Using critical approaches to understand gender exclusion in the
English Education System
Woodward (2004) states that each child’s socio-political identities in
school can be defined by a set of characteristics that makes one child
different from another. Within education the inclusion of these socio-
political groups can be seen as an ideal that many education systems
around the world should aspire to. ‘Class, gender, ethnicity, disability and
place of birth are all important dimensions of a person’s identity’ and in
relation to schooling diversity policy aims to identify and respect each
child’s differences and support them in reaching their full potential.
Although the English Education system has made huge developments in
inclusion over the last century, evidence of exclusion is still being found
and identified within ideology, policy and displayed through educational
statistics. Nutbrown and Clough (2006) noted that although each author
may define inclusion slightly differently, it is widely agreed to be the
process that motivates maximum participation within socio-political
groups and aims to minimize exclusion by recognising and overcoming
the barriers to involvement and belonging. In this essay I will be
demonstrating the relationship between the structure and function of the
English education system, taking into account its socio-political contexts,
in particular gender exclusion and the effect it has had on female
education over the last 50 years. I will do this by collecting and
interpreting relevant case study materials and relating it to the ideologies
of sociological theory within education.
Before a child begins to attend school their background and identity has
already begun to effect the way they will be treated through the
education system. The identity that parents have passed onto their
offspring will determine the opportunities their child has access to and can
also impact the attainment levels they may achieve. This is widely
accepted and explained through the use of statistical data to identify
socio-political differences and collect attainment data based on these
differences. This type of educational data suggests that the reason behind
1 | Page
, underachieving is the characteristics or groups that children identify with
and suggests that children from a certain background, sex or ethnicity are
destined to fulfil targets sets from previous years of children in the same
groupings. A publication on GCSE attainment in key stage 4 is an example
of the way pupils achievement are divided into characteristics such as
gender, class, ethnicity and even disability and justified using
characteristics as an excuse for underachievement. The Department for
Education’s (2010) report uses quantitative data to illustrate the
differences in attainment due to characteristics and finds; girls outperform
boys; children who have English as a first language outperform those who
do not; and pupils who are not eligible for free school meals (middle/upper
class families) outperform those who are (lower/working class families).
Statistics such as these prove that identity barriers still exist and are
accepted as the norm in the English education system but when you start
to analyse this data with sociological theory in mind, it begins to become
clear that the education system is built around the society’s current
ideologies throughout history.
Highlighting the previous data on girls outperforming boys in Key stage 4
exams, it is already obvious there is inequality of gender inclusion within
schooling. This data is a small insight into how a child’s gender can have a
huge impact on whether they are included or excluded in certain social
groups in school. Despite the evidence on girls outperforming boys at
GCSE level, Jackson, Paechter and Renold (2010) explain that English
education has current policies and agendas that allow girls to be
marginalized against, giving boys a more central focus to help them reach
female peers level of achievement and ignoring the needs of the girls.
This can be seen as a result of patriarchy in England, where male learner’s
education is held as more important than females due to their higher level
of employment and pay when they leave school. According to feminist
Oakley (Cited in Oakley, 2005) education is a male dominated
organisation that aims to keep men in charge and causes a division
between girls and boys as early as pre-school. Feminists also believe that
2 | Page
English Education System
Woodward (2004) states that each child’s socio-political identities in
school can be defined by a set of characteristics that makes one child
different from another. Within education the inclusion of these socio-
political groups can be seen as an ideal that many education systems
around the world should aspire to. ‘Class, gender, ethnicity, disability and
place of birth are all important dimensions of a person’s identity’ and in
relation to schooling diversity policy aims to identify and respect each
child’s differences and support them in reaching their full potential.
Although the English Education system has made huge developments in
inclusion over the last century, evidence of exclusion is still being found
and identified within ideology, policy and displayed through educational
statistics. Nutbrown and Clough (2006) noted that although each author
may define inclusion slightly differently, it is widely agreed to be the
process that motivates maximum participation within socio-political
groups and aims to minimize exclusion by recognising and overcoming
the barriers to involvement and belonging. In this essay I will be
demonstrating the relationship between the structure and function of the
English education system, taking into account its socio-political contexts,
in particular gender exclusion and the effect it has had on female
education over the last 50 years. I will do this by collecting and
interpreting relevant case study materials and relating it to the ideologies
of sociological theory within education.
Before a child begins to attend school their background and identity has
already begun to effect the way they will be treated through the
education system. The identity that parents have passed onto their
offspring will determine the opportunities their child has access to and can
also impact the attainment levels they may achieve. This is widely
accepted and explained through the use of statistical data to identify
socio-political differences and collect attainment data based on these
differences. This type of educational data suggests that the reason behind
1 | Page
, underachieving is the characteristics or groups that children identify with
and suggests that children from a certain background, sex or ethnicity are
destined to fulfil targets sets from previous years of children in the same
groupings. A publication on GCSE attainment in key stage 4 is an example
of the way pupils achievement are divided into characteristics such as
gender, class, ethnicity and even disability and justified using
characteristics as an excuse for underachievement. The Department for
Education’s (2010) report uses quantitative data to illustrate the
differences in attainment due to characteristics and finds; girls outperform
boys; children who have English as a first language outperform those who
do not; and pupils who are not eligible for free school meals (middle/upper
class families) outperform those who are (lower/working class families).
Statistics such as these prove that identity barriers still exist and are
accepted as the norm in the English education system but when you start
to analyse this data with sociological theory in mind, it begins to become
clear that the education system is built around the society’s current
ideologies throughout history.
Highlighting the previous data on girls outperforming boys in Key stage 4
exams, it is already obvious there is inequality of gender inclusion within
schooling. This data is a small insight into how a child’s gender can have a
huge impact on whether they are included or excluded in certain social
groups in school. Despite the evidence on girls outperforming boys at
GCSE level, Jackson, Paechter and Renold (2010) explain that English
education has current policies and agendas that allow girls to be
marginalized against, giving boys a more central focus to help them reach
female peers level of achievement and ignoring the needs of the girls.
This can be seen as a result of patriarchy in England, where male learner’s
education is held as more important than females due to their higher level
of employment and pay when they leave school. According to feminist
Oakley (Cited in Oakley, 2005) education is a male dominated
organisation that aims to keep men in charge and causes a division
between girls and boys as early as pre-school. Feminists also believe that
2 | Page
