The problem with education policy for other people’s children: (The Learnit Memo 03/06/22)

Dear global education leader?

What sort of school did your elected official choose to send their child to? It’s worth finding out. You don’t need details, just the type of institution. It’s a small fact but it will tell you a great deal about whether their education policies are something they truly stand behind or something they believe in, but, you know, for other people’s children.

Educational policy has had a long-standing problem with what people are willing to accept for other people’s children. Think about selective schools. In England, a 2016 YouGov poll found that only 2 in 5 people wanted more grammar schools. Under the system, children take a test at age 10-11; those who pass go to the local grammar school, where academic achievement is likely to be better. The rest go to the non-selective comprehensive down the road. Critics call grammars unfair and bad for social mobility — evidence shows that the system is weighted in favour of the already advantaged. But tweak the question slightly and ask people if they’d send their own child to such a school and suddenly, there’s a shift: 7 in 10 would want their child to attend.?

It makes sense: if you are presented as the winner in a system, you’ll likely allow individual gains to overcome any objections over abstract inequity. You and yours are getting ahead.?

This way of thinking is particularly evident in higher education and skills. High-profile campaigners, such as Euan Blair at Multiverse and Sir James Dyson, have pointed out skills shortages and how apprenticeships can lead to well-paying, fulfilling careers. And a recent poll of UK adults by Public First for the Sutton Trust charity found that apprenticeships and training-based routes came out on top when respondents were asked where the best opportunities for young people were. But, in that same poll, when asked what route they wanted their own children to follow, people came out in favour of a traditional degree.?

Apprenticeships, it turns out, are great — for other people’s children. It doesn’t help that many of the most visible and vocal champions of these routes have benefited from the system they now suggest others opt out from (Blair attended Bristol and Yale universities; Dyson the Royal College of Art).

And looking at the finances, it’s clear to see why traditional degrees remain the gold standard in the minds of parents. In the UK, an undergraduate degree represents a gain of 20% in average net lifetime earnings. While the tide seems to be slowly turning on the graduate premium, we’re still only just getting to the point where degree apprentices can earn as much as their peers who have studied for an undergraduate degree. Future generations are at stake here, too — household income is still the biggest predictor of a child’s life chances.?

We can — and should — continue to tout the benefits of skills-based learning and apprenticeships. But we need to be realistic. Until there is more of an established certainty around financial return, until we have figureheads who can point to their own successes within the system they promote, we’ll remain where we are: with people willing to accept that apprenticeships are the future…but wanting other people’s children to take that leap first.?

Keep learning

Sarah