Leading for equity: a moral imperative

Leading for equity remains an acute challenge for school and system leaders. A report published in the early morning of the 21 December 2017, by the Education Policy Institute,¹ highlighted that in England there is an acute North and South educational divide. The report signalled that access to high performing schools has become more unequal and geographically divided. It stated that areas with ‘consistently low densities of high-performing schools’, were all outside London and the South East. If you are a pupil in Blackpool, Hartlepool, Barnsley, Redcar, Cleveland, Knowsley, and Middlesbrough your chances of attending a high performing school are significantly lower than anywhere else in the country.

The report states ‘of particular note is the North East, which as a region has virtually no high performing schools’. Pupils in these areas face significant barriers in accessing a high performing school. Moreover, local authorities which have experienced the greatest increases in the density of high performing school places between 2010 and 2015 are overwhelmingly concentrated in London, which already had a relatively high density of high performing school places.

Even with such alarming findings, the report has not received the media attention it clearly deserved and warranted. It seems to have faded away along with its stark implication of inequity. Policy makers and politicians often move swiftly on from such worrying evidence. But geographical inequity has profound consequences for young people and their life chances. We know that the education playing field is far from level for young people who live in areas of disadvantage and poverty (Harris and Jones 2018b). From this report, it seems that there are significant advantages from being educated in certain parts of England and not others.

A recent Joseph Rowntree Foundation² report has shown that child poverty is on the increase. It has risen from 27% in 2011/2012 to 30% in 2015/2016. For those leading schools in challenging circumstances, this simply adds to the daily challenges being faced by teachers and leaders alike. Yet, such problems are not confined to England. In the USA, educational experts, like Ravitch (2013), are underlining how certain policies, like Charter Schools, are actively fuelling inequity and contributing to greater segregation of young people. For those who are most vulnerable in the system, this is not good news.

Leading for equity

In 2009, a book entitled ‘Leading for Equity’ told the compelling story of the Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools (MCPS) system and its transformation, in less than a decade, into a system committed to breaking the links between race and class and academic achievement. The story starts with a visionary superintendent but does not end there. The story is essentially one of broad-based leadership, including community leadership and a collective commitment to deal with issues of equity head on. MCPS serves a population of one hundred and forty thousand students who come from 163 different countries and speak 134 different languages (Childress, Doyle, and Thomas 2009). This story is centrally one of community empowerment and engagement. Like so many accounts of school and system turnaround, it is an account of a relentless and determined drive, by those leading at all levels, to close the attainment gap and to give all children opportunities for success.

Yet, such leadership does not exist within a policy vacuum. The policy context in which students, teachers and school leaders find themselves, is a critical determinant of success or failure. If there is a clear political will and commitment to actively deal with inequity, then those leading classrooms and schools have, at least, a fighting chance. If the converse is true and the political climate is promoting educational reforms that are punitive, devaluing and disempowering, then professional determination won’t turn the tide of structural inequality and inequity.

As Darling-Hammond (2007, 329) made clear over a decade ago:

if academic outcomes for minority and low-income children are to change, reforms must alter the quality and quantity of learning opportunities they encounter. To improve achievement, school reforms must assure access to high-quality teaching within the context of a rich and challenging curriculum, supported by personalized schools and classes. Accomplishing such a goal will require equalization of financial resources, changes in curriculum and testing policies, and improvements in the supply of highly qualified teachers to all students.

This remains so true.

While there are no simple solutions, it is increasingly clear that without a clear and central policy commitment to tackling inequity, the work of those leading schools becomes far harder. International evidence shows that equity should not be an afterthought in education reform, it should not be an add on or a follow on, it must be the policy priority (Harris and Jones 2018a). In the moving and prophetic words of the great Canadian educator and global champion of equity, Dr Avis Glase, ‘the children cannot wait’ (Benns 2017).

Notes

1. https://epi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Access-to-high-performing-schools_EPI_pdf.

2. http://www.edf.org.uk/joseph-rowntree-foundation-report-uk-poverty-2017/.