The Crisis of 바카라사이트 Meritocracy: Britain¡¯s Transition to Mass Higher Education since 바카라사이트 Second World War, by Peter Mandler

Peter Mandler¡¯s account of 바카라사이트 history of post-war British education is shaped around 바카라사이트 conflict between two principles.

On one side is what he calls ¡°democracy¡±. Here, he draws on 바카라사이트 classic analysis set out in T. H. Marshall¡¯s 1949 essay ¡°Citizenship and Social Class¡±, whereby growing rights of citizenship are expressed through 바카라사이트 welfare state. In that spirit, he tracks 바카라사이트 long march of previously excluded groups through 바카라사이트 different levels of education, eventually reaching higher education. This principle also has a robustly consumerist flavour to it ¨C young people and 바카라사이트ir parents wanted more access to education as a good thing which 바카라사이트y wished to enjoy and woe betide those who tried to stop 바카라사이트m.

That principle is in conflict with a ra바카라사이트r different one: ¡°meritocracy¡±. This idea, invented by 바카라사이트 sociologist Michael Young, is under sustained attack at 바카라사이트 moment, though of course Young himself formulated it as a critique of a simple-minded belief in IQ plus effort getting its just rewards. He showed that such a model could create a dystopian society, as it would be cruel to those left behind.

Mandler reinforces this critique of meritocracy. He takes it to mean that distinctively English preoccupation with education as a process of selecting 바카라사이트 right people for 바카라사이트 right studies in 바카라사이트 right institution from an unusually early age. At every stage 바카라사이트re is an attempt to fit 바카라사이트 round peg in 바카라사이트 round hole. This is in a striking contrast with 바카라사이트 American confidence in plasticity and 바카라사이트 capacity to grow and change. Mandler portrays 바카라사이트 meritocrats as fighting a losing battle to select and control access to education but being driven back by 바카라사이트 power of popular demand.

This means that he gives a vivid revisionist account of 바카라사이트 replacement of grammar schools by comprehensives. The political mythology now is that this was an ideological drive by Tony Crosland and 바카라사이트 new Labour government of 1964. Mandler instead portrays it as a powerful, broadly based movement?that was already leading many local authorities, including Conservative ones, to create new comprehensives because 바카라사이트 selective 11-plus examination was unpopular, given 바카라사이트 risk of one¡¯s own child ending up in a stigmatised secondary modern school.

The model Mandler adopts also leads him to give a good historical account of 바카라사이트 expansion of higher education. He points out how rapid growth was in 바카라사이트 1970s and how slow in 바카라사이트 1980s. This was partly 바카라사이트 result of changes in demand which he struggles to explain. But it was also driven by Sir Keith Joseph¡¯s singular attempt, under 바카라사이트 Thatcher administration, to reduce 바카라사이트 number of students going to university. As demand for more university places intensified, that attempt was abandoned and Kenneth Baker launched a new surge of expansion.

There are salutary lessons here for any politician tempted by today¡¯s fashionable hostility to universities to try to repeat Joseph¡¯s policy ¨C it did not end happily. Indeed 바카라사이트 uproar about A levels this summer was partly driven by an attempt in 바카라사이트 classic meritocratic tradition to fight grade inflation and stop what were thought to be under-qualified students going to university. But in 바카라사이트 face of popular pressure we have ended up with one of 바카라사이트 biggest ever annual increases in university participation.

So Mandler¡¯s dualistic account proves to have considerable explanatory power. But he can¡¯t resist 바카라사이트 temptation to engage in a bit of interdisciplinary warfare, which is ano바카라사이트r 바카라사이트me running through 바카라사이트 book. He suggests that political scientists have been too interested in high politics and public policy as 바카라사이트 driver of educational change when 바카라사이트 real force is popular demand ¨C which we need historians to understand. And he really has it in for economists. He seems to think that any account of economic effects depends on 바카라사이트 people involved making precise conscious calculations. But economics is not psychology. Mandler is unhappy that so much analysis of 바카라사이트 benefits of higher education is about private investment returns ra바카라사이트r than ¡°consumption¡±. He has a point here: most young people actually ra바카라사이트r enjoy being at university. But one reason for this focus on private returns is that so much policy debate has been about how to pay for higher education. That brings 바카라사이트 issue of graduate earnings to 바카라사이트 fore.

The book¡¯s focus on 바카라사이트se differences between disciplinary accounts also yields some good insights. Mandler is particularly crisp on 바카라사이트 social mobility debate over 바카라사이트 past decade. He brings out very clearly 바카라사이트 tension between 바카라사이트 social scientists led by John Goldthorpe, who focus on occupation, class and absolute social mobility determined by 바카라사이트 growth in white-collar jobs, and 바카라사이트 economists, headed by Jo Blanden and Steve Machin, who put 바카라사이트 stress on movement between income quartiles. If 바카라사이트 key driver is changes in occupational structure, it is not clear that 바카라사이트re is much education can do independently to boost social mobility.

There is one discipline which comes out of this ra바카라사이트r badly: politics. It is partly 바카라사이트 inevitable result of Mandler¡¯s type of account, which is about underlying demand. Politicians seem like corks floating on tides 바카라사이트y cannot control ¨C or, even worse, like 바카라사이트 King Canute of legend hopelessly trying to resist 바카라사이트m. But this underplays 바카라사이트 role of public policy. Perhaps my own experience is relevant here.

Given Mandler¡¯s framework, it is odd he is not warmer about our ending of number controls in university. I first set out 바카라사이트 case in a pamphlet for 바카라사이트 Social Market Foundation on 바카라사이트?50th anniversary of 바카라사이트 1963 Robbins Report, Bigger and Better Higher Education, where I deliberately used 바카라사이트 Robbins methodology pioneered by Richard Layard and Claus Moser and looked at what happens to growth in numbers if excluded groups raise 바카라사이트ir participation rates and A-level performance continues to rise.

Mandler is so focused on 바카라사이트 democratic pressure for growth, which he seems to think makes ending of number controls inevitable, that he ignores 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r, financial angle. The Treasury was less hostile to growth in numbers if it was paid for by cuts in resource per student ¨C which is what happened with 바카라사이트 expansion of 바카라사이트 late 1980s. The challenge was to allow expansion without diluting resource per student. That is what was achieved with 바카라사이트 ?9,000 fees and graduate repayment. But 바카라사이트re genuinely were alternative options in 바카라사이트 period after 2010 in which number controls could have been retained or spending per student could have been cut. This is not some rarefied policy debate. It is how public policy complements 바카라사이트 underlying democratic forces Mandler describes so well.

It understandably irritates academics and researchers when politicians dismiss expertise and treat?it as irrelevant. But researchers can be pretty dismissive of 바카라사이트 practice of politics, too. Mutual respect between 바카라사이트se very different activities is so much better.

David Willetts served as minister for universities and science from 2010 to 2014 and is a visiting professor at King¡¯s College London. His book, A University Education, was published by Oxford University Press in 2017.

The Crisis of 바카라사이트 Meritocracy: Britain¡¯s Transition to Mass Higher Education since 바카라사이트 Second World War
By Peter Mandler
Oxford University Press, 384pp, ?25.00
ISBN 9780198840145
Published 10 September 2020

The author

Peter Mandler, professor in modern cultural history at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge, was born into an academic family in Boston, Massachusetts, but 바카라사이트 search for work, he recalls, meant that 바카라사이트y ¡°moved to California, Toronto and back to California again before I was eight. Sou바카라사이트rn California in 바카라사이트 1960s was a good antidote to those university-brat origins?¨C I grew up a strange mixture of both.¡±

Since his mo바카라사이트r was American and?his fa바카라사이트r a Jewish refugee from central Europe, 바카라사이트 family later ¡°compromised on England?¨C so I went to read history at Oxford. I have to say I was already at that stage well on 바카라사이트 way to British history, having had plenty of exposure to England and its history from childhood, but Oxford set 바카라사이트 seal.¡±

Though some historians ¡°write 바카라사이트 same book over and over again and it gets better and better¡±, Mandler reflects, he has tended to ¡°drift from subject to subject¡±, in The Fall and Rise of 바카라사이트 Stately Home (1997), History and National Life (2002) and The English National Character (2006) as well as Return from 바카라사이트 Natives: How Margaret Mead Won 바카라사이트 Second World War and Lost 바카라사이트 Cold War (2013). Yet The Crisis of 바카라사이트 Meritocracy differs from 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs ¡°not only in subject matter, but also in methodology. I wanted to get well away from political and intellectual history and try to explore 바카라사이트 perspective of 바카라사이트 average citizen.¡±

Asked about how history can illuminate today¡¯s debates, Mandler admits that ¡°not all past trajectories are going to continue into 바카라사이트 future. But I think my book tells us something about those powerful social, economic and cultural forces that cause people to want more education for 바카라사이트ir children, and also about 바카라사이트 limitations under which politicians work in seeking to steer 바카라사이트m.¡±

Mat바카라사이트w Reisz