top of page
Search

Socio-Economics and the UK's Education Gap


By Zohaa Khalid


ree

On the topic of schooling and teaching of crucial information to younger individuals, the Oxford English Dictionary ‘education’ as: “The process of bringing up a child, with reference to forming character, shaping manners and behaviour, etc; the manner in which a person has been brought up; an instance of this.” In essence, without primary and secondary formal institutions set up for the purpose of educating children, our youth will fail to: develop critical thinking skills, further their cognitive and social development, or drive societal progress through means such as economic growth and innovation. As John Dewey says, “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.”

 

To our dismay, any hopes of a better or brighter future are - and have been - at risk for the past few decades as a result of the UK’s diminishing education system. Instead of opting for better diversity and inclusion, it is undeniable that certain barriers, such as race, class, gender, and immigrant status, are holding people back, lowering the chances of said children reaching their potential. Why is it that our society continues to accept this brutal reality? Why is our reality a lack of freedom, otherwise known as a deficit of educational access?

 

In line with the Education Act 2011, Human Rights Act 1998, and the Equality Act 2010, members of the youth possess legal rights to education, alongside protection from discrimination for characteristics such as race, sex, disability, or belief in any religion. However, the aforementioned legislation falls short in one particular aspect that may affect a child’s claim to receiving an education in the same way as other, more advantaged individuals; the Equality Act does not cover socio-economic status as a protected characteristic, and this could be prejudicial, deepening the widening socio-economic gap in education.

 

Sam Freedman from the Sutton Trust discusses the history of educational reform over the past 20 years, where she hones in on the “major focus on socio-economic disadvantage from the New Labour government in the early 2000s, into the 2010s with the Coalition (including the introduction of the Pupil Premium, to target funds at lower income students).” However, in recent years there has been a reversal of this focus, with changes to the funding formula directing resources only to schools with better-off intakes, alongside a failure of pupil premium funding to keep pace with inflation.

 

Consequently, it is no wonder that even today, in 2025, children of a lower class are often neglected entirely in the pledge for education, either because they are unable to afford adequate schooling at school or university level, or because their local receives minimal funding and is under-represented in government, thereby furthering their inability to procure remarkable grades. Some families also struggle to bear the finances of education and other essential materials required due to their immigrant status, whether as recent migrants, or as refugees who have fled dangerous circumstances, often facing worse dilemmas such as language barriers and psychological distress.

 

Ironically, international students, who have the luxury of pursuing studies in the UK as a result of financial advantage, prove to be a stark contrast to the home students who are unable to live in this same privilege - in spite of government benefits, grants, and student loans - suggesting the limitations of socio-economic facilities for UK citizens. In the 2004 National Institute Economic Review, the Department for Education and Skills’ ‘Age Participation Index’ illustrated the true depths of widening socio-economic disparity in institutions. This index measures the proportion of under-21s in each social class participating in higher education for the first time, emphasising that in 2001, 79% of the under-21s in the “Professional” social class started higher education, in comparison with 15% in the “Unskilled” social class, reinforcing the concerning correlation between lower economic status and compromised educational opportunities.

 

While the aforementioned policies ensure suitable education for all pupils and provide additional support for disabled and SEND students, it is notable that resource disparities and funding cuts amongst councils make it very difficult for local authorities to meet their statutory duties. To combat this issue, it may be plausible to challenge funding frameworks across the UK through judicial review, where courts can review and decide whether governments responded irrationally when considering the impact to regional equality of the proposed policy. By doing so, courts can question and charge local authorities, mandating changes to any policies which worsen inequality between students, as this impacts effective, guided and monitored access to education for students from financially disadvantaged backgrounds.

 

In addition, introducing legal reforms such as adding ‘socio-economic duty’ to the Equality Act of 2010, as well as increasing legal enforceability of children’s rights through more consistent and strengthened oversights into school funding and governmental accountability, may also decrease the socio-economic gap within educational institutions. In her TedTalk on ‘Socio-Economic Status and Barriers to Education’, Monica Korakula highlights how complications such as parental status and adverse conditions at home can produce lower academic progress, as well as negative health and cognitive issues. This can cause disruption and less effective access to any forms of education for such students if they are not given extra attention or treated with more consideration, reaffirming the idea that legal reforms must be made to improve the futures of the underprivileged youth of the UK.

 

Furthermore, establishments such as OFTSED should also be assessing if schools include both less and more able students in wider participation schemes and educational programmes, as well as a variety of children from diverse financial backgrounds to cater to inclusivity expectations. More often than not, “higher ability” is a result of the combined attention and support that certain advantaged pupils receive both at home and at school; therefore any schemes for the development of cognitive output amongst students should not be restricted to only the visibly smarter individuals, but also those from lower socio-economic backgrounds, providing them with equal opportunities to succeed with their peers.

 

Overall, with the execution of the above changes, we may find a larger percentage of low-income background students working towards better future prospects for themselves, all because of their heightened confidence, capability, and aptitude. No child, regardless of their familial and monetary circumstances, should feel as though they are unable to match the attainment rate of more privileged individuals, nor should they be forced to believe that they do not belong in any and all environments. Esteemed institutions, academic progress and professional occupation should be open to everyone, and this can only be achieved if the UK restructures its educational approach.



Sources:



Edited by Artyom Timofeev



 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Commercial Awareness Digest - 28th November 2025

Reeves' 2025 Budget and its Implications By Esme Glover The eagerly awaited 2025 Budget, delivered by UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves this week, has sparked significant discussion about its terms and area

 
 
 

Comments

© 2025 by UCL LAW FOR ALL SOCIETY 

  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • YouTube Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Instagram Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
bottom of page