Sir Peter Lampl writes on Open Access for The Times.

What is the one fact that best defines the educational divide between children from disadvantaged backgrounds and their more privileged peers? I am often asked this question when talking about the Sutton Trust’s work to improve social mobility through education. The Trust has produced over one hundred research studies documenting the educational inequalities that continue to blight our country.

The answer is that there isn’t really one education gap, but two. One concerns the long tail of underachievement, highlighted by the hundreds of thousands of children leaving school not reaching basic national standards in maths and English. The other is the so-called top end mobility problem: the yawning gap between the privileged few who continue to dominate our professional and academic elites, and the 90 per cent of children — the non-privileged — who, irrespective of their individual talents, are excluded from this top tier.

Recognising these two huge challenges, I believe, is crucial if we are to fulfil the potential of all our children and it is why I am so proud to be involved in the work on both these key battlefronts in the fight to improve the country’s social mobility.

Last week, the Education Endowment Foundation announced the latest tranche of programmes it is supporting to improve the results of the poorest children in the most challenging schools across the country.

The sum of £3.7 million will be allocated to a range of grants, from a programme to change the mindsets of children to realise they can increase their intelligence, to a programme helping children who struggle with numeracy. To date, the Foundation has awarded over £10 million. The 20 projects so far approved will reach over 900 schools and some 225,000 children.

The common characteristic is that they are being carefully evaluated to determine whether they truly make a difference for our neediest children. Over the next 15 years the Foundation will help schools to find out what works best at raising attainment.

Meanwhile, the Sutton Trust’s latest report highlights a very different challenge: how well we support our most academically able pupils, particularly those who come from non-privileged backgrounds.

The research shows that, in England, only 1.7 per cent of teenagers reached the highest level in maths, compared with an average of 3.1 per cent across all countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The few high performing pupils in England come mostly from independent and some from grammar schools, with almost nonefrom non-selective state schools.

The report recommends that schools should be made accountable for the progress of highly able children (the top 5 per cent). The Sutton Trust is now calling for proposals for developing the talents of the brightest pupils in non-selective state schools so we can fund and evaluate those programmes which are promising and, if proven to be cost effective, scale them up.

These new programmes will complement the Open Access scheme, which I believe is the only practical way to open up the country’s leading independent day schools. Under the scheme, places are awarded on merit alone, thus opening up the schools to children from all backgrounds. Parents pay a sliding scale of fees according to means.

We have trialled Open Access successfully and are now urging the Government to expand it to more than 80 independent day schools, almost half the total, who would accept Open Access if state funding were available.

Too often our efforts to improve educational opportunities are bedevilled by polarised debates and ideologically driven arguments. I believe we should just go with what has been proven to work. Only then can we strive for a world where educational achievement is determined by talent, not parental background.

Read the original article here