Raymond Williams maintained, after years of examining constructs of culture and society that “Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language” (1983: 87) So it is surprising that Ofsted has seen fit to insert the term “cultural capital” into the proposed Education Inspection Framework (EIF) without even a nod to its contested nature or complexity.
It appears in the following places.
Inspectors will make a judgement on the quality of education by evaluating the extent to which ..leaders adopt or construct a curriculum that is ambitious and designed to give all learners, particularly the most disadvantaged, the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life
Draft EIF p10
Cultural capital
140. Inspectors will evaluate how well leaders ensure that the curriculum they use or create enhances the experiences and opportunities available to children, particularly the most disadvantaged. Some children arrive at an early years settings with poorer experiences than others, in their learning and play. What a setting does, through its curriculum and interactions with practitioners, potentially makes all the difference for children. It is the role of the setting to ensure that children experience the awe and wonder of the world in which they live, through the seven areas of learning.
Footnote: Ofsted’s definition of knowledge and cultural capital matches that found in the aims of the national curriculum. Cultural capital is the essential knowledge that children need to be educated citizens.
Early Years Inspection handbook p16:
Cultural capital
163. As part of making the judgement about the quality of education, inspectors will consider the extent to which schools are equipping pupils with the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life. Ofsted’s understanding of this knowledge and cultural capital matches that found in the aims of the national curriculum. It is the essential knowledge that pupils need to be educated citizens, introducing them to the best that has been thought and said and helping to engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement.
Schools inspection handbook p42:
It is interesting that the term always is always bracketed with “knowledge” and that may be because, despite Ofsted’s claim to be using a definition found in the national curriculum , the national curriculum (NC) does not refer explicitly to cultural capital. The relevant aim of the NC (as quoted directly in the schools inspection handbook above) is:
The national curriculum provides pupils with an introduction to the essential knowledge they need to be educated citizens. It introduces pupils to the best that has been thought and said, and helps engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement..
So it seems that Ofsted have added to the NC aims by deciding that “the best that has been thought and said” plus “an appreciation of human creativity and achievement” equals cultural capital. Anyone who followed the debates about aspects of the 2014 NC such as slavery and English history or the accepted canon of English literature will anticipate potential difficulties here.
Amanda Spielman and HMIs at Ofsted are motivated by a desire to see more disadvantaged children succeeding and want to narrow the gap in educational performance etc. However, what concerns me is that such cavalier use of this term is likely to perpetuate deficit models of working class children (and many other children who are not white, British and middle class)
Bourdieu, the sociologist most closely associated with cultural capital theory and education maintained that we all have cultural capital. Are we/Ofsted careful enough in the school system to remember that cultural capital is a concept that includes all social, cultural and class groups ie we all have cultural capital; all forms of it are valid, but they are not valued equally by society’s institutions including the education system and this has economic and political consequences for children and families?
Instead of blaming working class underachievement on inferior working-class culture, cultural capital theory focuses on the dominance of middle class culture. Cultural capital theory would say that school is somewhere where working class children are taught to be more middle class – thus by default working class culture is devalued and working class children do not feel as ‘at home’ in school and are more likely to struggle in education as a result. (In early years Tizard and Hughes’ 1980s research with working class mothers and children is an example of this alienation in action in the nursery. The current attempt to introduce reception baseline could well be another)
So we need to be very wary in the context of current education policies – de-regulation, marketisation/academisation (and free schools) Middle class parents and schools can use this so called ‘freedom from regulation’ to exclude those who do not conform. Where is equality of opportunity or social justice here? The huge increase in off-rolling is an example of this unjust exclusionary behaviour – decried by Ofsted, but something that could be seen as an inevitable consequence of the accountability agenda, itself an expression of neo-liberalist competitive ideals.
Ofsted is also not explicit about the influence that ED Hirsch’s ideas about the knowledge based curriculum and the learning of facts have had on government policy and the national curriculum. Nonetheless their influence can be clearly seen in the new EIF. This matters because, as Watson (2018) points out, the Hirschian neo-traditionalist approach is “reductive, parochial and inherently culturally biased toward a white Establishment canon of literature and history.”
Some obvious questions which Ofsted HMIs do not appear to be asking themselves or any of us..
As Elliott Major (2015) writing for the Sutton Trust says “Widening wealth gaps have created a privileged class hell-bent on preserving that privilege for their offspring and armed with ever more resources to enrich their children educationally. At the same time ‘working class’ kids have been stripped of the traditional places where they once developed cultural capital: the youth club, town hall, local library, or children’s centre.” He goes on to say “Given this, the role of schools as places of cultural and social as well as academic learning has become even more critical.”
On page p75 of the proposed Schools Inspection Handbook the outstanding grade descriptor includes, “The curriculum provides no limits or barriers to the children’s achievements, regardless of their backgrounds, circumstances or needs. The high ambition it embodies is shared by all staff.”
This is an admirable ideal and one that I am sure is shared by most people but we have to do some better thinking than this and have a proper debate about that curriculum or it will so easily build barriers to achievement rather than accept and build on the huge drive that all young children have to learn in their own ways. As the EYFS principle states, “Every child is a unique child, who is constantly learning and can be resilient, capable, confident and self-assured.”
I have focused on cultural capital here but of course it is part of the whole new EIF package. A package which does not highlight the principles of the EYFS or the characteristics of effective learning; which selectively mentions some aspects of the curriculum and pedagogic practices and not others, thus risking promoting certain practices and discouraging others which are at least equally important.
Ofsted would not wish to exclude children and families from culture or anything else that we share as human beings but to use the term cultural capital without thinking about the broader context is disingenuous. For instance, research over the years has found that ability grouping has negative effects on children’s attainment and confidence as learners. The 2017 NEU/UCL report on grouping in the early years and key stage 1 found that grouping was widespread. Two of their recommendations were :
We also know students who spend longer in mixed-ability classes are more likely to share basic values in areas such as tolerance and patriotism, regardless of their social or ethnic group (Janmaat & Mons 2011). So how does this knowledge sit with Ofsted’s advocacy of systematic synthetic phonics in the EIF given its commitment to moving away from data and removing barriers and limits? I suspect an Ofsted answer would be to do with the power of reading and yet we have no evidence that the phonics check increases children’s reading comprehension or pleasure. And we need more than the usual Ofsted answers if we are to have a curriculum debate that is fit for purpose rather than an imposed inspection framework that is not. Culture and cultural capital are complex issues and should be part of a debate on the purposes of education and the ways in which we can best support all children (and their families) to learn and feel valued in schools and early years settings.
As Apple warned in 1990:
A nation is not a firm. A school is not part of that firm efficiently churning out the ‘human capital’ required to run it. We do damage to our very sense of the common good to even think of the human drama of education in these terms. It is demeaning to teachers and creates a schooling process that remains unconnected to the lives of so many children.
In our early years history and research we have a rich cultural resource which deserves to be cited and called on. It seems on reading both the published text of the new EIF and its research review and watching the accompanying videos and slideshows as well as reading between the lines, that it is overly influenced by those who believe that making young children engage in formal learning earlier and earlier will somehow make them better learners rather than disenfranchise and disconnect them from the world of ideas, creativity and cultures.
Apple. M. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum.
Bourdieu, P. (1985), “The Forms of Capital” in Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of Education (1986)
Bradbury, A. and Roberts-Holmes, G. (2017). Grouping in Early Years and Key Stage 1 ‘A Necessary Evil’? Report for National Education Union.
Elliott Major, L. (2015). Creating Cultural Capital
Hirsch, E.D. (1988). Cultural Literacy : What Every American Needs to Know.
Janmaat, J.G. & Mons, N. (2011). ‘Promoting Ethnic Tolerance and Patriotism: The Role of Education System Characteristics,’ Comparative Education Review, 55, 1, pp. 56-81.
Tizard, B. & Hughes, M. (2003). (2nd ed). Young Children Learning (Understanding Children’s Worlds).
Watson, S. (2018). “Educating the Working Class” in I.Gilbert The Working Class, poverty, education and alternative voices.
Williams, R. (1983). Keywords, A vocabulary of culture and society.
Raymond Williams maintained, after years of examining constructs of culture and society that “Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language” (1983: 87) So it is surprising that Ofsted has seen fit to insert the term “cultural capital” into the proposed Education Inspection Framework (EIF) without even a nod to its contested nature or complexity.
It appears in the following places.
Inspectors will make a judgement on the quality of education by evaluating the extent to which ..leaders adopt or construct a curriculum that is ambitious and designed to give all learners, particularly the most disadvantaged, the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life
Draft EIF p10
Cultural capital
140. Inspectors will evaluate how well leaders ensure that the curriculum they use or create enhances the experiences and opportunities available to children, particularly the most disadvantaged. Some children arrive at an early years settings with poorer experiences than others, in their learning and play. What a setting does, through its curriculum and interactions with practitioners, potentially makes all the difference for children. It is the role of the setting to ensure that children experience the awe and wonder of the world in which they live, through the seven areas of learning.
Footnote: Ofsted’s definition of knowledge and cultural capital matches that found in the aims of the national curriculum. Cultural capital is the essential knowledge that children need to be educated citizens.
Early Years Inspection handbook p16:
Cultural capital
163. As part of making the judgement about the quality of education, inspectors will consider the extent to which schools are equipping pupils with the knowledge and cultural capital they need to succeed in life. Ofsted’s understanding of this knowledge and cultural capital matches that found in the aims of the national curriculum. It is the essential knowledge that pupils need to be educated citizens, introducing them to the best that has been thought and said and helping to engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement.
Schools inspection handbook p42:
It is interesting that the term always is always bracketed with “knowledge” and that may be because, despite Ofsted’s claim to be using a definition found in the national curriculum , the national curriculum (NC) does not refer explicitly to cultural capital. The relevant aim of the NC (as quoted directly in the schools inspection handbook above) is:
The national curriculum provides pupils with an introduction to the essential knowledge they need to be educated citizens. It introduces pupils to the best that has been thought and said, and helps engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement..
So it seems that Ofsted have added to the NC aims by deciding that “the best that has been thought and said” plus “an appreciation of human creativity and achievement” equals cultural capital. Anyone who followed the debates about aspects of the 2014 NC such as slavery and English history or the accepted canon of English literature will anticipate potential difficulties here.
Amanda Spielman and HMIs at Ofsted are motivated by a desire to see more disadvantaged children succeeding and want to narrow the gap in educational performance etc. However, what concerns me is that such cavalier use of this term is likely to perpetuate deficit models of working class children (and many other children who are not white, British and middle class)
Bourdieu, the sociologist most closely associated with cultural capital theory and education maintained that we all have cultural capital. Are we/Ofsted careful enough in the school system to remember that cultural capital is a concept that includes all social, cultural and class groups ie we all have cultural capital; all forms of it are valid, but they are not valued equally by society’s institutions including the education system and this has economic and political consequences for children and families?
Instead of blaming working class underachievement on inferior working-class culture, cultural capital theory focuses on the dominance of middle class culture. Cultural capital theory would say that school is somewhere where working class children are taught to be more middle class – thus by default working class culture is devalued and working class children do not feel as ‘at home’ in school and are more likely to struggle in education as a result. (In early years Tizard and Hughes’ 1980s research with working class mothers and children is an example of this alienation in action in the nursery. The current attempt to introduce reception baseline could well be another)
So we need to be very wary in the context of current education policies – de-regulation, marketisation/academisation (and free schools) Middle class parents and schools can use this so called ‘freedom from regulation’ to exclude those who do not conform. Where is equality of opportunity or social justice here? The huge increase in off-rolling is an example of this unjust exclusionary behaviour – decried by Ofsted, but something that could be seen as an inevitable consequence of the accountability agenda, itself an expression of neo-liberalist competitive ideals.
Ofsted is also not explicit about the influence that ED Hirsch’s ideas about the knowledge based curriculum and the learning of facts have had on government policy and the national curriculum. Nonetheless their influence can be clearly seen in the new EIF. This matters because, as Watson (2018) points out, the Hirschian neo-traditionalist approach is “reductive, parochial and inherently culturally biased toward a white Establishment canon of literature and history.”
Some obvious questions which Ofsted HMIs do not appear to be asking themselves or any of us..
As Elliott Major (2015) writing for the Sutton Trust says “Widening wealth gaps have created a privileged class hell-bent on preserving that privilege for their offspring and armed with ever more resources to enrich their children educationally. At the same time ‘working class’ kids have been stripped of the traditional places where they once developed cultural capital: the youth club, town hall, local library, or children’s centre.” He goes on to say “Given this, the role of schools as places of cultural and social as well as academic learning has become even more critical.”
On page p75 of the proposed Schools Inspection Handbook the outstanding grade descriptor includes, “The curriculum provides no limits or barriers to the children’s achievements, regardless of their backgrounds, circumstances or needs. The high ambition it embodies is shared by all staff.”
This is an admirable ideal and one that I am sure is shared by most people but we have to do some better thinking than this and have a proper debate about that curriculum or it will so easily build barriers to achievement rather than accept and build on the huge drive that all young children have to learn in their own ways. As the EYFS principle states, “Every child is a unique child, who is constantly learning and can be resilient, capable, confident and self-assured.”
I have focused on cultural capital here but of course it is part of the whole new EIF package. A package which does not highlight the principles of the EYFS or the characteristics of effective learning; which selectively mentions some aspects of the curriculum and pedagogic practices and not others, thus risking promoting certain practices and discouraging others which are at least equally important.
Ofsted would not wish to exclude children and families from culture or anything else that we share as human beings but to use the term cultural capital without thinking about the broader context is disingenuous. For instance, research over the years has found that ability grouping has negative effects on children’s attainment and confidence as learners. The 2017 NEU/UCL report on grouping in the early years and key stage 1 found that grouping was widespread. Two of their recommendations were :
We also know students who spend longer in mixed-ability classes are more likely to share basic values in areas such as tolerance and patriotism, regardless of their social or ethnic group (Janmaat & Mons 2011). So how does this knowledge sit with Ofsted’s advocacy of systematic synthetic phonics in the EIF given its commitment to moving away from data and removing barriers and limits? I suspect an Ofsted answer would be to do with the power of reading and yet we have no evidence that the phonics check increases children’s reading comprehension or pleasure. And we need more than the usual Ofsted answers if we are to have a curriculum debate that is fit for purpose rather than an imposed inspection framework that is not. Culture and cultural capital are complex issues and should be part of a debate on the purposes of education and the ways in which we can best support all children (and their families) to learn and feel valued in schools and early years settings.
As Apple warned in 1990:
A nation is not a firm. A school is not part of that firm efficiently churning out the ‘human capital’ required to run it. We do damage to our very sense of the common good to even think of the human drama of education in these terms. It is demeaning to teachers and creates a schooling process that remains unconnected to the lives of so many children.
In our early years history and research we have a rich cultural resource which deserves to be cited and called on. It seems on reading both the published text of the new EIF and its research review and watching the accompanying videos and slideshows as well as reading between the lines, that it is overly influenced by those who believe that making young children engage in formal learning earlier and earlier will somehow make them better learners rather than disenfranchise and disconnect them from the world of ideas, creativity and cultures.
Apple. M. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum.
Bourdieu, P. (1985), “The Forms of Capital” in Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of Education (1986)
Bradbury, A. and Roberts-Holmes, G. (2017). Grouping in Early Years and Key Stage 1 ‘A Necessary Evil’? Report for National Education Union.
Elliott Major, L. (2015). Creating Cultural Capital
Hirsch, E.D. (1988). Cultural Literacy : What Every American Needs to Know.
Janmaat, J.G. & Mons, N. (2011). ‘Promoting Ethnic Tolerance and Patriotism: The Role of Education System Characteristics,’ Comparative Education Review, 55, 1, pp. 56-81.
Tizard, B. & Hughes, M. (2003). (2nd ed). Young Children Learning (Understanding Children’s Worlds).
Watson, S. (2018). “Educating the Working Class” in I.Gilbert The Working Class, poverty, education and alternative voices.
Williams, R. (1983). Keywords, A vocabulary of culture and society.
Early Education Associate, Debi Keyte-Hartland reflects on a recent commission by Balcarras Teaching School Hub In Gloucestershire to deliver a four-day course on Sustained Shared
Guest blog by Frances Giampapa and Claire Lee Introduction A wealth of evidence demonstrates the fundamental role played by early years (EY) education in shaping
by Katherine Gulliver Introduction Early Education was recently asked to review the special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) provision in the early years within one
Clare Devlin, Early Education Associate What aspects of physical development should we focus on within the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) and other early years
By Debi Keyte-Hartland, Early Education Associate This article is based on one included in the Early Education Journal no 100. To access the full article
In this article, Kate Irvine from Bristol Early Years discusses the impact of practitioners engaging in a sustained process of CPD through cluster groups and
by Dr Jo Albin-Clark, Edge Hill University and Dr Nathan Archer, Leeds Beckett University Inspection in the news Being involved in education in England involves
by Kayla Halls, Early Years Research Fellow at Middlesex University & Mona Sakr, Senior Lecturer in Early Childhood at Middlesex University’ Leaders in the early
Ofsted’s latest annual review highlights the impact of recruitment and retention challenges and finds a link between inspection outcomes and the proportion of graduates in
What are “Fundamental British Values”? by Vicky Hutchin The so-called “Fundamental British Values” form a part of the Prevent Duty, introduced in 2015 and last
The open letter below was sent to Ofsted in November 2023. Download Ofsted’s response We the undersigned are writing to you about the recently published
The Ofsted early years curriculum review Best start in life part 1: setting the scene, has just been published, which they describe as being part of
Early childhood education today has been influenced by key figures such as Froebel, Montessori, Isaacs and MacMillan. Much recent research has supported their ideas although
Sustained shared thinking: An episode in which two or more individuals “work together” in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate
Early years pedagogy is the theory that informs the practice of teaching children in the early years. The pedagogical research has been carried out by
by Cathy Gunning What is reflective practice? Reading a book by Donald Schon early on in my career as a teacher opened my eyes to
The Early Career Framework has been designed by the Department for Education in England to support newly qualified teachers in England with a structured package of support
The following extracts from past early years teaching newsletters have a feature which supports your team dialogue around pedagogy and practice dilemmas and reflective practice.
Last updated Spring 2018. The preschools of the Reggio Emilia in Northern Italy inspire us with their pedagogy and practice in giving children rich encounters
In most cases, sound early years principles and practices are already in place in settings. The EYPP funding allows settings to review and refine what
Who was Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852) Born on 21 April 1782 Friedrich Froebel was a German educator who invented the kindergarten. He believed that “play is
This article by Early Education Associate Anni McTavish explores the term “cultural capital”, and what it might mean for early years practitioners and their settings.
Welcome to the e-book Child-Centred Competences for Early Childhood Education and Care. The book brings together four years of research undertaken by early childhood academics
Early Education
2 Victoria Square
St Albans
AL1 3TF
T: 01727 884925
E: office@early-education.org.uk
