Literacy and social exclusion

Education secretary Ruth Kelly has announced that every baby and young child in England will receive free books in an expansion of the current Bookstart scheme.

 

Under the Bookstart programme every one to two-year-old will receive a satchel with books inside while every three to four-year-old will receive a box that includes books and crayons.

 

every baby aged up to 12 months already receives a free bag of baby books delivered through health visitors and libraries, and this will continue under the expanded scheme.

 

Ruth Kelly said: "I am delighted to announce the expansion of Bookstart which means that every baby and young child will benefit by receiving a free set of books.

 

"All children deserve the best start in life and we know that supporting early learning is central to ensuring that.

 

"Through the Bookstart programme we are helping to underpin children's learning and development from birth and give parents the opportunity and tools to engage with and support their child's early learning. This is a real boost to every baby and toddler in the country."

 

  

Opposition response: The Conservatives

 

David Cameron, shadow secretary of state for education, said: "Ruth Kelly has correctly identified that the failure to increase social mobility has been one of the biggest education failures of the last decade.

 

"If she is serious about delivering an education system that helps those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds get to the top she should take the following five steps:  

 

Step One - Insist on synthetic phonics at the heart of literacy teaching. If you can’t read- you can’t learn- and children from some of the poorest households are in the 20 per cent bracket that cannot read properly when leaving primary school.

 

Step Two - Allow head teachers to expel unruly pupils to ensure school discipline in schools. Schools serving deprived neighbourhoods often have poor records of discipline, and appeal panels over ruling head teachers only makes matters worse.

 

Step Three - Root out political correctness in teaching and exams. Pretending, for example, that failure is simply deferred success does no favours to anyone. We need rigour in every part of the education and exam system.

 

Step Four - Give schools freedom to determine admissions. The abolition of grammar schools reduced social mobility and the proportion of pupils from independent schools going to top universities has increased over the past 30 years.

 

Step Five – Tear down the barrier between state and private education. There are many ways to do this – assisted places schemes, scholarships- but we must end the apartheid."

 

 

Stakeholder Response: The Institute of Education

 

 

Sue Bodman, a co-ordinator of the Reading Recovery National Network at the Institute of Education, said: "There is considerable evidence that poor children do less well at school than their better-off classmates.

 

"For example, a study by the London School of Economics (2000) concludes that wealth is clearly linked to educational opportunity. As a result, educational opportunities have disproportionately benefited the middle classes.

 

"Family background and relative affluence seem to be the strongest predicting factors of educational attainment and future life chances. Children from wealthy, professional backgrounds are more likely to progress – whether they are academically able or not. So poor families can become trapped in a spiral of poor attainment and ongoing poverty.

 

"Failure to master basic literacy has a detrimental effect on learning in all other areas. Disadvantaged children are more likely to be among those identified as needing intensive support with reading and writing.

 

"I wholeheartedly welcome the government’s announcement today of a £10m initiative to boost literacy among disadvantaged children.

 

"This will include support for the Reading Recovery programme, which provides intensive support to young struggling readers and writers and which has been shown to make a significant difference to their chances of reaching age-appropriate levels in these skills.

 

"Research shows that Reading Recovery is the only intervention which makes a significant difference for the poorest readers and writers from disadvantaged homes."

 

 

Stakeholder Response: NUT

 

 

 

Steve Sinnott, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "I welcome the focus of Ruth Kelly’s speech but she needs to recognise that many schools in deprived areas have made very real progress for their children.

 

"All of us in education should concentrate on how we can give further support to schools in areas of social disadvantage. 

 

"Our country will not achieve the aim of tackling disadvantage through promoting choice. Those with the greatest advantages have the greatest choices. 

 

"The government's choice agenda will simply benefit those with the greatest advantages and not those that need the greatest support.

 

"Reducing class size and making a range of extra support such as additional staff will help schools in the most challenging areas.

 

"I look to the secretary of state to set out a range of practical personalised entitlements for young people from socially deprived backgrounds, including a guarantee of personal tuition and access to activities outside school."

 

Stakeholder Response: ATL

 

 

 

Commenting on Ruth Kelly’s speech to the IPPR, Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), said: "It is important that the Secretary of State talks about social mobility.  It has to be a prime target for government to allow children to achieve what they are capable of without the barriers of race and class.

 

"The hard bit will be working out that schools should do and what needs to be done in economic and social policy.

 

"In terms of education, the most effective agent for change is a good local school with a mixed intake. 

 

"Government policies on choice are giving middle-class parents the choice of schools for their children, while leaving working-class parents with what is left over.  At the moment, the rhetoric of choice doesn’t sit with the rhetoric of social mobility."