Thursday, February 01, 2007
NI education qualifiers bumping along the UK bottom…
Really interesting piece of research on educational achievement and its relation to individual economic success in Northern Ireland by Vani K. Borooah at the University of Ulster. In the introduction he notes that, “Based on a survey of 97 studies that estimated returns to education, Ashenfelter et. al. (1999) concluded that the return to an additional years schooling was between 6 and 9 percent”. Now we do extremely well compared to the rest of the UK when it comes to high individual educational achievement, but considerably less well when it comes of overall achievement as a proportion of the population - top and bottom!
Well:
Approximately, 30 percent of the respondents in the North East, the North West, the East and West Midlands, Wales, and Scotland had no qualifications compared to around 22 percent for the East, the South East, the South West, and inner and outer London. Of all the regions of the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland had the highest proportion of respondents (38 percent) with no qualifications.
And at the other end of the scale:
At the other end of the qualifications spectrum, 44 percent of respondents in inner London, 31 percent in outer London, and 27 percent in the South East had Level 4 qualifications. At the other extreme, only 18 percent of respondents in Northern Ireland and in the North East had level 4 qualifications. In the other regions the proportion of respondents with Level 4 qualifications was fairly equal at approximately 21 percent.
Now for the sectarian headcount thing. And it’s not quite as you might expect:
While there was no significant difference between the proportions of Catholics and Protestant respondents, taken in their entirety (i.e. 16-74), without any qualifications, the proportion of Catholic respondents without any qualifications was significantly higher than that for Protestants for the truncated age groups, 16-45 and 16-30 years.
However, at the other end of the qualifications spectrum, the proportion of Catholic respondents with Level 4 qualifications was significantly higher than that for Protestants for all the age groups: 16-74, 16-45, and 16-30 years. Compared to Protestants, Catholics were more likely to be without qualifications but also more likely to have the highest level of qualifications.
Protestants seem to have a more even spread of achievement, whereas there is quite a (class based?) spread amongst Catholics. On the face of it, you might use these findings to argue that Catholics both benefit from selective education and are simultaneously penalised by it. But, he adds an important caveat:
The empirical evidence tends to suggest that a higher proportion of Protestants migrate to Great Britain (GB) for HE purposes with a significant proportion not returning. This seems a strong explanatory factor in explaining the finding that Catholics have the highest levels of qualification.
But there is no such caveat for the most striking finding at the lower end Catholic performance, which significantly contradicts previous research:
The finding that the number of Catholics without any qualifications is significantly higher than for Protestants is particularly interesting and would tend to be contrary to what previous research has shown, particularly work which Professor Bob Osborne has previously undertaken.
Mick Fealty @ 09:35 AM
Hopefully that would prick a few bubbles about the advantages of the Eleven Plus, and having the best education system ever.
Same there is no comparative figures for the South, though.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:15 AMThe finding that the number of Catholics without any qualifications is significantly higher than for Protestants is particularly interesting and would tend to be contrary to what previous research has shown,
Wonder what the CCMS would say? Is it the schools or the culture.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:17 AMAcademic research commissioned by the NIO that backs its current education policy by contradicting previous research commissioned by the NIO that backed its previous education policy? Well I never.
Good job people here are stupid. They’d need to be.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:20 AMLies, damn lies and statistics - all of it from consultants who charge huge fees for telling our government what they want to hear and we end up paying for it!
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:31 AMHey. If these guys are only surverying people who are staying here, then it says more about local job opportunities and migration than it does about qualifications for people passing through the education system here.
What do the results say about qualifications for people living in the Belfast commuter belt compared with those who live west of the Bann?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:37 AMSluggerettes wouldn’t take the word of an elected politician at face value - and rightly so - so why should anyone take the word of the unelected politicians of academia at face value?
The academic establishment has a clear political opinion on the education system and its own bias needs to be discounted from any ‘research’ that fits its own opinions so neatly.Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:40 AMBloody hell. Is it too much for people to engage with figures, methodology, etc, and then actually engage an argument? Sheering detachment wins you nothing.
Having said that I may have thrown in a ringer with the comment on the 11+. Individual achievement is high, and any educational reforms that ignore that does so at huge risk to NI’s future…
But there are problems identified here that are not currently being addressed by the current set up!!
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:46 AMKensei,
Comparitors on any social measure between Northern Ireland and the Republic is notoriously difficult. I have a useful attempt at it sitting on my bookshelf… most of the data is about ten years old…
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:54 AMOK Mick - setting aside the probability that the stats are rigged, I agree that the system does not address the underlying issues. Hoever the solution of taking what has been recognised as the best education system in these islands and deconstructing it to leave the lowest common denominator, is surely not the best way forward. Leave academic selection alone. Leave our small rural schools alone. It’s time this government put the money where it is needed - into our education system (i.e. the teachers and resources on the ground) and not into the current bureaucratic nonsense. It is time to remove several layers of civil service red tape and put the money where it is needed. that is the only solution to the education system here - irrespective of whether it is in the state or CCMS sectors.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 10:55 AMThere are some NI stats at these two links
http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/
http://www.nicensus2001.gov.uk/nica/public/index.html
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 11:08 AMWhere do professional footballers lie in Vani’s little boxes? Plumbers must be glad they avoided a degree course in the performing arts ....
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 11:17 AM“Comparitors on any social measure between Northern Ireland and the Republic is notoriously difficult. I have a useful attempt at it sitting on my bookshelf… most of the data is about ten years old…”
Surely in this case it is relativey simple - no qualifications, Level 1-4. It should just be a matter of collecting the data.
“Having said that I may have thrown in a ringer with the comment on the 11+. Individual achievement is high, and any educational reforms that ignore that does so at huge risk to NI’s future…”
I don’t understand what you mean by “individual achievement is high”. Surely individual achievement is reflected in the proportional figures, and the salient point is that 4 out of ten people here have no qualifications, and in terms of high achievement, we are significantly behind other places?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 11:24 AMI can’t see how the stats are actually rigged. Like everything in journalism, politics and life in general, different questions bring out different realities.
There is not necessarily a contradiction between good individual achievment, and poor achievement at the bottom. Though of course the solutions being offered by our politics may tempt us into believing there is.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 11:30 AMHere’s a breifing from Ark on educational selection, but specifically, it comes out in high levels of achievement (compared to the UK average) in A Level results.
Experience in England (where this began to happen under Harold ‘you’ve never had it so good’ MacMillan) shows that if you break up grammars on the monodimensionial idea that selection is bad, you break up an educational resource that cannot be put back together again.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 11:39 AMKensei
To immediately assume this proves selection (as opposed to the 11+ itself)is mistaken. There is no doubt that the educational achievement at our grammar schools consistently outperforms that in GB in terms of results and ongoing education.
However, noone is saying all is well - we have far far too many people gaining no qualifications and this is the issue that has to be addressed. Why are so many poorly educated? Why do so many not see education as a way to get on?
Simply abolishing selection won’t improve opportunities for those currently failing. The questions above are harder to address honestly than grandstanding on selection.Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:47 PMjulian
“we have far far too many people gaining no qualifications and this is the issue that has to be addressed. Why are so many poorly educated? Why do so many not see education as a way to get on?”
Do you not think the demoralisation resulting from the branding of 75% of our children at the age of 11 has a lot to do with it ?
The NI Selection system is not about academic selection at all - it is about social selection and I just wish the debate was honest.
There is no reason why streaming and selection cannot occur within the school - eg as in Campbell College.People dont want their kids mixing with the gob shites and want to ensure that happens cheaply via the State system.
The problem is that NI educates to a high standard an elite which either clears off to GB or elsewhere or joins the Civil Service and then NI plc are left with a large uneducated mass at the bottom who will be benefit dependant.
We have got to stop academic selection but at the same time introduce a rigorous system whereby discipline offenders are imemdiately removed from mainstream school on the basis not of ability but attitude to wanting to learn.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:21 PMSimply abolishing selection won’t improve opportunities for those currently failing
For once I agree with Julian Robertson. The disparities between people from different social backgrounds begin in the earliest years in Primary School - i.e. well before selection. Getting rid of the 11+ will make a lot of people happy and let them give themselves big pats on the back and then let them ignore the apalling social disparities in our schools.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:21 PMDo you not think the demoralisation resulting from the branding of 75% of our children at the age of 11 has a lot to do with it ?
Given that a high proportion of that 75% go on to university, and then particularly to well paid voluntary sector jobs where they talk about how terrible a trauma the 11+ was, no I don’t.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:23 PMMick says:
“Comparitors on any social measure between Northern Ireland and the Republic is notoriously difficult. I have a useful attempt at it sitting on my bookshelf… most of the data is about ten years old…â€
and then
Experience in England (where this began to happen under Harold ‘you’ve never had it so good’ MacMillan) shows that if you break up grammars on the monodimensionial idea that selection is bad, you break up an educational resource that cannot be put back together again.
If it’s difficult to make contemporaneous comparisons between NI and the Republic, why should it be any easier -or more reliable- to compare 1960s England with NI in 2006?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:36 PMHugh - there are two different Micks. Three if you include Mick Hall.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:37 PMSammy Morse
“Given that a high proportion of that 75% go on to university, and then particularly to well paid voluntary sector jobs where they talk about how terrible a trauma the 11+ was, no I don’t.”
what proportion of that 75% would that be - could you name me 10 such people ?
Is that your best defence for the 11+ ?
I assume from previous threads you have never had opportunity to put a child through the 11+
I await the results for my third this Saturday and a more absurb system for educating NI children for life and work in the 21st Century I cannot imagine.
Other than saying look at the great results of our grammar schools compared to everywhere else there is no defence for it.
Parents dont mind if their child is not academically gifted - they all have different attributes and they just want them to be happy and for school to bring out the best of them.
If you could assure the vast majoroty of parents that their child would go to a ‘good’ comprehensive - ie one where the trouble makers are removed - they would have no problem with that.
Only the total snobs would care and they could pay for it elsewhere.If we tackled the real issue instead of banging on about 4 Grade A* etc then we would get there.
Let us all be honest - it is social selection
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:39 PM“To immediately assume this proves selection (as opposed to the 11+ itself)is mistaken. There is no doubt that the educational achievement at our grammar schools consistently outperforms that in GB in terms of results and ongoing education.”
That’s a huge surprise, considering they select all the best pupils.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 02:02 PM“There is not necessarily a contradiction between good individual achievment, and poor achievement at the bottom. Though of course the solutions being offered by our politics may tempt us into believing there is.”
Surely there is with low numbers at the top, however?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 02:04 PMMy apologies Sammy - had no idea there were three Micks.
Julian Robertson says:
‘There is no doubt that the educational achievement at our grammar schools consistently outperforms that in GB in terms of results and ongoing education.’
Can anyone recommend an ‘apples-to-apples’ source that demonstrates this? I imagine this would entail some sort of comparison between the top 25-30% of academic achievers in both regions.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 02:05 PMSorry Sammy they were both me.
Hugh,
I wasn’t making a comparison as such, just noting that the English experience suggests that if you break down from Grammar to Comp, there are certain things you lose, and which are difficult to compensate for.
There is a temptation to view the altering of macro educational policies as an easy way to combat all society’s ills. In truth there are multiple ills within education and its longer term relation to the workforce which probably require a range of smaller, smarter approaches.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 02:08 PM
