Marketisation of edu 1988-1997 Flashcards
Education Reform Act 1988
Marketised education – opened up education to market
forces (competition, choice and no government
interference) - schools are run like businesses, having
to compete to attract parents / students in order to get
more funding.
What laws did the education reform act 1988 introduce
National Curriculum
Testing (SATs and GCSEs)
Open enrolment
Formula funding
League tables
Changed the management of schools so schools can
run themselves
Created OFSTED
National Curriculum
The National Curriculum is a proscribed set of subjects all
students must study between the ages of 5 to16.
It Shifted responsibility for what was to be taught away from
teachers to central government.
Created three core and seven foundation subjects.
Introduced coursework as an examination technique.
National testing- SATs and GCSEs
SATS are tests in English, Maths and Science at the age of
7, 11, 14 and GCSE exams at the age of 16 to check if the
students have reached the attainment targets.
They were introduced to drive up standards and show
which schools are doing the best, to give parents the
information to choose a school and to encourage schools
to compete against each other.
They are published annually in league tables.
Open enrolment
Catchment areas were abolished and replaced with open enrolment.
This means parents could send their children to any school of their choice. David calls this ‘parentocracy’ – rule by parents –
as they are the ones with power to choose a school for their children.
This forces schools to be outstanding with high grades in order to attract parents.
Formula funding
Schools received funding according to the number of students they have.
It was introduced to reward the schools which attracted the most parents by having good results.
Failing schools would not attract many students, their funding would therefore be low and they would close down, while successful schools
would expand. These are called sink schools
Local management of schools
The Local Education Authorities lost control over schools.
The power was given to schools directly to run themselves e.g. their finances, who they employ, school day, etc.
This was done in order to reduce gov interference in schools.
OFSTED
The Office for Standards in Education
“Rigorous” school inspections every 4 - 6 years.
Emphasis on inspection rather than support of schools.
Aggressive system of naming and shaming and placing into “special measures” for “failing schools”.
The report gives parents info about schools so they can choose the best school for their child.
+c=Bartlett ( For open enrolment)
marketisation has led to selection policies by good schools
through cream-skimming and silt-shifting. w/c , e/m are often silt shifted while m/c and Chinese and Indians are cream skimmed.
criticism for open enrolment - Ball
‘myth of parentocracy’ – marketisation gives the impression that
parents have a choice, but in reality, middle class parents have more
economic and cultural capital which gives them an advantage in
choosing a school.
Criticism for National testing- Gillborn and Youdell
marketisation of education contributes to
widening the gap in achievement between working class and middle
class students through the A-C economy and educational triage.
Criticism for formula funding - Ball
schools spend money on advertising themselves, not on resources,
in order to attract middle class parents. Doing this means that school lacks resources to help students achieve, e.g. lack of textbooks
Criticism for national testing
Too much stress is placed on students with excessive testing. Also, teachers focus more on preparing students to pass the test,
than on actually getting them to learn and enjoy learning.
Criticism for open enrolment Gewritz
schools use home-school contracts to attract the ‘right sort of
parents’. Also, middle class parents can use their economic, educational
and cultural capital to select better schools for their children. This creates a blurred hierarchy of schools with high achieving middle class schools at one end and low achieving working class schools on the other.
Criticism of national testing
League tables are not an accurate indicator of a school’s
performance. For example, a school with many working class, low
ability students may have excellent teaching, but the students will
still get low results so the school will be placed in a low position
in the league table. Also, in order to maintain a high position in
the league tables, some school do not enter low ability students for
exams.
