Education action zones "had limited effect

Education + Training

ISSN: 0040-0912

Article publication date: 1 September 2003

220

Citation

(2003), "Education action zones "had limited effect", Education + Training, Vol. 45 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/et.2003.00445fab.001

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2003, MCB UP Limited


Education action zones "had limited effect"

Education action zones "had limited effect"

Education action zones, introduced in 1997 as a way of driving up standards through innovation, had a "limited overall and inconsistent" effect on results in national tests. While the zones did demonstrate some innovation and positive shifts in parents' perceptions of education, these were not matched by consistent improvements in pupil performance or lasting changes in classroom practice. These are among the conclusions of the first major study of the zones, by researchers from the University of London Institute of Education. The Economic and Social Research Council funded the study.

Education action zones typically included two or three secondary schools and their feeder primary schools. They each received up to £1 million extra funding from the government and business to enable them to develop new ways to improve education in areas of social disadvantage. Some 73 statutory education action zones were established. Additionally, 96 smaller zones have been established as part of the government's Excellence in Cities programme, into which the large zones are due to be subsumed later this year. "There was a complex relationship between spin and substance in which pressures of time played a key role in shaping the policy," said Professor Sally Power, head of the School of Educational Foundations and Policy Studies, and co-author of the report. "As a result, neither the hopes nor the fears of the policy have been realized. Initiatives can take time to embed – but many of those working in the zones felt the pressure of having to meet narrow, short-term examination, exclusion and truancy targets made it that much harder to be innovative in ways that could challenge educational disadvantage."

The researchers used regression modelling to assess how examination results might have changed without the zones, and concluded that schools in the areas they studied may even have "done rather worse than non-zone schools". They found that curriculum innovation was often peripheral to students' experience. And, while schools had many new computers, their introduction had not changed the way pupils were taught. However, many primary schools did use their extra funds to offer extra creative-arts provision as a counter-weight to the daily literacy and numeracy lessons.

The private sector was expected to play a significant role investing in and running zones. But the researchers found that businesses "were not able to invest the resources, energy and know-how to transform education" in these areas. However, aside from isolated examples of product placement, neither was there any evidence of the far-reaching commercialization feared by some teaching unions, nor was there any evidence that the private sector had undermined local accountability. Education action zones were supposed to be run by partnership forums, which might be led by schools, businesses or parents rather than local education authorities. But the researchers found the more familiar power structures existed. "We found no indication of new forms of civic engagement," said Professor Power. "The forums were not representative of the local community. Indeed, meetings were generally dominated by officers as many local council education committees tend to be. There was little time for open discussion or the introduction of new issues."

The researchers also argue that the imperative of establishing zones quickly led to the acceptance of under-developed proposals. "There is a sense that the need to construct an image of a can-do government overrode a more cautious approach to implementation," concluded Professor Power. "All this may help to explain why the impact of the policy within zones was so limited and patchy. And that pressure for short-term gains may have hidden some longer-term benefits that may have been developed as a result of the new partnerships formed within the zones."

Related articles