Does Making Schools Compete For Pupils Bring More Benefit or Harm?

TMA 4 Catriona Daynes U5769606

I do not presume to answer the above question with a definitive answer but I will show you, the reader, a clear outline of the options and their possibilities and how the changes have progressed into today’s educational system.

The education reform act of 1988 set out to give parents the right to ‘express a preference’ to which school they felt it best to send their children. One implication that derived from the act was that schools were expected to take pupils up to a historically pre determined limit (their 1979 level of intake). This in turn brings to an end the catchment areas that had been the previous method of selection. A positive outcome that could come from the changes was that parents did not necessarily have to send their children to the nearest school. These choices were outlined to parents in the Parents Charter (DES 1991, DFE 1994) a copy of which went out to every household in Britain. Reasoning behind the charter was to work in tune with the consumer society we live in. One reason for this was as Sharon Gewirtz said in unit 3 some members of the government had “derided the comprehensive system from its ‘dull conformity’” “’Real’ choice, it was said, requires real diversity.” It was felt that this was helped with the 1993 legislation that set up City Technology Colleges (CTCs) and grant-maintained (GM) schools sector. It meant that schools could adapt their curriculum and in some cases become more specialised in specific areas. This was meant to improve the quality of schools in general by offering an education that would be more relevant to the pupils

attending. The Conservative manifesto of 1987 said that parents would offer more support to the successful schools, this in turn would coerce the schools into reacting to the views of the parents. With the choice that was opened up, to parents and pupils with choice, they could request the school that specialised in the area most interesting to the pupil. In addition, it meant that schools could react to market forces effectively by offering the training future workers of our nation would need. Parents and pupils also derive benefit from league tables that have been set up by the act. These cover curriculum, attendance and how many pupils go on to university or college. The tables offer parents an opportunity to see which schools are performing best and thus help to make decisions about the choices. It is also a way of the government seeing where more assistance is required and where changes need implementing. Sharon Gewirtz Unit 3 predicts schools with low attendance will start to look more closely than before at how they portrays themselves through marketing and therefore become more ‘competitive’. The reader explored the external control of education through a ‘quasi-market mechanism’ (1993 legislation of CTCs and GMs) thus creating diversity and an internal control through management theory and practice to give ‘satisfaction to the service user’ The writer also puts an implication as being ‘the raising of standards in education’. The act enabled LEAs to delegate the financial management and the management of staff to the governing bodies of the schools. Therefore the transference of power goes directly to the people that can judge the specific financial needs better and they have more intimate knowledge of the service users needs when interviewing for a post.

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

These are all positive outcomes, expectations or ‘benefits’ of the education reform act to encourage ‘competition between schools’.

In contrast, the end of ‘catchment areas’ and the encouragement of competition could cause schools to become too selective when looking at their intake. Non-special needs pupils are less costly to educate than special needs due to the financial implications of providing extra support and equipment which could have the implication that some schools sway toward

the ‘cheaper’ option. As well as the financial implications are the league tables, these cheaper pupils are also good on paper, performing well in ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

These are all positive outcomes, expectations or ‘benefits’ of the education reform act to encourage ‘competition between schools’.

the ‘cheaper’ option. As well as the financial implications are the league tables, these cheaper pupils are also good on paper, performing well in the

Sats tests and having better attendance. These are concerns raised by the critics in block 3. An unfortunate consequence of the increase in competition could be less communication and co-operation between the educating establishments. Introducing management heads rather than the traditional headmaster could take the emphasis off of the pupils as individuals and position it onto the school operating in a more business like way, this could adversely affect the less able pupils in that they could be pushed out for being ‘too expensive’. The writer also anticipates an exacerbation of inequality, of provision, across the social classes (block3 pg15 2.22). It appears that critics predict that although the government have set out to eliminate house prices

being high in good school areas, (only middle class families can afford to live there) as a consequence opening up the school to poorer working class families, by abolishing catchment areas they could make it worse. (Gorard S 1997) Gorard would argue that:

“In this situation, the school may become more selective in its pupils entry requirements. Such a policy would presumably allow the school to produce better public examination results, by increasing the ability of its intake, but without actually improving its teaching…. A policy of improvement through selection of intake may make sense for a school in the market, but it is only cosmetic, not making any school more effective.”

Legislation seems to be offering the parents more choice and greater freedom in the education ‘market’ but the installation of performance league tables tells the parents the indicators that are important. The government still has ultimate control over the labelling of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ schools. They are in control of the criteria from which the performance is compared. Again, it is the affluent of society that can afford to move nearer to ‘good’ schools or to allow children that are accepted out of area to travel to them. Critics put forward the notion that the ‘bad’ schools would inevitably fail and possibly close, as all the better pupils would apply to the ‘good’ schools. This was outlined in the television

programme A Hard Act to Follow which showed an area of Manchester where one secondary school had been very proficient in its marketing achievement and, as a direct result had been part of the cause that meant the opposite happening in a nearby school. Another factor is how the school is managed. “There is a strong interaction between values and management, for the choice of values will have important ramifications for the kinds of management adopted, just as the kind of management chosen will affect the implementation of those values held as most suitable or desirable.” (Bottery, 1992, p2) For example one possibility is that a good (business) management structure would ensure efficiency with the funding available and that the criteria put down for the league tables was of paramount importance as that is the ultimate in advertising the school as being better than the competition.

This being so it will incur the problems outlined earlier of how schools make their selection. In turn, it brings us full circle back to the argument of the critics in that parents are given a ‘carrot’ of having choice but really, the ultimate decision of the acceptance still lies with the school and the government controls the criteria the school works to and the curriculum it is expected to follow.

“… the legislation has only been in place for a relatively short time and we have yet to see if the patterns of provision indicated by the early research are confirmed as the policy has more time to ‘settle’ and as more research is conducted. Therefore perhaps we should all be wary of making any final evaluations for the moment.” (Sharon Gewirtz, block 4 unit 3).

Six years have passed since unit 4 was first published and fourteen years since the education act reform, has this been enough time for the policy to settle? Choice schools are now engaged in rivalry for expansion and survival, which may be leading to a ‘dull uniformity’ of provision in the UK (Tomlinson, 1994). All schools are aiming to follow majority trends, and none are responding to the diversity among parents by providing a distinctive kind of school and then targeting their potential consumers (Woods, 1992). Perhaps the reason that schools are being so unadventurous and unresponsive is that they do not have good processes for learning or responding to changes from

outside (Levin and Riffel, 1997). These are the criticisms I have encountered in my research however my own experience has thrown up other interesting outcomes. My son began schooling at the age of four in 1998 in Weston-Super-Mare. Weston has a distinctive problem in that it is building a lot of new family housing for the growing population and because of the overspill from Bristol’s expanding business development. Unfortunately, no new schools have been built so the existing schools have had to cope with the influx of new children to the area and as a result, all schools in the surrounding area are oversubscribed I was not aware of this problem before the time of transition for my child. It was only when I received the application for primary education that it became apparent. In this application was a diagram of the area surrounding each school and circles showing the ‘catchment area’ I was told that children in these ‘catchment area’s’ would be considered first. I was lucky and my child did get a place at the first choice of school, but it should be noted I was in the catchment area. My point is that catchment was apparently removed by the reform act in principle but due to population forces the LEA in some areas are apparently still using catchment as the fairest method of selection. My opinion is there is no benefit or harm incurred as a result of the reform that gave parents choice because parents still do not have the choices promised. You may have the opportunity to put down on paper first choice second choice and third choice but if you are not in any of the catchment areas for these choices, there is little hope of getting your child into any of the schools you have chosen due to high population and low school places. This is true of the Weston area at present. I do realise the problem I have encountered is not nationwide however. In some areas, for example, they do have good example of parental choice and it has thrown up a very different perspective and argument. There seems to be a problem of “yuppie Land Rover brigade” of middle class parents ferrying their children miles to the best state schools it seems the teachers feel the rules for allocation are unfair and they want a return to the old system. Another objection raised was that league tables in England were potentially harmful due to the comparisons they illustrated. Brenda Wilson who is Head teacher of a primary school in Cambridge felt that parental choices meant unpopular schools could eventually become sink schools

All the arguments point to, in my opinion, a need for a middle ground between the two. Parents should have some say, teaching staff should have some say and most importantly of all the needs of the pupil should hold sway in the choices made. There needs to be an equality of provision that is not determined by league tables of sats results but of ‘value added’ learning. Perhaps if the government needs a league table then this is what it should be showing because only then will you have genuine guide to the best ‘taught’ schools and not just the school with the brightest students.

Bibliography

AHIER, JOHN (1996) Block 4 Unit 4

GEWIRTZ, SHARON (1996) Block 4 Unit 3

GORARD, S (1997) Market Forces, Choice and diversity in Education: The Early Impact

Sociological Research Online, vol.2, no.3

LAWTON, DENIS (1989) The Education reform act: Choice and Control Hodder and Stoughton

MACKINNON, DONALD AND STATHAM, JUNE (1999) Education in the UK: Facts and Figures Third Edition

Hodder and Stoughton

SMITHERS, REBECCA (Thursday August 2, 2001) End parents’ right to pick schools, say teachers

The Guardian

Tomlinson, 1994

Woods, 1992