Educational policy is a useful way of understanding how the British education system has changed over time. Since 1944, governments have repeatedly tried to use schools to solve wider social problems: improving social mobility, preparing young people for work, raising standards, reducing inequality and helping the economy compete in a global world. However, sociologists disagree about whether these policies genuinely create fairer opportunities or simply reproduce existing inequalities in new ways.
One major trend has been the shift from selection towards more comprehensive forms of education. The 1944 Education Act created a system where pupils were sorted into different types of secondary school, usually through the 11-plus. Later comprehensive reforms tried to reduce this form of selection by giving pupils access to the same type of secondary school. However, sociologists argue that selection did not disappear completely. It continued through catchment areas, setting and streaming, parental choice, school reputation and access to high-performing schools.
A second major trend has been the rise of marketisation. Since the 1988 Education Reform Act, schools have increasingly been encouraged to compete with one another. League tables, Ofsted reports, parental choice, formula funding, academies and free schools all reflect the idea that education can be improved through competition and consumer choice. New Right thinkers argue that this raises standards because schools must respond to parents. However, sociologists such as Ball, Bowe and Gewirtz argue that middle-class parents are often better placed to take advantage of choice, meaning marketisation can increase inequality rather than reduce it.
A third trend is the use of policy to promote equality of opportunity and outcome. Policies such as comprehensivisation, Education Action Zones, Sure Start, Education Maintenance Allowance, Pupil Premium, Opportunity Areas and the National Tutoring Programme have all attempted to reduce the impact of class, ethnicity, gender, region or disadvantage on educational achievement. These policies are important because they show that governments recognise educational inequality as a social problem. However, they also raise an important sociological question: can schools reduce inequality on their own, or are educational differences mainly caused by wider inequalities in income, housing, health, culture and power?
A fourth trend is the growing link between education, globalisation and the economy. Governments increasingly argue that education must prepare young people for a competitive global labour market. This can be seen in curriculum reform, the English Baccalaureate, apprenticeships, T Levels, Skills England and other vocational policies. These reforms aim to improve skills, productivity and employability. Functionalists may see this as a necessary role of education, while Marxists may argue that education often prepares different social groups for unequal positions in the labour market.
Overall, educational policy has moved between different priorities: selecting pupils, widening access, creating competition, raising standards, tackling inequality and developing skills for the economy. For AQA A Level Sociology, the key is not just to remember policy names and dates, but to ask what each policy was trying to achieve, who benefited from it, and whether sociological research suggests it was successful.
Education Policy Timeline: 1944 onwards
Sort major education policies by government, policy aim, impact and sociological research. Use the filters to build stronger AQA exam links on selection, marketisation, equality, globalisation and vocational education.
Sort and filter the policy timeline
Filter by impact: choose one or more impact tags.
Student challenge tasks
Task 1: Marketisation
Filter by marketisation. Choose two policies and explain how they increased competition between schools.
Task 2: Equality
Filter by equality. Which policy seems most effective at reducing disadvantage? Use data or research in your answer.
Task 3: Globalisation
Filter by globalisation. Explain how governments have changed education to respond to global competition.
Task 4: Evaluation
Sort by research angle. Identify one policy supported by New Right ideas and one criticised by Marxists or interactionists.
| Sociologist / study | Policy criticised | Main criticism | Useful exam point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Melissa Benn | Selection, grammar schools, academies, marketisation and New Labour education policy | Benn argues that education should be treated as a public good, not a marketplace. In School Wars, she criticises the long-term attack on comprehensive education and argues that successive reforms have weakened the idea of “good schools for all”. (Melissa Benn) | Use Benn to criticise policies that increase competition, selection or school diversity. Her work is useful for arguing that market-led policies can create social division rather than genuine equality. |
| Melissa Benn and the New Labour Paradox | New Labour policies, 1997–2010 | The New Labour Paradox refers to the contradiction between Labour’s aim to reduce inequality and its continued commitment to marketisation. New Labour introduced equality policies such as Sure Start, Education Action Zones and EMA, but also expanded academies, specialist schools, league-table accountability and private-sector involvement. (Save My Exams) | This is a strong AO3 point: New Labour was not simply egalitarian. It combined social justice aims with market methods, which may have limited how far it could reduce inequality. |
| Ball, Bowe and Gewirtz | Marketisation and parental choice | They argue that marketisation does not create equal choice. Middle-class parents are more likely to have the cultural capital, confidence, time and resources to choose desirable schools. Their work on education markets links parental choice to class and race inequalities. (ERIC) | Use this to criticise the New Right idea of parentocracy. In theory, parents choose schools; in practice, some parents are much better placed to use choice effectively. |
| Gewirtz | School choice after the 1988 Education Reform Act | Gewirtz is especially useful for the idea that parents are not equal consumers. Middle-class parents are more likely to be “privileged” or “skilled” choosers, while working-class parents are more likely to be “disconnected” from the education market. | This helps explain why marketisation may widen class inequality even when every family appears to have the same right to choose. |
| Stephen Ball | Marketisation, league tables, academies, privatisation and global education policy | Ball argues that education has increasingly been shaped by competition, performance data and private-sector involvement. In Education plc, he examines the growth of private-sector participation in public education and raises concerns about its ethical and democratic effects. (Routledge) | Use Ball to criticise academies, free schools, Ofsted pressure, league tables, private companies in education and the idea that schools should operate like businesses. |
| Will Bartlett | Quasi-markets in education | Bartlett’s work on quasi-markets is useful for explaining how schools may act like businesses. Popular schools can attract easier-to-teach, high-achieving pupils, while less popular schools may be left with more disadvantaged pupils. His work examined education reform as a case study of quasi-markets. (Springer) | Use Bartlett to explain cream-skimming and silt-shifting: marketisation may create a cycle where successful schools become more successful and disadvantaged schools struggle further. |
| Whitty, Power and Halpin | Devolution, school autonomy and parental choice | They argue that policies appear to give more power to schools and parents, but governments still control education from a distance through targets, inspections, testing and accountability. Their work describes reforms as quasi-markets based on school autonomy and parental choice. (Pedocs) | Use this to show that education is not a pure free market. Schools compete, but they are also tightly controlled through state accountability systems. |
| Miriam David | Parental choice and education reform | David criticises education policy for ignoring changes in family life and gender inequalities. Her work argues that debates about parental choice often fail to consider how family responsibilities, especially those placed on mothers, shape parents’ ability to engage with schools. (Sage Journals) | Use David as a feminist criticism of marketisation. Parental choice assumes parents have equal time, confidence and resources, but this often places extra responsibility on mothers. |
| Gillborn and Youdell | League tables, exam pressure and marketisation | Gillborn and Youdell argue that marketisation can lead to educational triage, where schools focus attention on pupils most likely to improve league-table results. Their work on Rationing Education links market pressures to class and ethnic inequalities. (UCL Discovery) | Use this to criticise league tables and performance-driven policies. Schools may ration support towards “borderline” pupils rather than helping all pupils equally. |
| Whitty | New Labour education policy | Whitty argues that New Labour combined social justice language with market mechanisms. Policies such as academies, specialist schools and Education Action Zones aimed to raise standards and reduce inequality, but still operated within a competitive education market. (ResearchGate) | Use Whitty to evaluate New Labour: it tried to tackle inequality, but did not fully reject the marketisation introduced by Conservative governments. |
| Ball and global policy networks | Globalisation, privatisation and international education reform | Ball argues that education policy is increasingly shaped by global networks involving businesses, consultants, policy entrepreneurs and private organisations. This means education policy is not only shaped by national governments, but also by global neoliberal ideas. (Routledge) | Use this for globalisation and privatisation. Education policy can be influenced by international competition and private organisations, not just by national educational needs. |
Sociological criticisms of educational policy usually focus on the gap between policy aims and policy outcomes. Governments often claim that policies will raise standards, increase choice or reduce inequality. However, critical sociologists argue that policies operate inside an already unequal society, so they may benefit some groups more than others.
Melissa Benn is useful for criticising policies that weaken comprehensive education. She argues that education should be a public good rather than a marketplace. This means she is critical of selection, academies, private-sector involvement and reforms that encourage competition between schools. Benn is also useful for the New Labour Paradox: New Labour introduced policies that seemed to support equality, such as Sure Start and EMA, but it also continued marketisation through academies, specialist schools, performance measures and private involvement.
Ball, Bowe and Gewirtz are especially important for criticising parental choice. They argue that marketisation creates the appearance of equal choice, but middle-class parents are usually better able to use the system. They may have more knowledge of league tables, more confidence when dealing with schools, more flexible working patterns, and more money to move into desirable catchment areas. This challenges the New Right idea that marketisation creates a fair parentocracy.
Bartlett adds that marketisation can change how schools behave. If schools are judged through results and league tables, they may try to attract pupils who are easier to teach or more likely to gain strong results. This is known as cream-skimming. At the same time, less successful schools may be left with pupils who need more support, a process sometimes described as silt-shifting. This can increase inequality between schools.
Gillborn and Youdell make a similar criticism through the idea of educational triage. They argue that performance pressures may encourage schools to focus resources on pupils who are close to achieving key grade boundaries. This means pupils who are already likely to succeed may receive less attention, while those seen as unlikely to improve results may be neglected. This is a powerful criticism of league tables and exam-driven accountability.
Miriam David adds a feminist criticism. Policies based on parental choice often assume that all parents can act as confident consumers. However, this ignores gender inequalities within families. Mothers are often expected to take responsibility for researching schools, attending meetings and managing children’s education. This means parental choice may increase pressure on families rather than simply empowering them.
Whitty, Power and Halpin argue that modern education policy often creates a quasi-market. Schools appear to have more freedom, and parents appear to have more choice, but the state still controls education through testing, inspections, funding rules and league tables. This means schools are not completely free; they are encouraged to compete while being constantly measured.
Overall, these sociologists show that educational policy should not be judged only by its stated aims. A strong sociology answer should ask whether a policy actually reduces inequality, or whether it simply changes the way inequality is produced. The most useful evaluation question is: does this policy genuinely help disadvantaged pupils, or does it give more advantages to groups who are already powerful?
Understanding Zero-Hours Contracts: Age and Gender Perspectives
Sociologists explain zero-hours contracts in different ways. Marxists argue that they are part of precarious capitalism because employers gain flexibility while workers carry the risk of irregular hours, unstable income and limited bargaining power. Weberian sociologists would link zero-hours contracts to market situation and life chances: workers with fewer qualifications, weaker employment security or less…
Media MCQ Eliminator: Can you get the highest score for AQA A Level Sociology: Media?
This arcade-style quiz is designed for AQA A Level Sociology: The Media, which is one of the Section B options on Paper 2: Topics in Sociology. The AQA specification expects students to study the new media, ownership and control, media, globalisation and popular culture, selection and presentation of news, media representations, and the relationship between…
The Big Beliefs Quiz: AQA A Level Sociology – Beliefs in Society
This arcade-style quiz is designed for AQA A Level Sociology: Beliefs in Society, which appears in Paper 2, Section B as one of the option topics. The AQA specification covers ideology, science and religion; religion, social change and social stability; religious organisations; social groups and religiosity; and the significance of religion in the contemporary world,…