Last week, the Social Mobility Commission published research showing that poorer pupils are being let down. Just think about that for a second—and then think about the government's empty rhetoric of "a Britain that works for all.” Not if you are poor, it doesn't. The Commission found that children on free school meals achieve less good GCSE grades than their more affluent peers. Crucially, the “attainment gap” has been getting worse since 2012. The research suggests this is because poorer pupils are more likely to be placed in lower sets, with less qualified teachers and lower expectations. So they are marked down early: poorer children aren’t expected to do well, so they get shunted to one side.
And so the cycle continues. It's a miracle that bright kids from disadvantaged backgrounds still manage, somehow, to get on in life—and that’s without getting into the question of whether they reach their full potential. As a 16-year-old mum-to-be I was branded a failure, and I know that far too few of my former classmates have been able to reach the heights of which they were capable. Not because they lacked the ability or the aspiration, but because the obstacles were just too great.
But what is the government's answer to this dislocation in our education system? More grammar schools, naturally. Today the government announced £320m ostensibly for the expansion of free schools, but heavily briefing that it hailed a new 'grammar schools revolution.'" Even though its own Commission explicitly calls for it to abandon discredited plans to increase selection.
The Tories will also impose £3bn worth of funding cuts to our schools: the biggest cuts they have faced in decades. This will only make the attainment gap between advantaged and disadvantaged children wider, at a time when inequality is steadily worsening.
It's enough to make me weep. But it doesn't have to be like this.
Labour had a proud record in government. When we took office in 1997 the attainment gap was 30.7 per cent, measured by comparing the number of pupils on free school meals who achieve five GCSEs at A*-C with the results of other pupils. When we left office, we had cut that gap by more than a third. Not good enough, maybe, but real progress nevertheless, because as a government we took radical, practical steps to ensure that every young person had the best start in life. Labour increased education funding, it opened 3,000 Surestart centres, it introduced the “London Challenge” to concentrate effort in the most disadvantaged and deprived areas of the capital. It worked tirelessly to close the attainment gap, to ensure that all children were able to go as far as their talents could take them.
Now our work is being steadily undone. It is disgraceful. Every child deserves the best education possible, regardless of their background. Yet still the Tories plough on, wrong-headed, misguided, locked in the past. And that is putting it charitably.
I believe that the poorest children deserve the best teachers. That those with the lowest attainment need the biggest leg-up. That we should intervene early and consistently. That is why I have asked my Early Years Task Force to come up with affordable, accessible solutions to the mounting crisis in childcare. Why Labour has pledged to bring back maintenance grants to give a helping hand to teenagers who need one. Why I want to see apprenticeships and vocational education and training given as much priority as Labour gave higher education during the Blair-Brown years. Nothing should stand in the way of bright pupils trying to do their best. Not selection. Not funding cuts. Not Tory ideology.
As it stands, a whole generation of disadvantaged children are being let down. And you never know, the children who are being failed could have gone on to develop a cure for cancer, or been world-leading climate scientists, or found ways to help reduce poverty in the developing world.
Sadly, on this government’s watch, it is increasingly likely that the rich talent and potential of those children will never be unlocked—and that their futures will be determined not by who they are and what they can contribute, but by where they came from and who their parents are.
