Search

This article discusses the astonishing ignorance at all levels as to how Britain has become a multiracial, multicultural society in a post-imperial age, the hostility towards changes in the education system which would help clearer understandings of the imperial past, and the efforts of teachers and other educators to assist in the creation of a socially and racially just society.

2018 marks the 50th anniversary of Enoch Powell's infamous "Rivers of Blood" speech, an intervention that is still viewed as one of the most incendiary statements of the perceived decay and violence likely to follow legislation intended to assure minoritised British citizens of equal rights regardless of their ethnic origin. In this essay, Sally Tomlinson (one of Britain's foremost multicultural theorists) reflects on Powell's legacy and the contemporary scene where in the US, UK and across Europe, White resentment and fear is increasingly shaping "mainstream" debates about nationhood, migration and education.

The old myth about the ability and variability of potential in children is a comforting myth, for those who are uneasy with the degree of inequality they see and would rather seek to justify it than confront it. The myth of inherent potential helps some explain to themselves why they are privileged. Extend the myth to believe in inherited ability and some can come to believe that their children will inherit part of a greater potential. These beliefs create and sustain inequality in society and allow for the creation of levels of ignorance in populations. This article uses insights from social geography and the sociology of education to examine how the myths are sustained past and present. It notes that countries with the highest degree of income inequality and the most unequal education systems have the worst outcomes for young adults, and these are the countries in which eugenic notions of inherited ability are resurfacing.

In countries that have developed special education (SE) provision, whether in segregated settings or "included" in mainstream, racial, ethnic and immigrant minorities continue to be disproportionately represented. Explanations for placement in SE programmes continue to centre round assumptions of deficiencies in student abilities to learn and "behave", their family backgrounds and communities. Many policy-makers, politicians, schools and teachers ignore or are ignorant of the historical background and social contexts in which these students are expected to learn. The article overviews some of this history and policy responses concerned with SE, low attainment and troublesome school behaviour in England, including recent evidence and current explanations for the placement of the students. A premise here is that research, policy and literature are still separating what is happening in "special" education from other areas of education. This cannot continue, as world-wide moves towards inclusive education have meant that mainstream schools and colleges now incorporate (or still exclude) a range of students regarded as having learning difficulties or disabilities, and all young people are now expected to acquire some kind of qualification or be prepared for independent living.

This article discusses the expansion of education systems that now, following international declarations, are expected to offer an "Education for All" to children, young people and adults. Since in these declarations special education and inclusive education are conjoined, sociological questions can be asked as to what sort of social relationships and conflicts are involved in this expansion of a sub-system that underpins mass education. The article uses recent research asking school and college heads, teachers and administrators, how they defined and treated the young people and what future they envisaged for them, given that an ideology of human capital dominates government thinking and policy.

This article briefly overviews the likely future of education as planned after the 2015 Conservative election success. Although education was not a major item in election manifestos or in subsequent discussion, the Department for Education claims that it is rolling out one of the most ambitious education reform movements in the world. How the break-up of a national public educational system is being achieved, primarily through an academies programme and a changed assessment system, and a requirement that all educational institutions, including universities, become competitive businesses, needs far more debate and understanding than any political party is currently willing to undertake.