The Limits of Compensatory Education in Spain: A Comparative Analysis of Some Autonomous Governments

In this article we aim to explore if these interventions are powerful enough to meet their official objective, that is, to overcome educational problems and disadvantages. Our argument relies on two previous generalizations that have established the framework for wider discussion. On the one hand, some recent contributions continue the long intellectual tradition that looks for actual opportunities whereby schools can tackle inequalities and their correlative educational disadvantages. Thus, several authors highlight the importance of explicit objectives (Derouet, 1992), minority-friendly curricula (Connell, 1997), democratic participation (Apple & Beane, 1995), flat and polyvalent organization (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1996), supplementary education (Bridglall & Gordon, 2002), public-political spaces (Griffiths, 2003), and school-community collaboration (Warren, 2005) for educational justice or social inclusion. Certainly, in Spain autonomous governments and other social agents have drawn on these ideas for the design of the initiatives we have just mentioned. On the other hand, other reports and authors recently highlight that societal features influence educational disadvantage more than the concrete programs and strategies deployed by schools (UNESCO-OECD/UIS, 2003). An exhaustive recent international comparison identifies two axes of these societal effects, namely enrolment rates and performance scores (Duru-Bellat, Mons, & Suchaut, 2004). Everywhere, working-class and minority students are more likely to achieve a low score in standardized exams and drop out early, though early leaving rates and average scores vary among countries. Thus, programs explore the opportunities to foster social inclusion through school policies, but societal features can limit such opportunities and therefore become bigger challenges to social inclusion.