British Council CourseAccess, Attendance, Achievement: Involving

Roma/Gypsy and Traveller Parents in their Children’s Education

HELLO AND WELCOME

A National Overview in the UK

• Contents:– What we have done since 1972– Success Story – Significant Progress– Audit: A more honest picture– Factors aiding policy development– Factors as barriers to change– The bigger picture– The future– Thanks

What we have done since 1972

• Voluntary NGO activity and advocacy• Growing inclusivity of different groups• Conflict over policy direction• Slow action by Local Education Authorities• Development of Roma/Gypsy/Traveller

Education Services (TES)• Training • Active involvement of Central Government since

1985

Success Story-Significant Progress?

• From NGO to government responsibility• Specific projects to Mainstreaming• National structure of Traveller Education

Services• Increasing success year by year with

access, regular attendance, and rising levels of achievement

• Innovation in policy, provision and practice• A place on most educational agendas

Audit: A more honest picture

• Lack of data and coordinated action

• Access to schools, education, curriculum

• Attendance

• Nomadic and housed

• Educational books and teaching resources

• Achievement

Ethnic group achievementGCSE 5 at grades A*-C

51.3

% 60.1

%

41.6

%

23.2

%

52.0

%

39.9

% 47.5

%

64.7

%

51.6

%

65.2

%

41.5

%

45.5

%

59.0

%

32.9

% 40.7

%

33.6

%

74.8

%

45.8

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Whi

te B

ritis

h

Iris

h

Tra

velle

r of

Iris

h H

erita

ge

Gyp

sy/R

oma

Any

oth

er W

hite

bac

kgro

und

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Car

ibbe

an

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Afr

ican

Whi

te a

nd A

sian

Any

oth

er m

ixed

bac

kgro

und

Indi

an

Pak

ista

ni

Ban

glad

eshi

Any

oth

er A

sian

bac

kgro

und

Bla

ck C

arib

bean

Bla

ck A

fric

an

Any

oth

er B

lack

bac

kgro

und

Chi

nese

Any

oth

er e

thni

c gr

oup

2003 PLASC Ethnic Groups

Per

cent

age

Ach

ievi

ng 5

+ A

*-C

GC

SE

s

Source: National Pupil Database (2003 Amended Dataset) Coverage: Pupils in Maintained Schools

National Average for All Pupils is 50.7%

Achievement Data2003 GCSE Cohort: Proportion Achieving 5+ A*-C grades

56.6

% 61.8

%

39.1

%

22.5

%

58.2

%

46.8

% 55.1

%

68.6

%

57.7

%

70.3

%

48.1

%

52.6

%

64.6

%

40.3

% 46.8

%

40.3

%

79.2

%

51.2

%

52.2

%

46.1

%

58.4

%

43.3

%

24.4

%

46.3

%

32.3

% 39.5

%

60.6

%

44.9

%

60.3

%

35.7

%

38.5

%

53.8

%

25.1

% 34.1

%

27.2

%

70.9

%

41.3

%

43.1

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%W

hite

Brit

ish

Iris

h

Tra

velle

r of

Iris

h H

erita

ge

Gyp

sy/R

oma

Any

oth

er W

hite

bac

kgro

und

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Car

ibbe

an

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Afr

ican

Whi

te a

nd A

sian

Any

oth

er m

ixed

bac

kgro

und

Indi

an

Pak

ista

ni

Ban

glad

eshi

Any

oth

er A

sian

bac

kgro

und

Bla

ck C

arib

bean

Bla

ck A

fric

an

Any

oth

er B

lack

bac

kgro

und

Chi

nese

Any

oth

er e

thni

c gr

oup

Unc

lass

ified

1

2003 PLASC Ethnic Groups

Per

cent

age

Ach

ievi

ng 5

+ A

*-C

GC

SE

s

Female Male

National Average for Non-FSM Pupils is 56.1%National Average for FSM Pupils is 45.5%

Source: National Pupil Database (2003 Amended Dataset) Coverage: Pupils in Mainatined Schools

2003 GCSE Cohort: Proportion Achieving 5+ A*-C GCSE/Grades for Pupils with PLASC record, by

FSM

55.5

% 66.9

%

55.8

%

30.9

%

58.5

%

45.4

% 54.2

%

70.6

%

59.1

% 67.9

%

47.3

%

49.7

%

64.7

%

36.6

% 47.9

%

38.6

%

75.7

%

53.5

%

20.4

% 28.6

%

16.4

%

9.0%

26.4

%

27.3

%

28.6

%

34.2

%

27.6

%

47.0

%

33.5

% 43.2

%

39.9

%

23.8

%

29.9

%

22.5

%

68.9

%

32.5

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Whi

te B

ritis

h

Iris

h

Tra

velle

r of

Iris

h H

erita

ge

Gyp

sy/R

oma

Any

oth

er W

hite

bac

kgro

und

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Car

ibbe

an

Whi

te a

nd B

lack

Afr

ican

Whi

te a

nd A

sian

Any

oth

er m

ixed

bac

kgro

und

Indi

an

Pak

ista

ni

Ban

glad

eshi

Any

oth

er A

sian

bac

kgro

und

Bla

ck C

arib

bean

Bla

ck A

fric

an

Any

oth

er B

lack

bac

kgro

und

Chi

nese

Any

oth

er e

thni

c gr

oup

2003 PLASC Ethnic Groups

Per

cent

age

Ach

ievi

ng 5

+ A

*-C

GC

SE

s

Non-FSM FSM

National Average for Non-FSM Pupils is 55.2%National Average for FSM Pupils is 24.4%

Source: National Pupil Database (2003 Amended Dataset) Coverage: Pupils in Mainatined Schools

Impact of deprivation/poverty

Effect of ethnicity and deprivation on GCSE results

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

ChineseIndian

White and AsianIrish

Any other Asian backgroundAny other White backgroundAny other mixed background

White BritishWhite and Black African

UnclassifiedAny other ethnic group

BangladeshiTraveller of Irish Heritage

PakistaniBlack African

White and Black CaribbeanAny other Black background

Black CaribbeanGypsy/Roma

Difference in percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Effect of difference inFSM rates

Observed ethnicityeffect

Relative performance by ethnic groups at all ages

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

KS

1

KS

2

KS

3

GC

SE

/GN

VQ

Dis

crep

ancy

from

the

Nat

iona

l Ave

rage

All White British Irish Traveller of Irish heritage

Gypsy/ Roma Any other w hite background White and Black Caribbean White and Black African

White and Asian Any other mixed background Indian Pakistani

Bangladeshi Any other Asian background Caribbean Black African

Any other black background Chinese Any other ethnic group Unclassif ied

Source: National Pupil Database (2003 Unamended Dataset) Coverage: All Pupils w ith Attainment Data and PLASC Data

Factors as barriers to change

• Centuries of abuse and exclusion as the context• Endemic ignorance and racism in the society at large• Avoiding political problems by marginalisation by all• Lack of awareness and indifference to injustice• Poor and inadequate training at all levels• Lack of specific reference in policy/practice• Lack of national and local data and coordination• Silence of power voices which could bring rapid change• Racism under cover of PC professionalism• Parents accused of a lack of interest • The impact of a negative mass media

Factors aiding policy development

• Active political NGO/voluntary sector• Influence of Her Majesty’s Inspectors (outside politics)• Making policy responsibility stick – threat of legal action• Anti-discrimination/social inclusion laws• National commitment to race equality • Coordinated and comprehensive actions• Professional awareness and commitment to anti racism• Agenda inclusion and data collection• Sound research• Parent power and political action• Impatience and winning hearts and minds

The Bigger picture

• Roma/Gypsies Travellers now pan-Europe

• Explicit international concern (EU/Cof E/UN/OSI/OSCE/World Bank)

• Seen now as a Human Rights issue

• Major European issue for next 20 years

• Increasing Roma community awareness worldwide

• The vision of enrichment not yet secure

The Future

• The Roma decade (2005 – 2015)

• Data picture will drive policy development

• Robust anti-discrimination will drive policy

• Desegregation of Roma schooling

• A bigger part played by Roma/Gypsies and Travellers in education at all levels

• A changed Europe- faced with its own racist self- equipped to embrace gobalism

End

Thank you for listening

Have a good few days