The underachievement of children from white, working-class families is a challenge that has bedevilled our education system for generations. Around one in 10 pupils (700,000) between 5 and 16 in England are classified as white British and qualify for free school meals.

On every conceivable academic measure, these pupils trail their counterparts from every other major ethnic group. Only a third manage to achieve five GCSEs, including English and maths, at age 16. They are already significantly behind in their development at age 5, and fall further behind their peers by the end of primary school. Only a handful make it into the country’s most selective universities and significant numbers leave school at age 16 without basic numeracy and literacy skills.

Given such statistics, why has more not been done to improve their attainment?

We know surprisingly little about why progress for this group of pupils at school is so poor. White, working-class pupils suffer from all the tell-tale warning signs associated with academic underperformance: low attendance, poor behaviour, high numbers of exclusions and complex educational needs. Yet there is little evidence that particular classroom practices or pedagogies are more effective for this group. Some have proposed literacy interventions as these have worked for other poorer pupils, or extended schools days as white, working-class pupils tend to complete less homework. Targeted intervention or differential support is likely to be needed.

Should we be blaming the parents?

Many suggest the root cause is a lack of support and stability at home, negative attitudes towards schools built up over successive generations and low aspirations and limited cultural capital that are to blame. But research suggests that working-class parents actually have high aspirations for their children. And there is no evidence to suggest that raising parental engagement and aspirations, even if possible, would lead to improved academic results. We also know that solutions such as grammar schools won’t work for this group.

So what can be done?

First we need to recognise that while a convenient shorthand, this is unlikely to be a homogeneous cultural group: white, working-class pupils in Sunderland probably have different needs to those in Dagenham, for example. Next, we need to stop the blame game - neither the pupils, their parents nor their teachers are individually responsible, the issue is more complex.

And then?

This is an area ripe for innovation by groups of schools - working with young people and their communities to evaluate new approaches to see if they work, both in the short-term with attainment, but also over the long-term for employment, health and wellbeing. This might involve reforming the curriculum and assessment to have stronger alignment with vocational outcomes, ensuring that they are perceived as rigorous, and developing effective teaching approaches for these. One thing the last 50 years has taught us is that it certainly won’t be a quick fix.

Lee Elliot Major is chief executive of the Sutton Trust and Steve Higgins is professor of education at Durham University. Together, they authored the Teaching and Learning Toolkit, now the EEF Toolkit. They tweet @lem_suttontrust and @profstig