and hair salons could be converted into free schools. Gove apparently regarded conversion as a cheap alternative to new buildings: 'We want to ensure that the spirit of innovation can flourish and our education system is open for business in terms of raising standards, ' he said (The Guardian 15 November 2010).
Sweden
The free schools policy was based largely on the Swedish model. But, as research by Dr Susanne Wiborg at ULIE revealed, Sweden 's free schools had not been the unqualified success which Gove claimed. The schools - set up mainly by middle-class parents in affluent urban areas - had increased social segregation. Furthermore, their pupils had done no better than other children in A Level equivalent exams and were no more likely to participate in higher education.
Now, 17 years after the neo-liberal reforms were first enacted, it appears that they have not managed to bring about decisive changes ... into the Swedish education system. Despite almost 1000 new independent schools and 150,000 students attending them, researchers ... claim that the outcome in terms of achievement induced only slightly higher pupil attainment, but also higher costs and greater segregation. (Wiborg 2010:282-3)
Given that England 's education system was already more divided than Sweden 's, free schools 'may have more damaging effects on inequality and school segregation ' (Wiborg 2010:283).
Many others agreed. Clyde Chitty (2010:277) warned that academies and free schools would do 'irreparable damage to the education system of this country '.
Sadly, the leaders of the Liberal Democrat party were apparently happy to turn a blind eye to 'the privatizing zeal of their Conservative colleagues ', despite the fact that at their annual conference in September members of the party voted overwhelmingly for a motion describing free schools as 'socially divisive, likely to depress education outcomes and an inefficient use of resources in an age of austerity ' (The Guardian 18 August 2010).
The free schools plan will certainly be costly: surplus school places will be a burden on local authorities ' budgets and the planning which will be required to allocate student places will be complex and expensive.

Drastic budget cuts
The new government warned that education would not be exempt from the savage cuts in public expenditure it was planning. A month after coming to power, ministers announced a £359m programme of education cuts (The Guardian 7 June 2010).
But worse was to come. By the beginning of July the government was talking about cuts of up to £3.5bn in the schools budget as part of the most drastic public spending squeeze since the second world war (The Guardian 5 July 2010).
Pupil premium
Desperate to have something positive to say, Clegg announced in October that he had persuaded the Treasury to find £7bn for a 'pupil premium ' scheme, under which schools would be given extra funding for children from disadvantaged homes. He insisted that this would be new money (The Guardian 16 October 2010).
But a week later, Gove admitted that he had had to make cuts elsewhere in the education budget to fund the premium. Some schools would face a budget cut in order to make the extra payment to schools taking pupils from the poorest homes (The Guardian 24 October 2010).

Curriculum matters
Primary curriculum
The new primary curriculum, proposed by Sir Jim Rose and due to be implemented in September 2011, was abandoned, along with planned initiatives in personal, social and health education, citizenship and RE. The government reckoned these decisions would save £7m (The Guardian 7 June 2010).
One of the few things the new government was determined not to scrap was the hated SATs. A quarter of all primary schools had boycotted the summer 's tests, but schools minister Nick Gibb defended the tests and confirmed that they would stay. 'Externally-validated tests give parents and professionals valuable information to gauge the standards of our primary schools and their pupils and play a vital role in accountability ', he said (The Guardian 3 August 2010).
Another policy which showed no sign of being scrapped was Gove 's intention to force teachers to use 'synthetic phonics ' to teach reading.
In August, Dylan William, professor of educational assessment at ULIE, became one of a long line of experts to condemn the proposal:
Phonics is important in learning to read, but no skilled reader uses phonics. An overemphasis on phonics will not address the problem. We are just beginning to discover that reading is one of the most complex skills. It also requires knowledge of language, speaking and listening skills. (The Guardian 3 August 2010)
School sports partnerships
Gove announced that he would abolish Labour 's £162m a year school sports partnerships scheme, but there were protests from schools, parents and British Olympic stars (The Guardian 1 December 2010).
Cameron ordered a rethink of the controversial decision and Gove was forced to announce a temporary U-turn: money would be found to keep 'key elements ' of the scheme going until the 2012 London Olympics (The Guardian 17 December 2010).
Diplomas
Another casualty of Gove 's axe was Labour 's flagship 'academic ' diplomas. The government said it would save £22.2m by abandoning the academic diplomas being developed in humanities, science and languages, and by reducing support for existing vocational diplomas in other subjects (The Guardian 7 June 2010).
Instead, it announced that state schools would now be allowed to offer iGCSE qualifications in key subjects and that the results would be included in school performance tables 'as soon as possible ' (DfE press release 7 June 2010).
In September, Gove announced that he intended to combat the 'decline in exam standards ' by offering an English baccalaureate qualification to students who passed GCSE in English, maths, one science, one foreign language and one humanity (The Guardian 6 September 2010).
QCDA scrapped
Gove confirmed that he was scrapping the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency, which had been created in 2008 when the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority was split into the QCDA and Ofqual, the watchdog for exam standards. The agency would continue to work on national tests and exam administration for the time being, he said, but it would stop work on qualifications and curriculum, saving £8m (BBC News 27 May 2010).
The decision to scrap the QCDA worried many, because its job was to give independent advice, based on its members ' experience as curriculum developers and former teachers, and sometimes even to challenge politicians. Curriculum planning was now to become the responsibility of the Department, with a panel of government-appointed 'experts ' offering advice.
Writing in The Guardian, Mike Baker commented: 'So, we have the prospect of the planned new national curriculum being shaped by advice from the education secretary 's hand-picked committee of experts and then implemented by his own department. Not much room for dissent or argument there ' (Baker 2010).
One of the first to be mentioned as a possible government advisor was Niall Ferguson, whom Gove suggested might help rewrite the history curriculum. The suggestion was controversial because, with his right-wing Eurocentric vision of western ascendancy, Ferguson was viewed by some as an apologist for imperialism (The Guardian 30 May 2010).
Celebrities
Back in February, Cameron had invited TV presenter Carol Vorderman to head a task force to review the teaching of maths.
In November Gove announced that he had appointed another TV presenter - Simon Schama - to help rewrite the history syllabus. James Vernon, professor of history at the University of California, Berkeley, commented:
It is symptomatic of how dominant market models of education have become that the minister has chosen Schama as his adviser. Neither Schama, nor Niall Ferguson, also apparently considered by Gove, has any experience of teaching in schools, indeed, like me, both are fugitives from British higher education. Nor are they even scholarly experts in the British history Gove holds so dear ... It is the popularity of their TV shows that has commended them to Gove. Expertise is now a matter of television ratings. (Vernon 2010)
But perhaps we should not be surprised that the school curriculum is now going to be written by TV presenters. After all, this is a government which is inviting McDonald 's and PepsiCo to help develop public health policy (The Observer 14 November 2010).

Free school meals
New Labour 's intention had been to extend free school meals to half a million children from low-income families. But Gove announced that the extension of the pilot schemes would be abandoned. Just three existing schemes would be allowed to continue to assess the case for increasing eligibility (The Guardian 7 June 2010).
Doctors, teaching unions and child poverty campaigners urged him to rethink his decision. They pointed out that healthier school meals had been shown to improve classroom behaviour and academic attainment (The Guardian 29 June 2010).
The decision was particularly regrettable in the light of a study of more than four thousand 10-16 year olds in England, led by Dr Gavin Sandercock, lecturer in clinical physiology at the University of Essex. This revealed that more than a quarter of boys and almost forty per cent of girls went without breakfast some or all of the time and that these children were more likely than their classmates to be inactive, unfit and obese (The Guardian 16 August 2010).

Building Schools for the Future
The biggest budget cuts affected the schools rebuilding programme.
Within days of coming to power, the government began a review of New Labour 's ambitious Building Schools for the Future project. Plans for the rebuilding or refurbishment of hundreds of secondary schools were put on hold. The Department insisted that no firm decision had yet been made, but it was clear that there would be a concerted drive to make savings from the £8.5bn annual budget for new schools, and that some of the money would be used to fund Gove 's 'free schools ' (The Guardian (14 May 2010).
In early July Gove finally cancelled Building Schools for the Future. He suspended plans for 715 new schools and cut funding for school swimming pools (The Guardian 5 July 2010).
He faced mounting anger from parents and teachers, and even from Tory MPs, two of whom demanded to know why new schools in their constituencies would not now be built.
To make matters worse, some schools which had been told their new buildings could go ahead now learned that they would not. In Sandwell, one of the most deprived parts of the country, there was anger over nine cancelled schemes. The deputy leader of the council warned of a 'two-tier system ' with some children attending schools in desperate need of renovation. Education department officials confessed they could not explain how a series of errors had been made which resulted in parents being wrongly told that their school projects would go ahead. 'We don 't have an answer on that ', a spokesman said (The Guardian 8 July 2010).
Hundreds of parents and teachers gathered outside parliament to protest at the cuts (The Guardian 19 July 2010). Gove was attacked by MPs, teachers and councils for the erroneous list of cancelled building projects and was forced to apologise in the Commons (The Guardian 29 July 2010).
In addition to the scrapping of new school building projects, Gove also cancelled Labour 's £235m Playbuilder scheme. Launched in 2008, the scheme would have seen the creation of 3,500 children 's community playgrounds across England (The Guardian 11 August 2010).
In October it became clear that even those building projects which were going ahead - affecting 600 schools - were facing budget cuts of forty per cent (The Guardian 22 October 2010).

Higher education
Fewer places
Higher education did not escape the new government 's axe, either. New Labour had promised 20,000 additional university places for 2010, but the coalition government cut this to 8,000 and threatened to fine universities if student numbers rose above this figure. The university admissions service UCAS said applications were 11.6 per cent higher than in 2009 and estimated that 170,000 students would not get places at university in 2010 (The Guardian 16 July 2010).
State school pupils from the poorest backgrounds faced another hurdle in applying for university places, when the first awards of the new A* grade at A Level were made. Sir Martin Harris, director of the government 's Office for Fair Access, warned that the new grade could strengthen private schools ' grip on elite universities (The Guardian 2 August 2010). His anxiety was justified: according to the Independent Schools Council, 18 per cent of entries from independent schools were awarded an A*, compared with a national average of 8 per cent (The Guardian 28 August 2010).
In his first major speech on universities, Vince Cable outlined plans to abolish tuition fees and replace them with a graduate tax which students would pay when they finished their degrees. He said the plan - which he insisted was only an option - would inevitably result in some students paying more (The Guardian 15 July 2010).
Browne Review
In November 2009 Lord Browne had been asked by the New Labour government to lead an independent panel to review the funding of higher education and make recommendations to ensure that teaching at our HEIs [higher education institutions] is sustainably financed, that the quality of that teaching is world class and that our HEIs remain accessible to anyone who has the talent to succeed. (Browne 2010:2)
The Browne review, Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education, was published on 12 October 2010. It decided against a graduate tax and instead proposed a Student Finance Plan, with the government meeting upfront costs.
The report was based on six principles: * more investment should be available for higher education; * student choice should be increased; * everyone who has the potential should be able to benefit from higher education; * no one should have to pay until they start to work; * when payments are made they should be affordable; and * part time students should be treated the same as full time students for the costs of learning. (Browne 2010:4-5)
 Download the Browne Review Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education (pdf text 799kb).
Tuition fees
During the general election campaign, Liberal Democrat candidates had toured university campuses telling students that the party would abolish tuition fees, and all Liberal Democrat MPs had signed a public declaration pledging themselves to vote against any rise in the fees.
Education minister Sarah Teather had repeatedly campaigned against tuition fees - even making them the subject of her maiden speech in the House of Commons in November 2003. And her leader, Nick Clegg, had appeared in a party election broadcast lambasting the other two parties for their 'broken promises '.
Yet by November, Vince Cable was proposing not just a rise but atripling of fees to £9000 a year. The Liberal Democrat party was torn apart by the issue.
In the event, when it came to the debate on 9 December, some Liberal Democrat MPs (including Clegg, Cable and Teather) voted for the increase, some voted against, and others abstained. The measure was approved by just 21 votes.
Thousands of university students and school pupils took to the streets to protest. They were angry not just at the massive rise in fees, but also at the sheer dishonesty of the Liberal Democrats. One school leaver told Nick Cohen that he and his friends had been so convinced that Clegg and Cable were honourable men that they had not only voted Liberal but campaigned for them too: 'I believed them when they said they were the party for young people, ' he said. 'I really believed them ' (Cohen 2010).
After the vote, opinion polls suggested that support for the Liberal Democrats had fallen from 23 per cent in May to around 8 per cent, their lowest showing for decades.
Education maintenance allowance
In the run up to the election, Gove had denied that he would scrap the £30 a week education maintenance allowance (EMA) paid to 16-19 year olds from poorer families who stayed in education. He had told The Guardian: 'Ed Balls keeps saying that we are committed to scrapping the EMA. I have never said this. We won 't. '
Yet in October 's comprehensive spending review he reneged on that promise: EMA was scrapped (The Guardian 25 October 2010).

Education White Paper
The government 's education white paper The Importance of Teachingwas published on 24 November. It declared that: what is needed most of all is decisive action to free our teachers from constraint and improve their professional status and authority, raise the standards set by our curriculum and qualifications to match the best in the world and, having freed schools from external control, hold them effectively to account for the results they achieve. (DfE 2010:8)
It was a wide-ranging document containing sections on: * Teaching and leadership; * Behaviour; * Curriculum, assessment and qualifications; * The new school system; * Accountability; * School improvement; and * School Funding.
It argued that the National Curriculum had been too prescriptive and had specified teaching methods which teachers should be free to decide. The new curriculum would be 'slim, clear and authoritative ', and while academies and free schools would keep the freedom to set aside parts of the curriculum, they would be required to teach a 'broad and balanced ' curriculum (DfE 2010:42).
All schools, including special schools and pupil referral units, would be allowed to become academies. To address unfair variations in funding between schools, the long-term goal was a 'national funding formula ' under which money would go directly from Whitehall to schools, rather than through the local authorities (DfE 2010:82).
The government would expect head teachers to take a strong stand against bullying - 'particularly prejudice-based racist, sexist and homophobic bullying ' (DfE 2010:32). Teachers would be given the right to search pupils for harmful items, and allegations against teachers would not automatically result in their suspension (DfE 2010:34). Heads would have the right to exclude disruptive children 'and to be confident that their authority in taking these difficult decisions will not be undermined ' (DfE 2010:32).
The government would no longer fund graduates who did not have at least a 2:2 degree (DfE 2010:20). The Teach First programme would be expanded, with members of other professions and former members of the armed forces encouraged to become teachers (DfE 2010:22).
Pupils would be prevented from taking large numbers of A Level resits, and the focus of the GCSE would be on the final exam. An English baccalaureate would 'encourage schools to offer a broad set of academic subjects to age 16 ' (DfE 2010:44).
 Download the White Paper The Importance of Teaching Cm 7980 (pdf text 1mb).
Interestingly, Finland was frequently quoted in the white paper as one of the countries which had been the government 's 'inspiration '. Yet not once did the paper acknowledge that Finland 's schools were almost entirely comprehensive and unstreamed.
Neither did it explain how it would 'free our teachers from constraint ' and our 'schools from external control ', while at the same time forcing them to use a particular method to teach reading.
But those weren 't the only concerns.
Peter Mortimore, former director of the University of London Institute of Education, was disturbed by the white paper 's tacit acceptance of privatisation:
The concept of privatisation is not discussed in the white paper, but can be detected in its subtext - with frequent references to 'new providers ', 'private sector organisations ' and 'a new market of school improvement services '. Yet where is the evidence that a market-led system, run by hedge-fund managers and their ilk, will create an education system to equal Finland 's? (Mortimore 2010)
And Simon Jenkins was not convinced that the white paper would result in serious reconsideration of the school curriculum:
The truth is that the entire curriculum is juju. Nobody knows its purpose. It is a miasma of archaism, bogus assumption, bland assertion and inertia. Nobody assesses what is a sensible way of spending a day, week or term. Nobody thrashes out the appropriate balance of vocational and educational, preferring to leave politicians to decide on the basis of 'what was good enough for me '. Almost everything taught to children is forgotten. The waste of money, time and talent must be stupendous. Yet we sail happily on, gazing over the stern and marvelling at the wake trailing behind. (Jenkins 2010b)
(The Education Act based on the proposals in The Importance of Teaching received the royal assent on 15 November 2011. SeePostscript below for more details).
Coalition?
At the start of this chapter I put the word 'coalition ' in inverted commas because it seemed to me that this was effectively a right-wing Tory government propped up by leading Liberal Democrats who were totally out of touch with their grassroots members. Nothing I have seen or heard in the past seven months has persuaded me to remove those inverted commas.
And sadly, Labour politicians are in no position to criticise, since the Tories ' policies on academies, free schools and university tuition fees are no more than extensions of New Labour 's - albeit on a grand scale.

In conclusion
This history has focused on the long struggle to create for England 's children an education system which values them all. It has, in many ways, been a sad story.
In the 19th century there was hostility to the very idea of mass education and, when that argument was eventually won, the system which evolved was based on the entrenched class divisions of English society.
In the first half of the 20th century the divisions continued, only now they were presented as being based on theories of intelligence rather than on social class.
By the middle of the century these theories had been shown to be spurious, and for a brief spell - in the 1960s and early 1970s - it looked as though, finally, England might get a truly comprehensive public education service.
But since 1976 (when Callaghan gave his Ruskin College speech and started the 'Great Debate ') the trend has been back to division and elitism.
Thatcher and Major sought to replace public service with market forces.
Blair created more division with academies and faith schools, and micromanaged the teaching process itself.
Under Gordon Brown, Ed Balls tried to take a holistic view of the needs of children but refused to undo the damage done by his predecessors.
And now we have Cameron and Gove, determined to destroy the local authorities and break up England 's schools. Will a recognisable state system of education even exist five years from now?
Stewart Ranson, emeritus professor at Warwick University, comments:
Over the past 20 years the neo-liberal agenda of choice and competition in schools has undermined public education. When the present contradictions finally implode, the nation will need a Royal Commission that leads a national conversation to rebuild education based on justice. Education should not depend on power and wealth, but on recognising that extending all the capabilities of all children is the nation 's first public good. (Ranson 2010:158)
And in his last column for The Guardian, Peter Mortimore wrote:
Over my years in the education service, I have witnessed the policies of 28 secretaries of state. I have observed the work of scores of local authority education officers, hundreds of heads and thousands of teachers, teacher trainers and pupils in many different countries.
I have seen great progress: British teachers today are amongst the best I have seen anywhere. But the improvements to the system, so obvious in the first half of my career, have not kept pace. Anthony Crosland 's request to local authorities to go comprehensive, the raising of the school leaving age from 15 to 16, the Plowden Committee 's concern for the disadvantaged, the merging of the GCE and CSE into the GCSE and the abolition of corporal punishment pointed the way to a modern education system.
Regrettably, the influence of the anti-progressive Black Papers, the wasted opportunity of James Callaghan 's Great Debate and the systematic rubbishing of the comprehensive ideal by both Tories and New Labour have stymied progress. In addition, the downgrading of local government and the creation of new types of schools - from Kenneth Baker 's city technology colleges to Michael Gove 's free schools - have fashioned a deeply fragmented English education service. Add to this the haughty control and command of New Labour 's classroom diktats, and small wonder that - despite the dedication of those who work in schools - the system is a mess. (Mortimore 2010)
Half a century ago, in his book The Long Revolution, Raymond Williams argued:
It is a question of whether we can grasp the real nature of our society, or whether we persist in social and educational patterns based on a limited ruling class, a middle professional class, a large operative class, cemented by forces that cannot be challenged and will not be changed. The privileges and barriers, of an inherited kind, will in any case go down. It is only a question of whether we replace them by the free play of the market, or by a public education designed to express and create the values of an educated democracy and a common culture. (Williams 1961:155)
Sadly, our political masters have chosen the market.
Derek Gillard
20 December 2010

Postscript
Education Act 2011
The main provisions of this Act (15 November 2011) are as follows: * schools will have more power to search pupils (Section 2); * Independent Appeal Panels are replaced by Review Panels with limited powers (4); * schools no longer need to give parents notice of pupil detentions (5); * the powers of the Schools Adjudicator are reduced (34); * new schools will normally be academies, and local authorities will have no say in who promotes them (37); * the Secretary of State: * can demand that a local authority changes its scheme for funding maintained schools (46); * will have greater power to close schools and reopen them as academies (56); * can remove the protection for non-religious teachers in foundation and voluntary controlled schools which become academies (62); * has greater power to make land available for 'free schools ' (63).

Citations: You are welcome to cite this piece. If you do so, please acknowledge it thus:  Gillard D (2011) Education in England: a brief historywww.educationengland.org.uk/history