Primary movement

As everyone in education knows, you can’t look at one phase in isolation – university access is largely a result of disparities in attainment at secondary level;  those disparities have their roots in inequalities in primary schooling; and, of course, there are big differences in school readiness at age four and five.

The Trust feels strongly that‎ this doesn’t mean intervention early on is the only answer – it is right to intervene at every stage where we can make a difference – but it does beg the question of what foundations like the Trust can do to have maximum impact on this negative chain reaction, widening the pool of students for whom leading universities and competitive careers are an option.

The answers are not straightforward. We know from research commissioned by Joseph Rowntree, for example, that there is limited evidence of the impact of aspiration raising activities on academic achievement. What is less clear, though, is whether the nature of those aspirations affect other outcomes – for example, progression to higher education. Certainly, our own experience suggests that low/middle income families have aspirations, but do not necessarily recognise the steps that are most likely to lead to those aspirations being fulfilled.

The notion that some qualifications have higher currency than others or that going to, say, Bristol to study History is perhaps one of the best routes into law, is one of those pieces of knowledge middle class families have, but are anathema to others. So some very practical advice to scaffold the aspirations of those outside the privileged few might be one way forward.

The Trust has a proud history of supporting charities working in the primary phase – Into University and The Children’s University in particular. The Brilliant Club is also extending it’s provision into primary schools.  But what else should we do? Groups like NEON are looking into what universities can usefully spearhead at the primary phase, recognising that, since the demise of Aimhigher and the introduction of higher fees, the incentives are for institutions to focus on the low hanging fruit of sixth formers.

In previous programmes we have found it hard to engage with primary schools around an HE agenda alone. So, should our focus be on boosting the attainment of non-privileged students at key stage two, a natural priority for primary schools and a key building block for all else that follows? We’ve already started to do this at key stage 3 through our Sutton Scholars Programme, funded by JP Morgan and run by UCL.  Certainly a serious combination of attainment raising provision, aspirations work and enrichment is worth testing, particularly if it is backed by universities and schools and linked to the transition to secondary school.

I’ve blogged before about there being arguably too much fragmented activity, particularly in London, on social mobility and university access in the later years. That doesn’t seem to be a problem earlier down the chain. But evidence is needed to establish exactly where the difference can be made and where the marginal pound should be spent.  The conversation should be an interesting one.