Ruth LuptonCentre for Analysis of Social Exclusion

London School of Economics

Labour Markets and Trajectories of Schools Performance in England

The data• State secondary schools : c3200• Construct trajectories for all schools present 1996 -2009 even if:

– Closed and re-opened as new school/Academy– Moved to new buildings– Acquired specialism, changed gender etc

• At this stage using single measure: 5 A*-C GCSE– Only measure consistently collected

• More to be done with other measures over shorter periods, also rolls, SEN, history of school closures, and private schools

• Matching to labour market data (TTWA) – 1971-1991 trends (with difficulty)– 2000s JSA claimant count – others to follow

• Later also to neighbourhood characteristics

The context• Broad policy consensus (since late 1970s?) on labour

market/education/equalities:– Competitive position in global knowledge economies requires

high skills and knowledge: search whole pool to identify talent– Jobs and labour are increasingly mobile– Knowledge economies can give rise to increasingly unequal

labour markets and to exclusion. Social mobility in this situation requires more and better jobs AND equal access. So do social cohesion and inclusion.

• And the sociology of individualisation: learners create individual biographies through choices drawing on a wide range of global influences

Policy response

• Focus on academic outcomes (in the absolute) rather than engagement or progress

• Focus on ‘closing the gap’ although no consensus on what an acceptable gap could be or importance of gap relative to absolute levels

• Individual school-based approach to raising standards:– Strong accountability regime– Re-provisioning in areas of ‘failure’ (threshold approach)– Marketisation to enhance competition– Generic school improvement measures– Some redistribution to schools poorer areas– Wider range of equivalent (vocational qualifications)

• Social and economic influences addressed through early years provision, extended schools

• More recently, focus on raising aspirations and on parenting. Getting people to exercise their agency for maximum individual benefit

Critiques• The goal is wrong: justice is about recognition as well as

redistribution and/or recognition is a means to an end• Still more to do in contextualising school improvement

strategies to recognise different circumstances• Marketisation leads to worse outcomes for the worst off• Patterning of attainment suggests strong structural forces

remain influential. – Is it just a matter of time before people get the message?– Is it poverty that holds people back?– Do labour market realities look different to the people at the

bottom?• Class cultural inheritances a) persist and b) have value

GCSE points by Decile Group of Neighbourhood Deprivation

6th tenth (5)Highest tenth (4.7)

Bo

ys

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Rank in the distribution

Source: National Equality Panel

Distribution of school performance 1996-2009

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

Median School Performance by 1996 Quintile Group (schools)

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

20

40

60

80

100

Top group234Bottom group

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

TOP234Bottom

Median School Perfomance by 1996 Quintile Group (TTWAs)

School trajectories are uneven:Number of ‘Ups’ 1996-2009

Top

2

3

4

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

3 times or fewer4 to 7 times8 or more times

Qui

ntile

Gro

up

Bumpy trajectories at the bottom

Bottom Decile Group Top Decile Group

19961997

19981999

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

M41 9PD NG20 8QFNG31 7PXSE3 8EP SE3 0XX TN2 4PY TN24 8AL

19961997

19981999

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

AL1 4PR B91 3NZ BD5 7RR CH48 8GGCM23 3LUHG4 2DG M32 8JB PE1 2UE WD25 0UU

Big jumps

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

School 1

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

School 3

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

School 4

Labour market links weaken

• In 1996 half of the lowest performing fifth of schools in just 10 TTWAs

• In 2009, spread across 24 TTWAs• No particular relationship to labour market

characteristics (1991) or trends in 2000s

So can all schools do it?Agency not structure

• What is it?– Implausible that rapid year-on-year leaps are

really about school quality• In any case

– There are within labour market factors that structure performance – school markets, demographics, institutional contexts

– Schools are in some cases in symbiotic relationship

A tale of two schools

Attainment 5 A-C Roll

1993/4

1994/5

1995/6

1996/7

1997/8

1998/9

1999/00

2000/01

2001/2

2002/3

2003/4

2004/5

2005/6

2006/7

2007/80

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1993/4

1994/5

1995/6

1996/7

1997/8

1998/9

1999/00

2000/01

2001/2

2002/3

2003/4

2004/5

2005/6

2006/7

2007/80

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Trends in Roll

Scho

ol R

oll i

ndex

ed to

199

3/4

Implications

• Labour market influences need to be understood at individual rather than school level

• Need for a fresh debate about what constitutes success (supported by longitudinal research)

• Abandon a threshold approach to school improvement and re-provisioning

• Less focus on individual schools – more on areas as a whole (not necessarily local authorities)