CASE Paper

Schools, Education and Social

Exclusion
Jo Sparkes
November 1999

LSE STICERD Research Paper No. CASE 029

This paper can be downloaded without charge from:
http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/CASEpaper29.pdf

Copyright © STICERD 1999

 Schools, Education and Social Exclusion
Jo Sparkes

Contents
1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1
2. Compulsory educational attainment and adult life chances .............................................2
2.1 Educational attainment, employment and earnings ......................................................2
2.2 Other educational outcomes are important too ..............................................................6
3. Educational attainment and outcomes – the current state of play ...................................8
4. Variations in compulsory educational attainment..............................................................9
4.1 Schools can make a difference ...........................................................................................9
4.2 Non-school factors and educational attainment ...........................................................10
4.3 School factors accounting for variance in educational attainment ............................24
5. Education: a strategy to reduce social exclusion? .............................................................33
6. Some further areas of research .............................................................................................36
References .........................................................................................................................................39

CASEpaper 29 Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion

November 1999 London School of Economics
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
CASE enquiries – tel: 020 7955 6679

i
 Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion

The ESRC Research Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE) was
established in October 1997 with funding from the Economic and Social
Research Council. It is located within the Suntory and Toyota International
Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines (STICERD) at the London
School of Economics and Political Science, and benefits from support from
STICERD. It is directed by Howard Glennerster, John Hills, Kathleen
Kiernan, Julian Le Grand, Anne Power and Carol Propper.

Our Discussion Paper series is available free of charge. We also produce

summaries of our research in CASEbriefs, and reports from various
conferences and activities in CASEreports. To subscribe to the CASEpaper
series, or for further information on the work of the Centre and our seminar
series, please contact the Centre Administrator, Jane Dickson, on:

Telephone: UK+20 7955 6679

Fax: UK+20 7955 6951
Email: [email protected]
Web site: http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/Case

 Jo Sparkes

All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may
be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including 
notice, is given to the source.

ii
Editorial Note

Jo Sparkes is a research officer in the Department of Social Policy at the

London School of Economics. As part of its ESRC-funded activities, CAES
commissioned Jo, whilst she was working at the Centre for Educational
Research at the LSE, to review the literature and research evidence on
education and social exclusion especially during the schools years. She is now
working on the ESRC research project “ Competitiveness, Cohesion and the
Policy Environment “ which is directed by Dr Mark Kleinman at the LSE and
others.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Dr Anne West and Dr Philip Noden at the
Centre for Educational Research, and Professor Howard Glennerster,
Professor John Hills and colleagues at the Centre for Analysis of Social
Exclusion for their helpful comments on the earlier drafts of this paper.

Abstract

A review of research evidence suggests that low levels of educational

attainment are crucial in generating and sustaining social exclusion. Test
scores at school are the most effective predictor of many adult outcomes.
School attendance and soft skills are also important. Reviewing the factors
accounting for the variance in educational attainment, it is evident that
combinations of social disadvantage powerfully affect school performance
with up to 75% of school variation in 16 year old attainment at GCSE
associated with pupil intake factors. But school factors can raise attainment
by up to 14 GCSE points for average pupils. Hence schools are a good place
to improve children’s skills. Research suggests that higher per pupil
spending, smaller class sizes and teacher quality in schools all seem to make a
difference and some have most impact on disadvantaged pupils. However an
approach which focuses solely on the improvement of average school
performance is likely to be a less effective means of reducing social exclusion
than an approach which creates incentives that rewards improvement among
the least able. Other factors such as the behaviour and hiring decisions of
employers also require attention if improved educational performance is to
provide high pay offs.

iii
1. Introduction

Whilst the concept of social exclusion is not new, its widespread use in British
social policy discourse is. Despite the increasing use of the term, there is no
single definition of social exclusion and the term is used with a variety of
definitions in mind. For some, social exclusion is merely a new way to refer to
existing concepts such as poverty or unemployment (Levitas, 1997; Paugam,
1993). However, a number of commentators have adopted a broader
definition centred on a notion of ‘integration’, rather than a sole concern with
the distribution of resources. From this perspective social exclusion is a
process of long term non-participation in the economic, civic, and social
norms that integrate and govern the society in which an individual resides
(Burchardt et al., 1998). It is conceptually differentiated from poverty and
deprivation, primarily by having a focus on the process of disengagement.
Indeed, tracing this process from source to outcome emerges as a key issue
(Room, 1995), and as a result social exclusion perspectives recognise the
dynamism of individuals’ trajectories over time. In addition the term moves
the unit of analysis from the individual, to socially structured disadvantage.
Maintaining this focus helps to ensure that social exclusion theories and
policies do not fall solely back on deficit theories focused on the pathology of
individuals or groups of individuals (Leney, 1999).
Operationalising such a definition of social exclusion in Britain in the
1990s, Burchardt et al. (1998) highlight the importance of participation in five
dimensions of activity – production, consumption, wealth, political and
social. As the authors highlight, an individual’s ability to participate in these
various spheres of activity is affected by a wide range of factors, which
interact with one another. These are outlined as;
½ “an individual’s own characteristics, such as his/her health and
education;
½ events in the individual’s life such as job loss;
½ the characteristics of the area in which the individual lives such as
transport links;
½ the social, political, civil economic institutions of society such as racial
discrimination laws.”
In contemporary modern societies, the human capital an individual possesses
affects the probability of participation in these spheres of life. However the
literature is predominantly focused on the role of education in relation to
production defined in terms of labour market participation. Less is known of
the role education plays in relation to the other spheres.

1
 As section two of this paper outlines, the knowledge, skills and
qualifications an individual acquires during compulsory education are
important facets of an individual’s human capital. In the third section a
summary of the state of knowledge about educational attainment in
compulsory schooling system is provided. The following three sections
analyse the factors accounting for the variance in educational attainment and
outcomes, both in and outside of schools. Finally some broader questions on
the role of education as a strategy to reduce social exclusion are explored.

2. Compulsory educational attainment and adult life chances

2.1 Educational attainment, employment and earnings

Recent analysis of National Child Development Study data, (Hobcraft, 1998)
identified educational test scores during compulsory schooling as “the most
frequent and effective childhood predictor of adult outcomes”. Research
suggests that individuals who leave school with low levels of educational
attainment are at a higher risk of experiencing social exclusion as adults, with
those who lack basic literacy and numeracy skills at particular risk.
Educational attainment is strongly related to unemployment and
earnings across the developed world. In general unemployment rates
decrease as the educational attainment of workers increases. In the UK, the
unemployment rate is 13% for 25 to 64 year olds with primary and lower
secondary education, 8.3% for those with upper secondary education and
3.9% among those with non university tertiary and university level education
(OECD, 1997). This trend is apparent across countries with widely different
dispersions of educational attainment in their populations and labour market
profiles. Basic literacy and numeracy attainment have a particularly profound
effect on labour market participation and unemployment. Evidence (Bynner
and Parsons, 1997; Moser, 1999) suggests that the experience of those with
poor literacy and very poor numeracy skills is particularly marked. In terms
of labour market access only 1 in every 50 jobs is open to those without Basic
Skills Agency “entry level skill” and only 50% of jobs are open to those with
1
skills only at entry level (Moser, 1999). Subsequently adults with poor skills
are up to five times more likely to be unemployed, compared with those with

1 The Basic Skills Agency entry level skill is broadly equivalent to level two in the
National Curriculum in schools, BSA level one is approximately equivalent to
National Curriculum level 4 (the expected level for 11 year olds) and BSA level two
is equivalent to GCSE Grade A-C (Moser, 1999).

2
average skills (Bynner and Parsons, 1997; Ekinsymth and Bynner, 1994). The
labour market difficulties associated with poor basic skills emerge during the
early stages of working life. Analysis of the 1970 British Birth Cohort Study
(Ekinsmyth and Bynner, 1994) revealed that at the age of 21, poorly skilled
male school leavers were more likely to be unemployed, and had experienced
twice as many months of unemployment, as their counterparts with average
basic skills. Poor literacy and numeracy skills were found to be of equal
importance in explaining the higher levels of unemployment. However other
work on basic skills has suggested that mathematical attainment is of
particular importance in terms of maintaining employment in the modern
economy (Bynner and Parsons, 1997). Poorly skilled female school leavers
experienced less unemployment than their male counterparts, tending to
follow mixed trajectories, experiencing a variety of jobs, training and
education; typically interspersed with unemployment or to leave the labour
market due to early family formation. By the age of 21, one third of females
with poor literacy defined themselves as engaged in house care.
When making judgements on the value of employing individuals,
employers require easily accessible and comparable data. Educational
qualifications most commonly fulfil this requirement. Hence there is a link
between qualifications, labour market participation and earnings. There is
strong evidence that a lack of qualifications is associated with an increased
risk of unemployment (Dolton and O’Neil, 1996). Individuals increasingly
require some form of qualifications to access the modern labour market. In
1986, only 62% of jobs required some form of qualifications but, by 1997 the
proportion had risen to 69% (Green et al., 1998). The importance of
qualifications as an explanatory factor in unemployment is known to be
increasing over time (Arulampamlam and Stewart, 1995). In terms of
attainment at 16, Robinson and Oppenhiem (1998) suggest that the
“possession of five or more lower grade GCSEs significantly
reduces the chances of exclusion post 16. Possession of one or
more higher grade GCSEs has a further positive effect.”

3
 Their analysis of Youth Cohort Study data is shown in Table 1. They go
on to advocate the proportion of 16 year olds failing to gain at least 20 GCSE
points2 in a maximum of seven subjects (including English and Maths) as a
key indicator of educational exclusion. They claim that this is the clearest cut
off point in terms of the relationship between GCSE attainment and post-16
participation in education, training employment and/or progression to an
intermediate vocational qualification. According to the authors, progression
to intermediate qualifications is significant, as this is the minimum level of
qualification, providing some leverage in the labour market.

Table 1: Main activity of 16 year olds by GCSE attainment, 1996

F/T Ed Gov. train F/T job *Excluded
5+ GCSE A-C 92 3 2 3
1-4 GCSE A-C 68 13 9 10
5+ lower grades 49 24 12 15
1-4 lower grade 34 22 13 30
No grades 26 20 17 38
Total 71 11 7 9

Note: *Excluded includes those out of work/unemployed and inactive but also a small
number (1-2%) who are in part-time work.
Source: Robinson and Oppenhiem, (1998) YCS cohort 8, sweep 1.

The link between qualifications and earnings is well documented and

exemplified by analyses using the Labour Force Survey. Among men, the
attainment of 1-4 GCSEs at grade A-C increases earnings by 17%, 5 or more
GCSEs at grade A-C increases earnings by 41%, 2 or more A levels increases

2 A GCSE point score is the sum of an individuals GCSE grades calculated on the
following basis: A*=8, A=7, B=6, C=5, D=4, E=3, F=2, G=1. GCSE short courses are
equivalent to half a GCSE at the same grade. GNVQ attainments are also included
in point scores on the following basis (DfEE, circular number 11/98).

Grade Part One GNVQ Intermediate Foundation

GNVQ GNVQ
Intermediate Foundation
Distinction 15 8 30 16
Merit 12 6 24 12
Pass 10 3 20 6

4
earnings by 67% and a degree increases earnings by 111% compared with a
base of no qualifications. Once again, basic skill attainment has a profound
effect on earnings. Low earnings are far more likely if one has poor basic
skills than if one has good skills.
In NCDS analysis (Bynner and Parsons, 1997) low income was defined
as under £200 per week for men and under £150 per week for women.
According to these definitions, twice as many men with very low numeracy
skill levels earned a low wage by comparison with men in the highest
numeracy group. With reference to literacy, 42% of those with very low or
low literacy were earning low incomes in comparison with 24% of those with
good literacy. Evidence suggests that numeracy skill has a particularly
powerful effect on the likelihood of low adult annual earnings. Special
analysis undertaken in the International Adult Literacy Survey (see Moser,
1999) found a correlation of 0.28 between annual earnings and literacy and a
correlation of 0.38 with numeracy (see Table 2). The importance of numeracy
to earnings is reiterated in analysis of the NCDS sample at the age of 37. Of
those who left school at 16, 30% of women with competent numeracy and
low literacy earned below £150 per week. The comparable figure among
women with very low numeracy levels and competent literacy was 58%
(Bynner and Parsons, 1997). The significance of basic mathematical skill in
explaining wage differentials is also found in US evidence (Murnane et al. in
Halsey et al., 1997).

Table 2: Distribution of annual earnings for people with different levels of

literacy and numeracy
Annual Literacy Numeracy
Earnings
Low level High level Low level High level
Up to £4,6000 20 11 26 6
£4,600-£9,000 29 12 29 10
£9,000-13,000 27 16 22 17
13,000-19,200 17 20 15 21
Over £19,200 7 40 7 46
Total 100 100 100 100

Source: IALS in Moser (1999)

Less is known of the significance of educational attainment in relation

to participation in the spheres of wealth, political and social activity.

5
However basic skill attainment is associated with participation in the savings
and political spheres. NCDS analysis (Bynner and Parsons, 1997) shows that
by the age of 37, one-third of those with very low skill levels did not own
their own home, compared with under 10 per cent of men and women with
good skills. Furthermore, NCDS analysis also indicates that substantial
proportions of those with poor skills do not participate in general election
voting. Literacy skill is more powerful than numeracy in this respect – 32% of
men and 30% of women with low literacy skill failed to vote in the 1987
General Election compared with 22% of men and 17% of women across the
NCDS sample. In addition educational attainment is inversely related to poor
reported general health and depression as measured by the Malaise
Inventory (Whitty et al., 1999; Bynner and Parsons, 1997).

2.2 Other educational outcomes are important too

Success in formal examinations and tests is only one of a number of
educational outcomes. At the individual level other outcomes include
attitudinal and personal qualities, behaviour and school attendance. Evidence
suggests that non-cognitive educational attainments are also significant in
relation to later adult outcomes. Recent research on employability (Kleinman
et al., 1998; Moss and Tiley, 1995) has emphasised the importance of
individuals’ personal qualities and ‘softer skills’ in accessing the labour
market. Moss and Tiley, (1995) identify two clusters of soft skills:
“the first, interaction, has to do with ability to interact with
customers, and co-workers. This cluster includes friendliness,
teamwork, ability to fit in, spoken communication skills, and
appearance and attire. A second cluster we call motivation, taking
in characteristics such as enthusiasm, positive work attitude,
commitment, dependability and willingness to learn.”
According to the authors soft skills are measured neither by educational
attainment nor standardised test scores. In Moss and Tiley’s sample of
American employers, 86% included soft skills in their list of most important
hiring criteria and almost half put soft skills first in that list. Surveys of
employers in the UK have also stressed the importance of soft skills.
Employers are evidently dissatisfied with the responses of the education
system in these respects. A report by Industry in Education (1996) on
employability concluded that among employers,
“there was unanimous agreement that far more needs to done
before school leaving age to develop the personal qualities
required in adult life and employment.”

6
However soft skills have yet to be adequately defined and their importance,
relative to formal qualifications, for different groups of people and at
different stages in the life cycle is unknown.
Evidence also suggests that school attendance is an important factor
with small but significant independent effects on early adult outcomes. The
associations between truancy and educational attainment are well
documented. Persistent truants tend to obtain significantly lower
examination scores. The Youth Cohort Study indicated that 38% of persistent
truants (those who reported truanting for weeks at a time) did not attain any
GCSEs compared with 3% of non-truants. Occasional truants also gain
significantly lower examination scores than those who report never having
truanted (Bosworth, 1994). Early research (Gray et al., 1980) suggested that
the difficulties encountered by truants, particularly in the labour market were
a result of their depressed examination performance and lack of
qualifications at the end of their schooling; and that thereafter their problems
were no greater than others with similarly poor qualifications. However,
more recent research (Hibbert et al., 1990) has demonstrated that the
occupational outcomes of former truants are distinct from other poor
achievers:
“Truancy is a predictor of employment problems and of a more
severe kind than will be experienced by others who share the
disadvantaged backgrounds and low attainment, which typify the
truant.”
According to Hibbert et al. (1990) at the age of 23, truants have lower status
occupations, less stable career patterns and are up to twice as likely to be
unemployed as non truants. Interestingly, when in work former truants’
income is no lower, but if the number of children in the household is taken
into account they are considerably less well off. These differences remained
statistically significant after controlling for the effects of social background,
educational ability, poor attendance due to other reasons (e.g. sickness) and
qualifications on leaving school. Preliminary analysis indicates the
independent effect of truancy on adult outcomes is even more marked for
those individuals who reported truanting at the age of 11, in addition to
truanting at age 16.
Other evidence (Hibbert et al., 1990b) suggests, by the age of 23, truants
are up to three times more likely to have experienced marital breakdown, up
to ten and half times more likely to smoke heavily (over 30 cigarettes a day)
and up to three times as likely to suffer depression as non-truants of similar
background, ability, and educational attainment. Interestingly, holding these
factors constant, truancy has no statistically significant impact on age of the

7
first child or patterns of alcohol consumption. Truancy has also been linked
with offending behaviour. Home Office research findings of self-reported
offending amongst 14–25 year olds in England and Wales found that the odds
of offending were almost three times as high among truants as those not
truanting (Grahame and Bowling, 1995, cited in SEU, 1998). These findings
suggest that schools contribute to individuals’ human capital formation, and
reduce their vulnerability to social exclusion as adults, in ways which are
neither assessed nor reflected in national assessments and examinations.

3. Educational attainment and outcomes – the current state of

play

Given the associations between adult life chances and school outcomes,
current levels of educational attainment are not encouraging. Although
general levels of attainment are rising, a significant number of young people
truant from school and leave school without attaining qualifications or basic
and personal skills. In terms of GCSE attainment, there have been year-on-
year improvements in the proportion of young people attaining five GCSEs
at grades A-C. At present around 45% of young people obtain qualifications
at this level. However the proportion leaving with no GCSE passes has
remained stable since the late 1980s at approximately 1 in 12 young people. In
1996/7 the figure was 7.7%, over three-quarters of this group were not
entered for any examinations (DfEE, 1997). In terms of average GCSE point
score, there has been a national improvement of 2.8 points in the period from
1993-1997. Improvements have not been evenly distributed across the ability
range. In this period, the top decile group improved by 4.4 points whilst the
bottom 10% experienced a deterioration of 0.1 points (West and Pennell,
1999). Hence, in recent years the gap between the highest and lowest
attaining pupils has grown. This polarisation has been attributed, at least in
part, to the introduction of league tables focusing on high attainers as
performance indicators (West and Pennell, 1999; Pearce and Hillman, 1998).
This has created powerful incentives, that have encouraged some schools to
focus attention and resources on pupils who are on the borderline of
achieving five GCSEs at grades A-Cs, as these are published in the DfEE’s
examination performance tables, at the expense of lower attainers (Kleinman
et al., 1998).
In terms of basic skill attainment, a recent study found that 15% of
school leavers had literacy problems and 20% had numeracy problems that
would place them below the minimum employability requirements even for
the least qualified jobs (National Commission on Education, 1995). Given the

8
significance of basic skill attainment for adult life chances, there have been
calls both in the UK and the US for exit examinations testing basic skills,
which all students would be required to pass prior to leaving school or
graduating (Kleinman et al., 1998; Betts, 1998). Poor prior acquisition of basic
skills, particularly literacy, have also been associated with exclusion and
truancy from school (OFSTED, 1995, 1996). Little is known of current levels of
attainment in relation to ‘soft’ skills. However, in the DfEE skills survey
nearly three times as many employers complained about the lack of
management, communication, personal skills (such as motivation) and IT
skills as complained about basic skill levels.
The 1998 Social Exclusion Unit report on truancy and exclusion
summarises research on truancy rates. Official figures suggest that rates are
stable with approximately 1% of school time lost to unauthorised absence in
secondary schools and 0.5% in primary schools (DfEE, 1997 in SEU, 1998).
The report highlights the fact that official figures underestimate truancy
levels, as they do not include truancy which occurs post-registration or that
which is condoned by schools including cases where pupils have been
removed from school rolls. O’Keefe (1993) provides a more detailed insight
into truancy levels in a survey of over 37,000 pupils in the final two years of
compulsory schooling. Overall, 30.5% of pupils surveyed admitted to playing
truant in some form over the previous half term. This figure included large
numbers of occasional truants (defined as truanting less than once a month)
and small but significant proportions of frequent truants. Of those surveyed
1.5% truant on a daily basis, 4.7% truant 2-4 times a week, 8.2% truant once a
week and 13.6% truant 2-3 times in a month.

4. Variations in compulsory educational attainment

4.1 Schools can make a difference

Research suggests non-school factors are a more important source of
variation in educational attainment than differences in the quality of
education that students receive. Thomas and Mortimore (1996) have reported
that between 70-75% of school variation in 16 year old attainment in GCSEs is
explained by pupil intake factors. However there is broad scale consensus
that schools do make a difference, which is both educationally and
statistically significant. Reynolds et al. (1996) conclude from their review of
school effectiveness research that schools have an independent effect of
approximately 8-15% on student attainment, with the effect of primary
schools being greater than that of secondary schools. However at the
extremes, school effectiveness research (Thomas and Mortimore, 1996) has

9
demonstrated that having taken background factors into account, schools can
lift GCSE results in the order of 14 GCSE points for pupils with average levels
of prior attainment. As the authors highlight, this is broadly equivalent to the
difference between six Grade Bs rather than Grade D GCSE passes.
Non-school and school factors are known to vary in their pattern of
relationship with achievement in different subject areas for example.
Background factors are far more important determinants of English than
Mathematics attainment and are of relatively little importance in accounting
for variations in Science results. The proportion of total variance accounted
for by correlation with background factors (age, free school meals eligibility,
fluency in English and gender) ranged from 13% in English, 7.5% in Maths
and only 2.4% in Science attainment. Concurrently, the percentage of
variation attributable to schools ranged from 5.3% for English, 13.8% for
Mathematics and 20% for Science (Sammons et al., 1997).

4.2 Non-school factors and educational attainment

Strong associations between non-school factors and low levels of educational
attainment have long been recognised in the sociological and education
literature. However the recent research focus on the ‘school effect’ has
diverted attention from these links. In order to isolate the value added by
schools, ‘appropriate’ allowance is made for socio-economic variables and/or
prior attainment to control for differential school intakes. As a result,
inequalities in final educational outcomes arising from background factors
may be at risk of becoming acceptable and even regarded as inevitable.
Although the associations between different non-school factors and
educational attainment are well documented, the factors that are causal, and
not simply associated with attainment, have yet to be identified. A number of
key background/non-school variables are associated with educational
attainment in the literature. These are:
½ Pupils’ personal characteristics: prior attainment, gender, health;
½ Socio-economic: low income (eligibility to free school meals), parental
unemployment, social class (father’s occupation) and housing (e.g.
overcrowding);
½ Educational: parents’ educational attainment – qualifications and basic
skills;
½ Family structure: family size, lone parent status, institutional care;
½ Ethnicity/Language: ethnic group, fluency in English;
½ Other: parental interest / involvement /practice, locally based factors.
It is widely accepted that there is high level of interdependence between
many of the factors highlighted above and that the cumulative impact of risk
factors may be greater than the simple sum of separate factors. Educational

10
priority studies have shown that multiple disadvantage has devastating
implications for educational attainment. This is demonstrated in Table 3. As
the number of risk factors experienced by the pupil increases, so to does the
risk of falling into the bottom 25% of the age group at age 11 (verbal
3
reasoning band three ) and the chance of being rated as having some kind of
disturbed behaviour. Non-school factors and their interactions are now
examined.

Table 3: Percentage of secondary pupils experiencing different number of

educational priority criteria by measures of educational outcomes and
behaviour
Number of % of pupils in verbal reasoning % of pupils with disturbed
factors band Three behaviour
0 10.8 5.6
1 16.7 9.4
2 25.5 14.7
3 32.2 20.4
4 38.6 25.1
5 49.1 28.6
6 61.5 32.7
7 91.7 42.3

Source: Sammons et al. (1981).

4.2.1 PUPILS’ PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS

Prior attainment
At the pupil level, prior attainment explains the greatest proportion of
variance in educational attainment. This is thought to explain up to 59% of
total variance in pupils’ academic test scores (Thomas and Smees, 1997) –
more than social economic background variables. However, there is a high
correlation between socio-economic variables and prior attainment; the
former is used as a proxy for prior attainment when prior attainment is not

3 From 1972 to 1988, pupils in the final year of primary school took a verbal
reasoning test as part of the secondary school transfer process. Pupils were assigned
to one of three bands on the basis of teachers judgements guided by test score
results. The Verbal Reasoning band was used as a crude guide to educational
outcome as it was strongly predictive of latter public examination performance
(Sammons et al., 1981).

11
available (Levacic and Hardman, 1999). Even at the earliest stages of
educational assessment when pupils are aged seven, prior attainment
accounts for 26–43% of variance in national assessment results (Sammons and
Smees, 1998). Prior attainment on the sub scale of ‘sound’ may provide the
best predictor of Key Stage One results, highlighting “the value of developing
children’s phonological knowledge at a young age.” (Sammons and Smees,
1998). Variations in cognitive development/attainment are evident during
early infancy. Analysis of BCS70 data (Feinstein, 1998) demonstrates a social
class gradient in cognitive development at 22 months which increases at 42
months and at five years. The proportion of individual variance in
educational attainment accounted for by variations in genetic intelligence at
birth is unknown and has been the subject of vigorous academic debate.
Environmental factors are known to affect cognitive development prior to
birth. Maternal smoking and poor nutrition during pregnancy, for example,
have been associated with low levels of latter educational attainment among
children. The effects appear to be relatively small. Regardless of their origins
innate variations fail to offer a sufficient explanation of poor educational
attainment, as high proportions of children with normal IQ achieve only low
levels of educational attainment (Rutter and Madge, 1976).
There is a broad consensus that intervention in the early years is among
the most effective means of improving educational performance and
outcomes. Such interventions are likely to be an important facet of strategies
that help to lift children out of cycles of deprivation and onto positive
trajectories. Waldfogel (1998) provides a useful summary of the effectiveness
of early childhood interventions in the US. The evidence is promising and
suggests that well designed programmes are successful at raising educational
attainment and other positive adult outcomes. The most successful
programmes are defined by early and intensive intervention, and include a
follow-through component in the later stages of the child’s development. In
the UK, evidence of the effects of pre-school provision is mixed, particularly
for children who participate in day care programmes before their first
birthday. In general, research studies suggest that in comparison to no
experience, all forms of pre-school experience have a positive impact on
attainment in national assessment tests, taken at age seven (Sammons and
Smees, 1998; Daniel, 1995). In addition, pre-school attendance has been found
to improve ‘school commitment’, reducing the risk of disaffection during the
latter stages of schooling and delinquency (Slyva, 1994; Shepard and
Farrington, 1995). However, the quality of provision appears to be a crucial
determinant of the effects on educational attainment. Definitions of high
quality provision are subject to debate, but frequently refer to small group
size, high adult- child ratios, a balanced curriculum and trained staff.

12
 If pupils do fall behind, they have few opportunities to make up lost
ground in the current education system. Such pupils tend to fall further
behind their peers and may give up altogether the attempt to catch up
(Mortimore et al., 1983). Subsequently, transient events in a pupil’s life may
have an unnecessarily high impact in the longer term. Specific intervention
projects, which offer pupils opportunities to accelerate their educational
development, allowing children to catch up may be beneficial. One such
project is the reading recovery programme. This involves training teachers to
recognise reading problems among young disadvantaged children, and has
been positively evaluated using controlled experimental methodology (Sylva
and Hurry, 1995).

Gender
In national curriculum tests and at higher level GCSE grades, girls
outperform boys. For example, in 1997 49% of girls achieved five or more
higher grade GCSEs compared with 40% of boys (DfEE, 1997). However, at
the lower levels of GCSE attainment, the gender gap is smaller in percentage
point terms. In 1997 8.8% of boys and 6.5% of girls failed to gain any GCSE
qualifications (DfEE, 1997). Evidence of a gender effect on the propensity to
truant is mixed. Some evidence suggests that boys are slightly more likely to
truant than girls, whilst other results have shown that there no differences
(Bosworth, 1994; O’ Keefe, 1993). These findings have significant
implications. If truancy is not a male dominated phenomenon whilst juvenile
crime is, the notion of a causal link between the two, needs to be treated with
considerable caution. As Pearce and Hillman (1998) suggest, “factors other
than gender are more important in explaining disaffection and
underachievement”.

Health
Physical illness is associated with high levels of absence and low levels of
educational attainment (Rutter et al., 1976). As poor health is correlated with
low-income and poor housing conditions, this is likely to explain, in part, the
strength of correlation between disadvantage and attainment. In a review of
urban education, the Office for Standards in Education (1993) noted a
prevalence of dental problems, speech disorders, ear, nose and throat
disorders that did not always receive prompt treatment, as parents were
unable to access the appropriate health services due to poor transport links
for example. Hence, lack of access to one public service inhibits access to the
human capital which is developed by the education service.
Recent school-based health interventions such as the healthy schools
initiative and breakfast clubs explicitly recognise the link between health and

13
educational attainment. Findings from a local study of such an intervention
have shown positive effects on attainment, attendance and bullying (McInnes
and Toft, 1998).

4.2.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC
Growing up dependent on an income support recipient/eligible for free school meals
Low income, as indicated by free school meal eligibility, is strongly correlated
with low levels of educational attainment at all levels, from the age of seven
upwards. Recent research (West et al., 1999) has shown the proportion of
children dependent on income support recipients (at a local authority level) is
very strongly correlated with levels of educational attainment. Analysis
suggests that this indicator of need accounted for approximately 66% of
variance in educational attainment at a local authority level. The strong
correlation between low income and GCSE attainment is reiterated in
analysis undertaken at school level (Levacic and Hardman, 1999). Low
income is frequently conceptualised as an undifferentiated experience, and as
Tabberer (1999) has highlighted the effect of temporary, as opposed to
persistent poverty on educational attainment is little understood.
O’ Keefe’s research on self-reported truancy indicates free school meal
eligibility has a significant but small effect on measurable truancy. However
the correlation is weak (0.17) and this cannot account for more than 2% of
variance in truancy rates between schools. In contrast the correlation between
free meals and absence levels is much stronger, accounting for 42% of school
level variance. This would include authorised and unauthorised absence.
Dearden et al. (1997) also found household income had no effect on truancy
levels. It is important to note that the decision not to attend may not be one
taken independently by the child. Surveys suggest in some cases
families/parents are aware of pupils’ absence from school, and often condone
it in order for children to take on caring responsibilities or to engage in illegal
employment in order to maintain family incomes (O’ Keefe, 1996; Galloway,
1985). This is likely to reflect lack of access to money and to affordable child
care structures among such families. Fox (1995) suggests that 10% of all
school absence results from children undertaking duties associated with their
home. Research on truancy and part time work post-16 has shown that
participation in part-time work significantly increases the probability of
truancy for both males and females (Dustmann et al., 1997).

Parental Unemployment / Employment

The relationship between parental unemployment and education is difficult
to disentangle as adults are only eligible for income support (and hence their
children eligible for free school meals) if they are unemployed and available

14
to work. Some evidence suggests that it is the loss of income which is
important. Gregg and Machin (1997) report that in the absence of financial
difficulties, the association between low educational attainment and paternal
unemployment is significant, but small, for boys and non-significant for girls.
The effect of maternal employment on children’s educational success
appears to vary, according to the age of the child, the type of employment
and in terms of different types of attainment. Analysing the effect of maternal
employment on children’s behavioural adjustment, reading and maths
attainment, Joshi and Verropoulou (1999) concluded:
“Mother’s employment while a child is under 1 shows
limited signs of association with at least one sort of problem later
on. At other ages under 5, there is no evidence for a negative
effect, and as at the ages of 5 –17 at which these children were
observed there are some signs of positive associations, possibly
benefits.”
Examining parental employment patterns when children are aged between 13
and 15 and GCSE attainment, O’Brien and Jones (1999) also suggest that
maternal employment has positive effects, particularly if the employment is
undertaken on a part time basis. Results showed that children living in dual
worker households where the mother was working part time were 70% less
likely to gain low grades (all D-G grades or nil passes at GCSE) than children
in households in which the father was the sole earner. They were also 53%
less likely to attain low grades than children in dual worker households in
which the mother worked on a full time basis.
Research evidence on the impact of workless households on
educational attainment is also mixed. Joshi and Verroupoulou (1999) found
that no earner families had adverse effects on maths attainment and one
measure of behavioural adjustment (absence of anxiety). However in terms of
reading attainment and the second measure of behavioural adjustment used
in the analysis (absence of aggressive behaviour) the authors concluded that
the results were more consistent with no effects. Qualitative research suggests
that some form of household employment may be important to the
acquisition of personal softer skills. Findings suggest that many pupils who
grow up in work-less households are not exposed to working role models,
and as a result fail to learn in the home about the behavioural aspects of work
(Kleinman et al., 1998).

Housing Tenure and Conditions

The associations between housing tenure, conditions and educational
attainment are well established. Individuals living in council housing are less

15
likely to attain qualifications and are more likely to report playing truant than
those living in other forms of accommodation (Bosworth, 1994). However it is
important to note that this does not necessasrily imply causality. On the basis
of current research, it is unclear if social housing exerts an indpendent effect
on educational attainment. Poor housing, in particular overcrowding, access
to basic amenities, and temporary accommodation are also associated with
lower educational attainment. Such conditions adversely effect upon a child’s
health, development and access to friends and social networks, which are
likely to affect school attendance and performance. Homelessness more
specifically has been examined by Whitty et al. Exploring the processes which
translate homelessness into poor educational outcomes Whitty et al. (1999)
highlight “the nature and organisation of current services and professional
responses…were often as much part of the problem as the solution”. The
authors highlight a lack of formal policy mechanisms, to ensure the priority
of the education of homeless children. Data derived from a survey of LEAs
on the administrative arrangements relating to the education of homeless
children, revealed high levels of confusion, inconsistency and a lack of clear
lines of communication and responsibility. For example, homeless parents
who elect to continue their child’s education at their existing school may
incur additional financial costs for transport.

4.2.3 EDUCATION
Parent’s educational attainment
Parental education attainment has long been recognised as an important
predictor of a child’s educational attainment. The mother’s level of
educational attainment is particularly important in this respect. Dearden
(1998) for example found that the probability of a woman undertaking a
degree increases by 1.1 percentage point for every extra year of education
undertaken by her mother. The association is particularly strong in terms of
literacy attainment. Research at City University (Basic Skills Agency, 1993 in
Moser, 1999) has shown that 60% of children in the lowest reading attainment
group at age 10 had parents with low literacy levels, whilst only 2% had
parents with high literacy scores. In contrast parental education is only
weakly related to the likelihood of truancy from school (Bosworth, 1994). The
means by which better educated parents confer advantage to their children,
remains open to question. Research has highlighted the importance of
parents’ human, and social capital. Clearly if parents are unable to read, they
are unable to assist their child’s learning in this respect. Interventions that
have increased parents’ human capital along side that of the child, such as
family literacy projects, have been favourably evaluated (Brooks et al., 1998).

16
Whitty et al. (1999) suggests that educated parents have higher levels of social
capital and that this has a positive impact on their children’s attainment.

4.2.4 FAMILY STRUCTURE

Growing up in a lone parent family
The evidence suggests that controlling for other variables, lone parenthood is
non-significantly or only weakly associated with educational attainment
(Gregg and Machin 1997). However some evidence has suggested the effect
depends on the sex of the parent, and that living with just a father has a slight
negative effect on attainment (Bosworth, 1994). When experienced in
combination with other risk factors, notably low income, lone parenthood
does increase the probability of low educational achievement (Mortimore et
al., 1983). The circumstances of family disruption are also relevant. The
children of widows, for example, seem to experience fewer negative effects
than do divorcees. Similarly the addition of a step parent into a family also
appears to have negative effects (Kiernan, 1992). Parental circumstances are
strongly associated with truancy and absence. Holding other factors constant,
YCS analysis demonstrates that family structure is significantly related to the
likelihood of truancy. Results show that individuals in two-parent families
were the least likely to truant, followed by those who live with the mother,
those who live with the father, and those living away from parents
(Bosworth, 1994; Casey and Smith, 1995). Other studies have also found that
behaviour such as school lateness and negative teacher evaluation appear to
reflect family structure/disruption effects and not just economic factors
(Featherstone et al., 1992). Hence as Joshi and Verropoulou conclude:
“Family structure effects are generally more important for
behavioural outcomes than cognitive attainment, at least when
the family’s economic resources are taken into account. “

Growing up in an institutional care placement or multiple foster places

Surveys show that over 75% of those who have been in local authority care
gain no qualifications on leaving school – compared with 11% in the general
school population within the same geographical areas. Furthermore over 80%
of care leavers remain unemployed two and half years after leaving school
compared with 9-16% within the general population (Biehal et al., 1992;
Garnnett 1992). Young people who experience multiple care placements are
at an especially high risk of low attainment (Biehal et al., 1992). The low levels
of educational attainment among in-care children are primarily, though not
entirely, accounted for by their traumatic backgrounds (Osbourn and St
Claire, 1987). However studies show that the experience of care tends to

17
compound the educational difficulties experienced by children in care.
Contributing factors in this respect have been found to be: inadequate liaison
between carers and schools, the prioritisation of welfare above educational
concerns, disruption caused by placement moves, lack of transport to school,
low priority given to education by social workers, low expectations and
stigmatising treatment by teachers and bullying by peers (Carleen et al., 1992;
Fletcher-Campbell and Hall, 1990).

Growing up in a large family

Individuals with large numbers of siblings have a slightly higher probability
of failing to gain qualifications at the age of 16 than others. In addition if they
succeed in gaining qualifications they are likely to attain lower test scores
(Bosworth, 1994). The association between large family size and low
attainment is strongest in respect to reading and verbal intelligence, moderate
in terms of mathematics ability and far weaker in respect of other forms of
non-verbal intelligence, suggesting that lack of verbal interaction with adults
may be the key factor (Wedge and Prosser, 1973. Research findings suggest
that the effect of family size is dependent in part upon income. Wedge and
Prosser (1973) for example, found that in the middle classes, only those
children from a family with four or more siblings were adversely affected,
whilst in working-class families children are progressively disadvantaged by
each additional sibling. Birth order, the sex and ages of other siblings have
also been associated with educational attainment. Dearden (1998) for example
found that boys with fewer older siblings had better levels of attainment than
boys further down the birth order. In addition, women with only brothers
were found to have significantly higher levels of attainment. In terms of
truancy males are more likely to truant when there are older siblings in the
household, but the presence of younger siblings has no effect. For females the
presence of older siblings has no effect whereas there is a weak but significant
effect where young siblings are present (Dustmann, et al 1997).

4.2.5 ETHNIC BACKGROUND AND FLUENCY IN ENGLISH

There are no national data on the attainment of pupils from different ethnic
backgrounds (DfEE, 1997). However research (Gipps and Gilborn, 1996)
suggests that on average the attainment of Afro Caribbean pupils, and
particularly boys, is low relative to other ethnic groups. Asian pupils attain
almost as well, or better, than whites of the same class and gender. There are
however substantial differences among Asian groups. Pupils of Indian origin
consistently attain high levels whilst Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils’
average attainments are lower, and they are more likely to leave school
without having acquired any qualifications. Patterns of attainment vary

18
considerably at LEA level. For example in the London borough of Tower
Hamlets, Bangladeshi pupils now achieve higher average GCSE point scores
than white and Afro Caribbean pupils. Summarising the research on progress
Gipps and Gilbourn (1996) indicate the gap between ethnic minorities and
white students widens during primary school years. However at secondary
school this trend reverses for students from Asian and Chinese backgrounds,
who tend to make better progress than their white counterparts. One
explanation of such trends is that
“Bilingual learners may start school as low attainers (in verbal
reasoning) but make substantial progress in language skills while
attending secondary school.”
However differences between the progress of black and white pupils remains
smaller and less consistent. Hence as pupils proceed through secondary
schooling, some ethnic minorities narrow the attainment gap, but in general
(with the exception of some inner London areas) fail to close it completely.
The Social Exclusion Unit Report (1998) concludes ethnicity is not associated
with the propensity to truant persistently.

4.2.6 OTHER
Parental Interest/Involvement/Practice
Recent analysis of NCDS data has identified parental interest in education as
one of the factors most strongly related to educational attainment and adult
outcomes (Feinstein and Symons, 1997; Hobcraft 1998). Feinstein and Symons
(1997) found parental interest in schooling had a massive direct effect on
children’s attainment at 16, far greater than the direct effects of social class
variables. Their results showed that in mathematics tests, the improvement of
children between the ages of 11 and 16 whose parents exhibited high levels of
interest was 15% greater than that of pupils whose parents exhibited no
interest. In terms of reading attainment the difference was 17 per cent. Other
NCDS analysis has shown that father’s interest has a crucial and sizeable
effect on the attainment of educational qualifications (Hobcraft, 1998).
Findings must be treated with caution as analysis is based on teachers
assessments of parental interest in education, and hence on perceptions
rather than objective measures. Sammons (1998) suggests
“this variable is likely to reflect teacher perceptions, which may
well be coloured by cultural factors…it may well be an indicator
of socio-economic disadvantage…measurement problems are
compounded by the decision to set the mothers or fathers interest
at zero where the parent is absent. This means that this variable
may well be picking up the impact of one parent family status.”

19
Direct evidence from parents suggests that very high proportions are
interested in their child’s education (Tizard, 1981; West et al., 1997; Lareau,
1997).
A number of studies have highlighted the significance of parental
involvement in their child’s education and learning. Indeed parental
involvement is the only non-school factor that is widely cited in the school
effectiveness literature (Mortimore et al., 1988). Despite the current
enthusiasm for increasing parental involvement (DfEE, 1997) research
findings as to its efficacy are somewhat mixed. Little is known of the ways in
which parents are involved in their children’s education – particularly
outside the formal school setting. Numerous studies have focused on one
measure of parental involvement yet this is unhelpful as parents can display
their involvement in different ways. Differentiation is crucial as some types of
involvement, such as use of parental helpers in the classroom have been
found to be non-significant or negatively correlated with educational
attainment (Sammons et al., 1997).
Past research concerned with parental involvement has focused on a
number of different issues. Some research has focused on parents’
involvement as consumers/decision-makers in education. This would
include parents’ choice of school in the education ‘quasi market’ and
participation on school governing bodies. Other studies have focused on
home school communication for example newsletters, and parents
evenings/meetings. High levels of contact and trust between parents and the
school are associated with beneficial outcomes in the school improvement
literature (Mortimore et al., 1988). Other research has tended to focus on
parents’ role as educators – usually in specific curriculum areas such as
reading and to a lesser extent mathematics. Studies have shown the amount
of direct teaching or ‘intellectual stimulation in the home’ is highly correlated
with children’s attainment, particularly during early school years (Parkinson
et al., 1982). Considerable optimism about the efficacy of this form of
involvement as a means of raising reading/educational attainment among
disadvantaged pupils, was first generated by the experimental study known
as the ‘Haringey project’ (Tizard et al., 1982). The project took place over two
years, during which time parents were encouraged by their child’s teacher
and home visitors to hear their child read. After the two-year intervention
there were considerable differences in reading test scores. In the control
classes, very few children scored at or above the test norm for the age group,
whilst in the experimental class over 50% of the children scored above
average. Subsequent research has however failed to confirm the efficacy of
increasing this type of involvement as a means of improving attainment (e.g.
Hannon, 1987). The success of the Haringey project may be attributable to the

20
home-visiting component of the programme (Hannon, 1987). Home visits
were frequent and involved specific advice on good practice, and prescribed
what parents should do. This draws attention to the issue of what parents
actually do when listening to their children read. The type of parental input
may be a crucial factor. Studies which have examined this issue suggest that
the way in which parents interact with their children whilst listening to them
read is significantly differentiated by the level of the parents’ education
(Greenhough and Hughes, 1998). This is in line with direct evidence from
parents, which suggests that the majority recognise the importance of family
support for educational attainment, but lack the confidence, and crucially the
knowledge as to what they should do to help their child. When combined
with time and family pressures, Tizard et al. (1981) noted that working class
parents who lacked confidence found it particularly difficult to sustain
involvement in their child’s reading. Many parents report willingness to
spend more time on learning activities with their children if teachers gave
them more guidance as to what they should actually do. However contact
with parents is given remarkably low status and little or no time allocation in
a teacher’s day and the training which teachers receive provides limited
preparation for collaboration with parents (Hancock, 1997).
Other research has focused on parents’ involvement as facilitators of
education. This involves the provision of support for children’s education
through encouragement and an environment within which pupils can
become good learners and benefit fully from teaching. Examples of this type
of involvement include the provision of space and time for education within
the family home life, positive parent child relationships and lack of conflict
within the home. Recent research has highlighted the significance of
parenting style. In their study in the London borough of Barking and
Dagenham, O’Brien and Jones (1999) found that maternal praise was a
powerful determinant of GCSE attainment at 16. The authors indicate that
maternal praise, of children aged between 13 and 15, increased the odds of
achieving high grades4 at GCSE by a factor of four and reduced the odds of
achieving low grades by 72%. In two parent households, this variable
emerged as the most important determinant of educational success. Joshi and
Verropoulou (1999) also note that supportive parenting has a positive effect
on children’s vocabulary, whatever the family’s economic situation. Work in
the US, on variations in literacy attainment among pupils from low-income
families, found that emotional and organisational dimensions of family life

4
O’Brien and Jones (1999) define high grades as five or more A*- C GCSE passes and
low grades as all D –G / nil passes.

21
were strongly correlated with writing production. However these factors
were negligible in terms of their relationship with other components of
literacy – vocabulary, word recognition, and reading (Snow et al., 1991). This
suggests that different forms of parental involvement are differentially
related to different areas of educational attainment. Parents may be involved
in their children’s attainment as role models. In this sense parents’ own
behaviour and attitudes may have an impact on the educational attainment of
the child.
Research findings suggest that some, but not all, measures of parental
involvement are differentiated by non-school factors. One study of both
formal and informal parental involvement found no statistical differences in
terms of social class as defined by father’s occupation (West et al., 1997).
Differences were found in relation to mother’s level of educational
qualifications in terms of attendance of parent’s evenings, informal contact
with teachers, use of work books at home and private tuition. In a study
comparing home school relationships in different communities, Lareau (1997)
suggests that level of parental education, time, disposable income, child care,
transportation, and work place flexibility are important factors affecting
parents participation in their child’s education. Lareau also stresses the
significance of cultural capital, drawing attention to the importance of middle
class parents’ social networks as a source of information on schooling that
parents utilised to build a family-school relationship. It is therefore important
for research to clarify the relative importance of different types of
involvement of mothers and fathers, for different areas of learning (e.g.
reading, writing, speech), and at different stages of their children’s lives. In
addition more needs to be known of the involvement of different groups of
parents and of the key factors which inhibit or foster involvement.
The literature has also highlighted the influence of parents’ and pupils’
wider social networks in their educational attainment. Research suggests that
informal teachers, group leaders and mentors fulfil important roles when
young people begin to negotiate independence from their parents (Hendry et
al., 1992). Interestingly, a high level of personal support from a trusted adult
has been identified as a key success factor in a number of highly successful
projects, which prevent exclusion among high risk groups (Pearce and
Hillman, 1998, Sparkes and West, 1999). Other work has drawn attention to
the considerable influence of peer groups as young people are establishing
their own identities (Cullinford and Morris, 1997). Studies show that parental
influence sharply decreases during adolescence due to the rising counter
influence of peers. Peer groups emerge as ‘surrogate families’, and their
influence is known to be more significant when the counter influences of the
family are weak. Rich Harris (1999) has controversially argued that parents

22
have relatively little influence over their child’s behaviour outside the home,
and emphasises peer group relationships, focusing on ways in which children
socialise each other collectively. A greater understanding of the significance
of peer groups and of how and why they are important would be beneficial.

Locally based factors

The literature suggests that local factors such as limited work opportunities
in the local labour market, racial tensions and local violence may impact
negatively upon educational attainment and outcomes. Recent analysis of
Youth Cohort Study (YCS) data (Bosworth, 1994) found that holding other
factors constant, ‘travel to work’ area types did not play any consistent,
significant role in creating different pupil attitudes to school. In addition,
controlling for other factors, the probability of truancy was found to be
highest in high wage and manufacturing areas. In contrast ‘travel to work’
area ‘type’ was related to examination performance. Individuals whose travel
to work area types were in some sense disadvantaged were however, less
likely to gain a examination score. The ranking running from highest to
lowest performing areas was as follows:
(1) high status growth areas;
(2) high wage areas;
(3) northern and midland metropolitan areas;
(4) high unemployment areas;
(5) service dominated areas;
(6) low wage, low growth areas;
(7) manufacturing dominated areas.
However the differences in absolute scores across the regions were not large.
This suggests young peoples’ expectations of work affect their educational
attainment. Similar effects have been noted in the US (William Julius Wilson
in Halsey et al., 1997). In their review of the attainment of ethnic minority
pupils Gipps and Gilborn (1996) suggest that racial harassment and violence
may undermine young ethnic minorities pupils’ educational attainments.
Research in the US analysing levels of local violence, attainment and college
attendance found that on average a moderate level of local violence reduced
the likelihood of high school graduation by 5.1% per cent and lowered the
likelihood of a student attending college by 6.9% (Grogger, 1997). The
significance of interpersonal/social relations in the wider community is
reiterated in the work of Coleman (1997) who concludes the success of
Catholic schools reflects high levels of social capital and cohesion in Catholic
communities.

23
4.3 School factors accounting for variance in educational attainment
Studies have highlighted the possibility of improvement in schools with
disadvantaged pupils (DfEE, 1997). Case studies of schools with below
average intakes who succeed against the odds emphasise the importance of
leadership built on a team approach, a vision of success, careful use of
targets, improved physical environment, common expectations about pupils
behaviour and success and investment in good parent and community
relations (National Commission on Education, 1996). However analysing the
role of school improvement as a remedy for social exclusion, Mortimore and
Whitty (1999) argue “it cannot be assumed that such strategies will contribute to
greater social inclusiveness”. Reiterating the conclusions of Rutter in the Fifteen
Thousand Hours study, the authors suggest
“If all schools performed as well as the best schools, the
stratification of attainment of achievement by social class would
be even more stark than it is now. This would happen because
socially advantaged children in highly effective schools would
achieve even more than they do now in less conducive
environments and the gap between them and their less
advantaged peers would increase.”
Plewis (1998) has argued that school improvement targets such as those in
literacy and numeracy are counterproductive and may exacerbate inequality
of attainment. He suggests that the targets create incentive structures which
encourage teachers to concentrate on pupils most likely to reach the desired
level, paying little or no attention to those who are at substantially lower
levels. School exclusion, resources allocation, class size, the curriculum and
market reforms are now examined in turn.

4.3.1 SCHOOL EXCLUSION

Exclusion is the ultimate sanction a school can employ against a pupil who is
persistently disobedient, disruptive or violent. Exclusion may be permanent
or fixed term (whereby a pupil is excluded for not more than 15 days in any
one term). At an individual pupil level the longer-term consequences of
school exclusion are often profound. For example students who are excluded
from school in the final two years of compulsory education are two and a half
times as likely not to participate in education, training or employment
between the ages of 16 and 18, than those not excluded (SEU, 1999).
Of those who are excluded on a permanent basis, only 27% of primary
age pupils and 15% of secondary pupils return to mainstream education
(Parsons, 1996). Those not returning to school lose their right to full-time
education and receive what is legally defined as ‘education otherwise’. The

24
nature of this provision is determined by the LEA. However, in the majority
of cases young people attend Pupil Referral Units (PRU), receive home
tuition, or attend further education colleges. The quality of education
received by pupils in Pupil Referral Units has been seriously criticised in
OFSTED Inspection reports (1995). Criticisms draw attention to the low
standard of educational attainment, low expectations of pupils, poor quality
of teaching and an absence of clear objectives in many PRUs. Consequently:
“Permanently excluded pupils and children who for other
reasons do not have a school place are therefore at risk of
educational failure, leading to unemployability and long term
dependency on benefits; in short from a whole range of
vocational, cultural and social opportunities.” (OFSTED, 1995)
However, for children in Pupil Referral Units in 1994/5 the cost per pupil
was £4,300 compared to £2,500 for mainstream education; this amounted to
double the cost for under 10% of the teaching time they would receive in
school (Parsons, 1996).
Official figures show that there were 12,700 permanent exclusions in
1996/97 (DfEE, 1998). This compares with 2,910 in 1990/91. Actual figures
may be even higher. One independent survey of LEAs for example suggests
there were as many as 13,500 permanent exclusions in 1996/97 (Godfrey and
Parsons, 1998 in SEU, 1998). Although the majority are from secondary
schools, rates of exclusion from primary schools have risen rapidly – by over
500% during the 1990-1996 period (Parsons, 1998). In addition estimates from
OFSTED (1996) suggest that there are approximately 100,000 fixed term
exclusions from secondary schools annually. The rapid increase in rates of
exclusion has been attributed to a number of factors including institutional
factors and in particular to the publication of league tables as performance
indicators. In a competitive climate with intense pressure on schools to meet
demanding standards, schools may exclude less able students or those who
disrupt other pupils learning in order to improve their league table position.
The importance of institutional factors in explaining the increasing use of the
exclusion sanction is reiterated in a survey of LEA Directors of Education; 8
per cent thought that the increase in exclusions was due to poorer discipline,
whilst 42% attributed increases to levels of competition between schools
(Gillborn, 1996).
Boys represent 83% of those permanently excluded (DfEE, 1998).
Evidence on the background of those excluded indicates that 61% come form
unemployed households (SEU, 1998). High proportions are from disturbed or
disrupted home contexts including family break up, bereavement, illness,
alcoholism and abuse (OFSTED, 1996). Young people in care are on average

25
10 per cent more likely to be excluded than their peers (SEU, 1998). Exclusion
has particularly significant implications for this group of young people, as
this frequently triggers a break down in their care placement (Pearce and
Hillman, 1998). For those with special educational needs the risk of exclusion
is roughly 6 per cent higher than others. This has been attributed at least in
part to the funding systems for special educational needs. Stirling (1992)
suggests that from the school’s perspective, the process of exclusion is a
speedier and more predictable process than the implementation of the
lengthier assessment procedures leading ultimately to a ‘statement’ of Special
Educational Needs (which results in additional resources to help meet the
pupil’s needs) under the 1981 Education Act. In addition he suggests that
schools may be using the process of exclusion to speed up the allocation of
additional SEN funding as in many cases the act of exclusion triggers the
statementing process.
In 1996/97 the permanent exclusion rate for white pupils was 0.18%.
However the rates for Black Caribbean, Black African and Black Other were
0.76%, 0.30% and 0.70% respectively (DfEE, 1998). Although the reasons for
this are little understood, research has highlighted tension and conflict in
relations between white teachers and Afro Caribbean pupils as a plausible
explanation (Gipps and Gilborn, 1996). This is thought to explain the
differences between excluded Afro Caribbean pupils and other excludees.
Although the majority of excluded pupils were found to be evenly divided
between average and below average ability, Afro Caribbean pupils who were
excluded were more likely to have above or average ability but were
generally described as under performing. They do not usually show
disruptive behaviour from early in their school careers and show less
evidence of deep-seated trauma. In addition OFSTED, (1996) found that
exclusion is consistently associated with limited aspirations and expectations,
poor relationships with other pupils, parents and teachers and pressure from
other pupils to perform in ways that lead to conflict with authority.
Rates of exclusion are geographically uneven with the high levels in
inner London, followed by outer London, metropolitan LEAs and finally
county districts (DfEE, 1998). However while there is a correlation between
the socio-economic context of the school and its exclusion rate using free
school meals as an indicator of poverty (OFSTED, 1996), there are schools in
very disadvantaged areas that maintain a very low rate of exclusion. Hence
there are observable school and LEA effects on patterns of exclusion. A
number of studies and inspection reports have noted the differences in the
propensity of schools to exclude pupils:

26
 “Schools practice with regard to exclusion varied to an
unacceptable degree. Some schools were far to ready too exclude;
others did so with extreme reluctance.” (OFSTED, 1996)
Similar variations are detected at a LEA level. For example a survey of LEAs
undertaken by Parsons (1995) revealed that rates of exclusion in some LEAs
were ten times higher then in others, a rate that could not be explained by
socio-economic differences, suggesting a clear local authority effect.
The Government is committed to reducing exclusion rates by one third
by 2002 (SEU, 1998). Measures announced to date include the development of
behaviour support plans outlining local provision for pupils with
behavioural difficulties, the commitment of additional resources to fund
school based programmes which work to prevent exclusion, and the
improvement of education for those who are excluded. In addition exclusion
issues have been identified as a central focus in the Education Action Zone
programme (SEU, 1998).

4.3.2 RESOURCES
LEA and school level expenditure
The debate on the effect of resources on student attainment and labour
market outcomes is ongoing. This reflected in the oft cited US evidence. On
the basis of a large scale meta-analysis Hanushek (1986) concluded that
“there is no strong or consistent relationship between school resources and
student performance”. He found that only 27% of 163 studies showed a
positive and significant relationship between expenditure per pupil and
learning outcomes. It is important to note the Hanushek’s methodology has
been severely criticised and reanalysis of his sample of studies undertaken by
Hedges et al. (1994) found a consistent and positive relationship between
inputs and outcomes. Card and Kreuger (1992) also conclude that increased
per pupil expenditure results in higher earnings. In the UK there has been
comparatively little research into the effects of financial resources on
educational outcomes. Work that has been undertaken suggests there is no
consistent relationship between LEA expenditure and pupils learning
outcomes, nor their subsequent earnings (Dolton and Vignoles, 1996).
However West et al. (1999) highlight that expenditure per pupil and
examination results are confounded, as local authorities with higher
proportions of children from disadvantaged backgrounds are allocated
additional funding by central government and therefore spend more on
education. Having controlled for the confounding effect of poverty West et al
demonstrate that educational spending per pupil is positively associated with
educational attainment at the LEA level. Interestingly analysis undertaken by

27
Dearden et al. (1998) found that the effect of per pupil expenditure in
secondary schools on female wages at age 23 is significant and quite large –
“a 10% increase in this budget leads to a 3.1% increase in wages”. The effect
of different school intakes on school processes has not been researched
extensively in the UK. However Gerwitz (1998) provides an interesting
comparison of the impact of different school intakes on management
processes, resource allocation and teaching styles in two inner London
schools.

Class Size
Econometric literature on class size has failed to find consistently positive
effects. Large classes are frequently associated with better results reflecting
the tendency for low attaining pupils to be placed in smaller classes (Dolton
and Vignoles, 1996). Analysis of examination results and class size is further
confounded as additional funding directed to poorer LEAs and schools is
frequently used to reduce class sizes (West, 1995). However findings from
Project STAR, a large scale controlled study of the effects of reduced class
size, conducted in 79 state schools in the state of Tennessee from 1985 to 1989
are positive. Within participating schools, children entering Kindergarten
were randomly assigned to one of three class sizes – small, (with an
enrolment range of 13-17 pupils), regular (with an enrolment range of 22-26)
and regular with an additional class room assistant. Teachers were randomly
assigned to the class groups. Standardised attainment tests were
administered to participating students at the end of each school year.
Differences in attainment were highly significant for all attainment measures
and the significance was attributable to the superior performance of children
in small classes. With minor exceptions, there was no significant interaction
with school location or sex of pupil. Indeed, some of the benefits of small
classes were greater for minority than non-minority students. In most
comparisons the impact on minorities, most of whom were black, was twice
as large as it was for white students. This resulted in a considerable reduction
in the achievement gap.
Finn and Achilles (1990) noted the differences between minority and
white attainment in grade one reading tests was “reduced from 14.3 per cent
in regular classes to 4.1 per cent in small classes”. The experiment was
followed up in the Lasting Benefits Study. All children returned to normal
sized classes in grade four; monitoring of the pupils was maintained. Grade
Four evaluations showed that even after the small class intervention had been
disbanded, students who had been in small classes had higher achievement
in all academic areas compared with students in regular class sizes. The small
class effect (small – regular) ranged from 0.11 in social studies to 0.16 in

28
mathematics. The small class effect of a similar range endured in later grades.
In addition pupils were rated as expending more effort in the classroom, and
less disruptive behaviour than their peers who been in classes of a regular
size. The study provides compelling evidence that small classes in the earlier
years of compulsory schooling have significant long term consequences and
may help to place children at risk of low educational attainment on a positive
trajectory that will increase their chances of school success and subsequently
their adult life chances. However given the high costs involved in reducing
class size, Slavin (1990) argues that for the equivalent expenditure, more
pupils could receive learning support through intervention programmes
targeted at individual learners. Analysis of cohort data suggests that reduced
pupil-teacher ratios increase educational attainment but are also associated
with subsequent adult earnings (Dolton and Vignoles, 1996). The authors
summarise:
“Attending a school with lower pupil teacher ratio may increase a
child’s human capital and consequently their labour market
prospects but this effect will not be a direct one, nor will it solely
be via educational attainment.”
Dearden et al. (1997) have also found that lower student teacher ratios
enhance both the ultimate educational and labour market performance of
women in the bottom half of the ability distribution.

4.3.3 TEACHER EFFECTS

On the basis of NCDS analysis, Dearden et al. (1997) conclude that teacher
quality as reflected by teachers’ salary, is an important factor in determining
labour market outcomes among male sample members. Controlling for
educational achievement, teacher salary at secondary school level is
associated with increased wages among men at ages 23 and 33:
“Teachers paid 10 per cent extra given the cost of living, produce
pupils who earn 7% more at 23…better quality teachers offer
knowledge and skills that are important to the labour market but
are not relevant for obtaining formal qualifications.”
As teachers’ salaries primarily reflect experience, the findings suggest that
more experienced teachers may be more effective in developing students soft
or personal skills. There are also observable teacher effects on truancy levels
(Casey and Smith, 1995). The likelihood of truancy is reduced in schools with
higher proportions of graduate teachers and low rates of staff turnover. These
factors are thought to affect the quality of teacher/pupil interaction. Gipps
and Gilbourn (1996) suggest that some white teachers perceptions and

29
expectations of Afro Caribbean males, “played an active though unintended
role in the creation of conflict with African Caribbean pupil, thereby reducing
black young people’s opportunity to achieve”. Research findings suggest that
black pupils are subjected to heightened levels of criticism and discipline,
often unwittingly, by white teachers. A number of psychological processes –
such as learned helplessness, self-fulfilling prophecy and achievement
motivation have been suggested in models of how expectations come to affect
pupil’s attainment and behaviour. Research by Blatchford et al. (1989) based
in infant schools has also found sizeable ‘expectation effects’ over the three
years of infant school. However the authors suggest expectations affected
attainment primarily through more direct channels such as access to and
coverage of the curriculum.

4.3.4 CURRICULUM
The national curriculum has been implicated in poor educational attainment
and outcomes among certain groups. It is widely acknowledged that the
academic curriculum fails to motivate a substantial proportion of pupils.
Surveys of pupils’ own views have identified the curriculum as an important
cause of truancy (Kinder, 1996; O’Keefe, 1993). The exclusiveness of the
national curriculum has been recognised by the Government who have
responded with a number of measures including the dis-application of the
national curriculum in certain cases to allow greater participation in work-
based learning. However to date, these developments are focused on
addressing particular groups and there is little indication of a recognition that
all young people would benefit from a curriculum which was more closely
aligned with the workplace and adulthood in the modern world (Hayton,
1999). Research has shown that previous attempts to modernise the academic
curriculum such as the development of TVEI achieved impressive successes.
Using YCS data Bosworth (1994) found that holding other factors constant,
TVEI significantly raised young peoples examination performance. The net
effect was approximately 14 points, although Bosworth suggests that without
the inherent disadvantages of the students participating in the project, the
effects of TVEI might have been as much as 30 points. In addition, findings
suggested that TVEI had a positive impact on pupils’ attitudes to school and
attendance. However there are fears that the recognition of a wider range of
skills by the formal education system will lead to a situation “where every
aspect of people’s lives are under the formal gaze of authority for
certification” (Foucault, 1977 in Halsey et al., 1997).

30
4.3.5 MARKET MECHANISMS
Research suggests that the development of a quasi-market in education has
created a powerful set of institutional processes and incentives which work
against the goal of an inclusive education system. Key aspects of the reform
include the right of parents to express a preference for a school of their
choice. In the education quasi-market place, school funding is largely
determined by the schools ability to attract pupils, and schools compete with
one another for pupils on the basis of published performance indicators
(league tables). Research (West et al., 1994) has shown that many parents find
the league tables difficult to understand. Such difficulties are concentrated
among parents with lower levels of educational attainment. Where the
mother was educated to GCE A level, 67 per cent of respondents reported
that they understood the league tables; this compared with 31 per cent of
respondents where mothers had GCE O level or below. This has significant
implications for the equity of informed choice. Research (Noden et al., 1998)
on patterns of parental choice at the secondary transfer stage in London
found that middle class parents’ first choice schools scored more highly in the
DfEE’s performance tables. Middle class parents identified first choice
schools averaging 53 per cent five or more A* – C at GCSE, whilst working
class parents chose schools averaging 40 per cent. The realisation of choice is
also differentiated by family socio-economic status. Fitz, Halpin and Power’s
(1993) study of two LEAs found that households in which the father was not
in paid employment were the least likely to gain access to their preferred
school choice. In contrast those in professional occupations were the most
successful.
Critics of the educational market have suggested that the publication of
league tables create incentives which encourage cream skimming, whereby
schools take actions to maximise their league table position and consequently
their market advantage. Work on admissions in the UK suggested cream-
skimming has been taking place in some grant maintained and voluntary
schools, that have more flexible admissions policies (West et al., 1998).
Evidence suggests that some such schools have been covertly or informally
selecting pupils who are academically or socially advantaged (West et al,
1998; West and Pennell, 1997; Gerwitz et al., 1995). In addition it has been
suggested that the additional application procedures in some of these
schools, which may involve application forms and/or interviews, may in
themselves operate against particular groups of parents (Gerwitz et al., 1995).
Research by the Audit Commission (1996) in this area found that 9 per cent of
1029 parents surveyed did not express their first genuine first choice – the
most common reason cited was the belief that their application would not be
successful.

31
 Hence, it is argued that the structure of some local quasi-markets may
exacerbate segregation of pupils, particularly in urban areas (West et al., 1997;
Whitty et al., 1998). This argument is supported by analysis of changes in
segregation undertaken by Vandenberghe (1998) in the educational quasi-
market in the French Community of Belgium. Vandenberghe argues that
regulatory strategies should be implemented to prevent segregation and
improve the efficiency of the quasi-market. For example, he suggests the
development of differential capitation grants:
“The regulator can steer recruitment practices simply by making
the per pupil amount allocated to schools conditional on the
socio-economic composition of the school.”
Empirical evidence on the impact of quasi market reforms on segregation in
the UK is less clear. Recent work by Gorard and Fitz (1998) has suggested
that social polarisation of school intakes has reduced in recent years. Analysis
in Wales suggests that the spread of pupils eligible for free school meals
across schools is now more even than it was in 1988. However data for
England suggest that segregation in English secondary schools rose in the
1994 – 1999 period (Noden, 1999). The impact of market reforms on
segregation is an important issue as a body of research evidence shows that
the composition of a school’s intake can have a substantial effect on student
attainment – the so called “peer effect”. Pupils of average ability attending a
school where high proportions of pupils are of high ability tend to attain
more highly and have higher earnings as adults than comparable students in
classes where there are high proportions of low ability pupils (Robertson and
Symonds, 1996; McPherson and Willms, in Halsey et al., 1997). However
segregation works in the favour of higher ability pupils as they too attain
more highly if educated among high ability children. Similar effects have also
been found in relation to high concentrations of students for free school
meals.
US research suggests that competition and budgetary devolution is
associated with improved school performance (Chubb and Moe, 1990).
Research in the England (Bradley, Johnes and Millington, 1999) also indicates
that competition has enhanced the technical efficiency of English secondary
schools and that the “least efficient schools in 1993 have improved the most
5
over the time period (1993-1997) as the quasi market developed”. However it

5 It is important to note that Bradley, Johnes and Millington findings are calculated
using a technical definition of efficiency – the maximisation of exam performance
and attendance rates given various inputs. Such a definition may not be
appropriate in the field of education. For example, whilst a school which has a low

32
has been argued that the method of budgetary devolvement in some Local
Education Authorities in England works against schools with disadvantaged
intakes. In their analysis of education and homelessness, Whitty et al. (1999)
highlight the way in which some LMS budgetary formula handicap schools
in turbulent areas. The authors explain that some funding formulas are based
on a single head count, which is readjusted on the basis of another headcount
later in the year. As a result the school rolls of schools in turbulent areas may
be underestimated, leading to significant budgetary shortfalls.

5. Education: a strategy to reduce social exclusion?

The role of education in the process of social exclusion has yet to be fully
elucidated. The dominant mode of analysis has focused on the concept of
human capital. From this perspective education or schooling increases
productivity as it equips individuals’ with skills and knowledge. As
productivity is reflected in earnings and rates of labour market participation,
education offers an important means of social mobility, particularly for the
poor. Widespread changes in the economy such as the emergence of high-
level service sector jobs have opened up important opportunities, to those
with the necessary levels of education. The government certainly adopts this
perspective. Tony Blair has noted the importance of acquiring education and
developing human capital as a route out of social exclusion:
“We should root out educational failure, because it is the greatest
inhibition to correcting poverty…in today’s world, the more you
learn the more you earn.” (“The will to win” speech, June, 1997)
Opponents of the human capital model argue that little of the variation
between individual’s earnings and labour market participation is explained
by education. The ‘signalling’ or ‘screening’ paradigm suggests that the
process of education merely serves to identify individual ability or personal
attributes. From this perspective the positive correlation between education
and income arises because they are commonly founded in an individual’s
ability. Educational attainment merely allows individuals to signal their high
level ability and low prospective training costs to employers. In its most
extreme and ‘ideal typical’ form, screening implies that qualifications provide
valid information to employers about characteristics of the individual to

rate of success at GCSE and a very low input in terms of proportion of trained staff
may be deemed technically efficient, this form of provision is not desirable from a
broad policy perspective.

33
which education does not contribute; education is in effect reduced to a
process of assessment. Hence improvements in educational attainment,
particularly among the less able will have no effect on the overall distribution
of income and unemployment rates. Recent research in the US has rebutted
the long-standing criticism of the use of education as a tool to reduce
inequality. On the basis of studies of intra-family comparisons and ‘natural
experiments’ in the US, Ashenfelter and Rouse (1999) conclude “the return to
schooling is not caused by an omitted correlation between ability and
schooling...the school is a promising place to increase the skills and incomes
of individuals”. Furthermore research in the UK has found no evidence of
heterogeneity in the return to schooling completed by the age of 23,
according to ability, and family financial circumstance as a child (Dearden et
al., 1998). If anything the evidence suggests that those individuals whose
parents have low levels of education benefit slightly more from schooling.
They found that the estimated return to an additional year of full time
education decreases by around 0.23 percentage points for every additional
year of father’s education. Whilst no economist would subscribe solely to the
signalling paradigm, many accept that the screening argument may have
some relevance, especially in relation to particular courses.
Other theorists suggest that an increasing supply of qualifications leads
to compositional changes in the demand for labour. Employers merely
respond to the increased supply of qualifications by raising the qualification
levels they ask for as means of screening out large numbers of applicants –
otherwise known as the process of credential inflation. Hence differentials
between the less and more qualified remain. Educational attainment is
devalued as more people achieve a given level, stimulating a further round of
contest at a higher level qualification. Recent analysis by Green et al. (1998)
however rebuts the notion that credentialism has occurred on an economy
wide basis but concludes the phenomenon is apparent in some areas such as
the real estate industry.
New economic theory provides compelling evidence of the importance
of education and training as a strategy to reduce social exclusion. As
Glennerster, Noden and Power (1998) outline
“The reason we cannot run nearer to full employment lies in the
fact that there are pools of people who are not effectively part of
the labour market (Layard, 1997). The Bank of England has to
check and turn back the economic tide long before it can ever
reach the poorest areas as the labour market tightens and inflation
takes off. Macro economic policy is not independent of its micro
roots.”

34
However this role must not be overstated. US evidence suggests that raising
test scores may not have much impact on worker productivity. Empirical
work by Murnane, Willett and Levey (1992, in Hasley et al., 1997) on test
scores and earnings suggests that the magnitude of the relationship has
grown in recent years yet the statistical relationship between the two remains
modest. They found that the wage difference associated with a one standard
deviation difference in mathematics test scores rose from 3 per cent in 1978 to
7.4 per cent in 1986 for men and from 8.5 per cent to 15.5 per cent for females.
Another study found that only a limited amount of variance in productivity,
as observed by supervisors, was associated with test score results.
Analysis of the 1958 NCDS cohort (Gregg and Machin, 1997; Feinstein,
1998) has identified low educational attainment as a key mechanism
translating childhood disadvantage into poor social and economic outcomes
at the ages of 23 and 33. This suggests that improving educational attainment
may reduce the transmission of social exclusion over the life course.
However, findings also suggest that education is only part of the story, as
childhood deprivation is associated with significant reductions in adult
earnings regardless of educational performance.
The effectiveness of education as a means of overcoming social
exclusion may be differentiated on the basis of an individual’s previous
experiences. Using NCDS data, Gregg and Machin (1997) have analysed the
extent to which individuals can improve their wages and employment
prospects by upgrading their education attainment later in life (between the
ages of 23 and 33). In general the results showed that educational upgrading
had a positive and significant impact on wages at 33 – of approximately 9 per
cent for men and 16 per cent for women. However, men who at 16 had poor
school attendance, or who had police contact during their childhood years,
saw no improvement in their wages by the time they were 33 from
educational upgrading in the ten years prior to this. In terms of employment
prospects, educational improvement had no impact for men but was
associated with substantial benefits for women. Hence improvements in
educational attainment in later life offer scope for improvement among some
groups but not for others. These findings raise important conceptual
questions about the role of education in the process of social exclusion.
However they support rather than undermine the importance of education
attainment achieved during the compulsory years of schooling. Getting
education right the first time around appears to be important for all, and
crucial for some groups of individuals.
Crucially the human capital paradigm is closely tied to the notion of a
fair and meritocratic market. Attention is focused on an individual’s
investment and the impediments which restrict the ability to invest.

35
Subsequently such analysis tends to ignore the other conditions that are
necessary for education to provide high payoffs. Research has drawn
attention to the significance of employers and their micro demand for labour.
Atkinson (1998) argues,
“The role of employers is, in my view, too little emphasised in
today’s economic analysis. In seeking to explain the rise in
unemployment, we have to consider the hiring decisions of
employers. Are people now being excluded from the labour
market by the employment practices of companies?”
Procedures, which discriminate on the basis of address, age, gender and race,
prevent individuals with the necessary education and skills from gaining
positions in which they can utilise their human capital (Kleinman et al., 1998).
In a survey of eight TECs Rolfe et al. (1996) found that employer
discrimination on the basis of postcode and race, was a major factor
constraining the youth training opportunities of young disadvantaged
people. They found that despite action by the TECs, employers persisted in
labelling disadvantaged trainees as poor achievers and were inclined to use
them as sources of cheap labour, rather than an opportunity to offer long
term commitment to trainees. From the perspective of trainees, effort and
attainment are not rewarded.
Levin and Kelley (1997) stress improving education is only one factor
which requires a range of complementary measures in order to provide high
payoffs:
“The single factor approach to improving productivity – raising
educational levels and test scores – serves to distort both national
and industry policies in directions that are unlikely to improve
national productivity…What we should be doing is
acknowledging the entire range of changes that are necessary to
increase national productivity and placing education in that
context as only one of the constellation of related and
complementary factors in the policy mix.”
The authors highlight the significance of investment, work place organisation
and managerial approaches.

6. Some further areas of research

½ Soft skills are an important facet of an individual’s human capital,

affecting vulnerability to exclusion from the sphere of production.

36
 However soft skills have yet to be defined, and their importance,
relative to formal qualifications, for different groups of people and at
different stages of the life cycle is unknown.
½ School attendance is also important. Schools with high proportions of
free school meal eligibility have only slightly higher levels of
measurable truancy, but significantly higher rates of absence. We need
to know more about what impedes the attendance of these pupils –
poor health, lack of family access to other services or disaffection from
the schooling process.
½ Existing literature focuses on the relationship between educational
attainment and participation in the sphere of production. We know less
about the importance of educational attainment and outcomes for
participation in the other spheres identified by Burchardt et al. (1998).
½ Non-school factors are of significant importance to educational
attainment and outcomes, however we know surprising little about
which factors are causally related to which educational attainment and
outcomes and which are merely associated. This would be aided by a
greater understanding of the processes which link poverty to poor
educational outcomes.
½ Parents appear to play an important role in their children’s educational
attainment. Research needs to clarify exactly how parents are involved
and the relative importance of different types of involvement, of
mothers and of fathers, for different areas of attainment and at different
stages of their children’s lives. A greater understanding of the
significance of peer groups and of how and why they are important
would also be useful.
½ The school effect is better understood. It will be interesting to monitor
effects of school based interventions such as breakfast and homework
clubs, which address non-school factors (e.g. diet, space to complete
homework), on attainment and outcomes.
½ The Government is committed to reducing levels of exclusion from
school – will the measures that have been announced be successful?
½ Little is known of the effects of the composition of school intake on
management processes, teaching styles and resource allocation at
school level.
½ Innovations in the curriculum and teaching methods seem to be an
effective means of improving attainment and attendance. It would be
useful to evaluate the effectiveness of the different innovations that are
currently taking place at a local level.

37
½ Research on the extent of screening and credentials inflation is useful as
these have serious implications for the utilisation of education as a
strategy to reduce social exclusion.
½ We need to gain a better understanding of the role of employers in the
social exclusion process. How do their decisions, policies and practices
affect educational attainment and the transmission of low educational
attainment into poor adult outcomes?

To sum up, the research indicates that schools are a good place to
improve children’s skills and that poor children benefit differentially more
from such improvements. However, if pursued in isolation, the improvement
of average school performance is a less effective means of reducing social
exclusion than an approach which takes deliberate action and creates
incentives that rewards improvement among the least able.

38
References

Arulampamlam, W. and Stewart, M.B. (1995), “The determinants of

individual unemployment duration in an era of high unemployment”,
Economic Journal, 105: 321-332.
Ashenfelter, O. and Rouse, C. (1999), Schooling, Intelligence and Income in
America, working paper. Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic
Research.
Atkinson, A.B. (1998), “Social exclusion, poverty and unemployment”, in
Atkinson, A.B. and Hills, J. (1998), Exclusion, Employment and
Opportunity, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion CASEpaper 4.
London: London School of Economics.
Audit Commission (1996), Trading Places: The supply and allocation of school
places. London: Audit Commission.
Betts, J. (1998), in Tracy, J.S. and Walter, B.L. (1998) “Summary of
observations and recommendations”, Economic Policy Review, March: 3-
6.
Biehal, N., Claydon, J., Stein, M. and Wade, J. (1992), Prepared for Living? A
survey of young people leaving the care of local authorities. London: National
Children’s Bureau.
Blatchford, P., Burke, J., Farquhar, C., Plewis, I. and Tizard, B. (1989),
“Teachers expectations in infant schools: associations with attainment,
progress, curriculum coverage and classroom interaction”, British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 59: 19-30.
Bosworth, D. (1994), “Truancy and pupil performance”, Education Economics,
2(3): 243-263.
Bradley, S., Johnes, G. and Millington, J. (1999), School Choice, competition and
the efficiency of secondary schools in England. Lancaster: Centre for
Research in the Economics of Education.
Brooks, G., Gorman, T., Harman, J., Hutchinson, D. and Wilkin, A. (1998),
Family literacy works. London: Basic Skills Agency.
Burchardt, T., Le Grand, J. and Piachaud, D. (1998), “Social Exclusion in
Britain 1991-1995”, Social Policy and Administration, 33(3): 227-244.

39
Bynner, J. and Parsons, S. (1997), It doesn’t get any better; the impact of poor basic
skill attainment on the lives of 37 year olds. London: The Basic Skills
Agency.
Card, D. and Kreuger, A. (1996), Labour market effects of school quality, working
paper. Princeton : Princeton University.
Carleen, P., Gleeson, D. and Wardhaugh, J. (1992), Truancy: the politics of
compulsory schooling. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Casey, B. and Smith, D. (1995), Truancy and youth transitions, DfEE, London:
Policy Studies Institute.
Chubb, J.E. and Moe, T.M. (1990), Politics, markets and America’s schools.
Washington D.C: The Brookings Institution.
Coleman, J. (1997), “Social Capital in the creation of human capital”, in
Halsey, A.H., Lauder, H., Brown, P., and Wells A. (1997), Education,
Culture, Economy and Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cullinford, C. and Morris, J. (1997), “Peer group pressure within and outside
school”, British Educational Research Journal, 23(1): 61-80
Daniel, S. (1995), “Can pre school education affect children’s achievement at
key stage one”, Oxford Review of Education, 21: 163-178.
Dearden, L. (1998), “Ability, family, education and earnings”, mimeo:
Institute of Fiscal Studies.
Dearden, L., Ferrier, J. and Meghir, C. (1997), “The effects of school quality on
educational attainment and wages”, mimeo: Institute of Fiscal Studies.
DfEE (1997), Excellence in schools, cm3681, London: HMSO.
DfEE (1998), Permanent exclusion from school in England 1996/97, 451/98.
Dolton, P. and O’Neil, D. (1996), “Unemployment duration and the restart
effect”, Economic Journal, 106: 387-400.
Dolton, P. and Vignoles, A. (1996), The impact of school quality on labour market
success in the UK, Newcastle: University of Newcastle.
Dustmann, C., Rajah, N. and Smith, S. (1997), Teenage truancy, part time
working and wages, London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Ekinsmyth, C. and Bynner, J. (1994), The basic skills of young adults. London:
The Basic Skills Agency.
Featherstone, D.R., Cundick, B..P. and Rodgers, W. (1992), “Differences in
school behaviour and achievement between children from intact,
reconstituted and single parent families”, Adolescence, 27: 1-12.

40
Feinstein, L. (1998), Pre-school educational inequality?, London: Centre for
Economic Performance.
Feinstein, L. (1998b), “Which children succeed and why?”, New Economy, 5(2):
104-108.
Feinstein, L. and Symons, J. (1997), Attainment in secondary schools, London:
Centre for Economic Performance.
Finn, J.D. and Achilles, C.M. (1990), “Answers and questions about class size:
a state wide experiment”, American Educational Research Journal, 27(3):
557-577.
Fitz, J., Halpin, D. and Power, S. (1993), Grant maintained schools: education in
the market place. London: Koogan Page.
Fletcher Campbell, F. and Hall, C. (1990), Changing schools? Changing people?
The education of children in care. Slough: NFER.
Fox, N. (1995), “Professional models of school absence associated with home
responsibilities”, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(2): 221-242.
Galloway. J. (1985), Schools and persistent absences. London: Pergamon Press.
Garnett, L. (1992). Leaving care and after. London: National Children’s Bureau.
Gerwitz, S. (1998), “Can all schools be successful? An exploration of the
determinants of school success”, Oxford Review of Education, 24(4): 11-22.
Gerwitz, S., Ball, S.J. and Bowe, R. (1995), Markets, choice and equity in
education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Gilborn, C. (1996), Exclusions from school, Viewpoint number 5, London:
Institute of Education.
Gipps, D. and Gilborn, C. (1996), Recent research on the achievements of ethnic
minority pupils. London: HMSO.
Glennerster, H., Noden, P. and Power, A. (1998), “Poverty, social exclusion
and place”, paper presented at the SPA conference, Lincoln, mimeo:
London School of Economics.
Gorad, S. and Fitz, J. (1998), “The more things change …the missing impact of
marketisation?”, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19(3): 365-376.
Gray, G., Smith, A. and Rutter, M. (1980), “School attendance and the first
year of employment”, in Hersov, L. and Berg, I. (eds), Out of school.
Chichester: John Wiley.
Green, F., Ashton, D., Burchell, B., Bryn, D. and Felstead, A. (1998), “Are
British Workers getting more skilled?”, in Atkinson, A.B. and Hills, J.

41
 (eds), Exclusion, employment, and opportunity. Centre for Analysis of
Social Exclusion CASEpaper 4. London: London School of Economics
Gregg, P. and Machin, S. (1997), “Blighted lives”, Centre Piece, London School
of Economics: Centre of Economic Performance, 15-17.
Greenhough, P. and Hughes, M. (1998), “Parents’ and teachers’ interventions
in children’s reading”, British Educational Research Journal, 24(4): 379-
398.
Grogger, J. (1997), Local violence, educational attainment and teacher pay,
working paper, Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic
Research.
Halsey, A.H., Lauder, H., Brown, P., and Wells A. (1997), Education, Culture,
Economy and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hanock, P. (1997), “Building home school liaison into classroom practice; a
need to understand the nature of the teachers day”, British Educational
Research Journal, 24(4): 399 -414.
Hannon, P. (1987), “A study of the effects of parental involvement in the
teaching of reading test performance”, British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 57(1); 56 – 72.
Hanushek, E. (1986), “The economics of schooling, production and efficiency
in public schools”, Journal of Economic Literature, 24: 1141-1117.
Hedges, L.V., Laine. R.D. and Greenwald, R. (1994), “Does money matter? A
meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inuts on
student outcomes”, Educational researcher, 23(3): 5-14.
Hendry, L., Roberts, W., Glendining, A. and Coleman, J.C. (1992),
“Adolescents perceptions of significant individuals in their lives”,
Journal of Adolescence, 15: 225-270.
Hibbert, A., Fogelman, K. and Maoner, O. (1990), “Occupational outcomes of
truancy”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(1): 23-36.
Hibbert, A. and Fogelman, K. (1990b), “Future lives of truants: family
formation and health related behaviour”, British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 60(2): 171-179.
Hobcraft, J. (1998), Intergenerational and life course transmission of social
exclusion: influences of child poverty, family disruption and contact with the
police, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion CASEpaper 15, London:
London School of Economics.

42
Industry in Education (1996), Towards employability – Addressing the gap
between young people’s qualities and employer’s recruitment needs. London:
Industry in Education.
Joshi, H. and Verropoulou, G. (1999) “Maternal employment and child
outcomes”, Paper presented at the Equality Action Seminar, 11 Downing
Street, London: Centre for Longitudinal Studies.
Kiernan, K. (1992), “The impact of family disruption in childhood on
transitions made in young adult life”, Population Studies, 46: 213-234.
Kinder, K., Wakefield, A., and Wilkin, A. (1996), Talking back: pupils views on
disaffectional. Sough: NFER.
Kleinman, M., West, A. and Sparkes, J. (1998), Investing in employability the role
of business and government in the transition to work. London: BT/LSE
Lareau, A. (1997), “Social class differences in family school relationships; the
importance of cultural capital”, in Halsey, A.H., Lauder, H., Brown, P.,
and Wells A. (1997) Education, Culture, Economy and Society. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Leney, T. (1999), “European approaches to social exclusion”, in Hayton (ed)
(1999), Tackling Disaffection and social exclusion. London: Koogan Page.
Levacic, R. and Hardman, J. (1999), “The performance of grant maintained
schools in England: an experiment in autonomy”, Journal of Education
Policy, 14(2): 185 -210.
Levitas, R. (1996), “The concept of social exclusion and the new Durkheimian
hegemony”, Critical Social Policy, 46: 5-20.
McInnes, C. and Toft, M. (1998), Healthier schools partnership project,
monitoring report, London: Lewisham Education and Community
Services.
Mortimore, P. and Mortimore, J. (1983), “Education and social class”, in
Rogers, R. (1986), Education and social class. East Sussex: Falmer Press.
Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Lewis, D. and Ecob, R. (1988) School
matters – the junior years. London: Open Books.
Moser, C. (1999), A fresh start improving literacy and numeracy. Suffolk: DfEE.
Moss, P. and Tiley, C. (1995), Soft skills and Race: An investigation of black men’s
employment problems. New York: Sage Foundation.
National Commission on Education (1995), Standards in literacy and numeracy,
NCE briefings new series 7.

43
National Commission on Education (1996), Success against the odds: effective
schools in disadvantaged areas. London: Routledge.
Noden, P. (1999), Paper submitted to the British Journal of Sociology of
Education.
Noden, P., West, A., David, M. and Edge, A. (1998), “Choices and
destinations at secondary schools in London”, Journal of Educational
Policy, 13(2): 221-236.
O’Brien, M. and Jones, D. (1999), “Children, parental employment and
eductaional attinment: an English case study”, Cambridge Journal of
Economics, 23: 599-621.
OECD (1997), Education at a glance, OECD indicators, Paris: OECD.
OFSTED (1993), Access and achievement in urban education. London: HMSO.
OFSTED (1995), Pupil Referral Units – the first twelve inspections, London:
HMSO.
OFSTED (1996), Exclusion from secondary schools 1995/6, London: HMSO.
O’Keefe, D. (1994), Truancy in English secondary school; a report prepared for the
DfEE. London: HMSO.
Osbourne, A. and St Claire, L. (1987), “The ability of children who have been
in care or separated from their parents”, Early Child Development, 28(3):
187-354.
Parkinson, C. E. (1982), “Rating the home environment of school age children:
a comparison with cognitive index and school progress”, Journal of child
Psychology, 23: 329-333.
Parsons, C. (1995), National survey of LEAs, policies and procedures for the
identification of and provision for children who are out of school by reason of
exclusion or otherwise, London: DfEE.
Parsons, C. (1996), Exclusions from school: the public cost, London: Commission
on Racial Equality.
Parsons, C. (1998), “Trends in Exclusion from school”, FORUM, 40(1): 11-14.
Paugam, S. (1998), “La dynamique de la disqualification sociale”, Science
Humanities, May.
Pearce, N. and Hillman, J. (1998), Wasted Youth: raising attainment and tackling
social exclusion, London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
Plewis, I. (1998), “Inequalities, targets and zones”, New Economy, 5(2): 104-
108.

44
Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., Stoll, P., Barber, M. and Hillman, J. (1996),
“School effectiveness and school improvement in the United
Kingdom”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7: 133-158.
Rich Harris, J. (1999), The nurture assumption: why children turn out the way they
do, New York: Free Press.
Robertson, D. and Symons, J. (1996), Do peer groups matter? Peer group versus
schooling effects on academic attainment, London: Centre for Economic
Performance.
Robinson, P. and Oppenhiem, C (1998), Social exclusion indicators – a
submission to the social exclusion unit. London: Institute for Public Policy
Research.
Rolfe, H., Bryson, A. and Metcalf, H. (1996), The effectiveness of TECs in
achieving jobs and qualifications for disadvantaged groups, London: HMSO.
Room, G. (1995), “Poverty and social exclusion: the new European agenda for
policy and research”, in Room, G. (ed), Beyond the Threshold. Bristol: The
Policy Press.
Rutter and Madge (1976), Cycles of disadvantage, London: Heinmann.
Sammons, P. (1998), A note to the DfEE.
Sammons, P. Kysel, F. and Mortimore, P.(1981), Education priority indices – a
new perspective, London: Inner London Education Authoriety
Sammons, P. and Smees, R (1998), “Measuring pupil progress at key stage
one: Using base line assessment to investigate value added”, School
Leadership and Management, 18(3): 389-407.
Sammons, P., West, A. and Hind, A. (1997), “Accounting for variations in
pupil attainment at the end of key stage one”, British Educational
Research Association Journal, 23(4): 486-511.
Shepard, J.P. and Farrington, D.P. (1995), “Preventing crime and violence: Pre
school education, early family support and situational crime prevention
can be effective”, British Medical Journal, 310(4): 271-272.
Slavin (1990), “Class size and student achievement – is smaller better?”,
Contemporary education, 62: 6-12.
Social Exclusion Unit (1998), Truancy and school exclusion, London: The
Stationary Office.

45
Social Exclusion Unit (1999), Bridging the gap: new opportunities for 16-18 year
olds not in education, employment or training, London: The Stationary
Office.
Snow. C., Barnes. W., Chandler, J. Goodman, I. and Hemphill, L. (1991),
Unfulfilled Expectations home and school influences on literacy. London:
Harvard University Press.
Sparkes, J. and West, A. (forthcoming), An evaluation of the Learning for Life
project, London: Centre for Educational Research.
Stirling, M. (1992), “Absent with Leave”, Special Children, 52.
Sylva, K. (1994), “School influences on children’s development”, Journal of
Child Psychology, 35: 135-170.
Sylva, K. and Hurry, J. (1995), The effectiveness of reading recovery and
phonological training for children with reading problems, London: Institute
of Education.
Tabberber, R. (1998), “Poverty and education: evidence for education’s role in
combating the transmission of poverty”, in Persistent poverty and lifetime
inequality: The evidence, CASEreport 5. London: London School of
Economics.
Tizard, B., Mortimore, J. and Burchell, B. (1981), Involving parents in nursery
and infant schools, London, Grant McIntyre.
Tizard, J., Schofield, W. and Hewison, J. (1982), “Collaboration between
teachers and parents in assisting children’s reading”, British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 52: 1-15.
Thomas, S. and Mortimore, P. (1996), “Comparison of value added models
for secondary school effectiveness”, Research Papers in Education, 11(1):
279-295.
Thomas, S. and Smees, R. (1997), “Dimensions of school effectiveness:
comparative analyses across regions”, Paper presented at the tenth
international congress for school effectiveness.
Vandenberghe, V. (1998) “Educational quasi markets: the Belgian
experience”, in Bartlett, W., Roberts, J.A, and Le Grand, J. (eds.), A
revolution in social policy, Bristol: The Policy Press.
Waldfogel, J. (1998), “Early Childhood intervention and outcomes in CASE”,
in Persistent poverty and lifetime inequality: The evidence, CASEreport 5,
London: London School of Economics.
Wedge, P. and Prosser, N. (1973), Born to fail, London: Arrow Books.

46
West, A. (1995), “How London gets smaller classes”, Parliamentary Brief, May:
52.
West, A., Noden, P., Edge, A. and David, M. (1997), “Parental involvement in
education in and out of school”, British Educational Research Journal,
24(4): 461-484.
West, A. and Pennell, H. (1997), “Educational reform and school choice in
England and Wales”, Education Economics, 5(3): 285-304.
West, A. and Pennell, H. (1998), “School Admissions: increasing equity,
accountability and transparency”, British Journal of Educational Studies,
46(2): 188-200.
West, A. and Pennell, H. (1999), Paper submitted to the British Educational
Research Journal.
West, A., Pennell, H., West, R. and Travers, T. (1999), The financing of school
based education – End of award report to the ESRC: main findings, London:
Centre for Educational Research.
Whitty, G., Power, S., Gamarnikow, E., Aggleton., Tyrer, P. and Youdell, D.
(1999), “Health, housing and education”, in Hayton, A. (ed), Tackling
Disaffection and social exclusion. London: Koogan Page.

47