This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/15/free-market-schools-education-councils

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The free market works, but not when it comes to schools The free market works, but not when it comes to schools
(7 months later)
The free market is the best way of allocating scarce resources in 90% of cases. The other 10% includes schools.The free market is the best way of allocating scarce resources in 90% of cases. The other 10% includes schools.
Britain’s headteachers today claimed the blindingly obvious. If the government funds private organisations to set up “free” state schools wherever parents do not like existing ones, provision will be “wasteful, fragmented and confusing”. There will be too many places in some neighbourhoods and too few in others.Britain’s headteachers today claimed the blindingly obvious. If the government funds private organisations to set up “free” state schools wherever parents do not like existing ones, provision will be “wasteful, fragmented and confusing”. There will be too many places in some neighbourhoods and too few in others.
That has duly happened. Half a million children are now in “super-sized” classes, while British schools are slithering back to the selection and social segregation of the old days. This has nothing to do with free schools and academies as such. It has to do with allowing them to expand – or not expand – at will, and allowing them to choose their pupils, which means choosing their parents. Ever since primary schools were supposedly “local” and secondary schools “comprehensive”, parents at least in city centres struggled to get their children out of unpopular schools. Local councils struggled to police the resulting competition.That has duly happened. Half a million children are now in “super-sized” classes, while British schools are slithering back to the selection and social segregation of the old days. This has nothing to do with free schools and academies as such. It has to do with allowing them to expand – or not expand – at will, and allowing them to choose their pupils, which means choosing their parents. Ever since primary schools were supposedly “local” and secondary schools “comprehensive”, parents at least in city centres struggled to get their children out of unpopular schools. Local councils struggled to police the resulting competition.
Related: More than 500,000 primary school pupils taught in 'super-size' classes
The crisis came with the 2010 Academies Act, an accident waiting to happen. It told the councils to get lost. In future all new schools would be free or academies, answerable to central government. Yet at the same time, local councils would remain responsible for finding “a place for every child”. There was no way this circle could be squared. One consequence was that ailing private schools had simply to declare themselves “free” for the government to shower it, and its parents, with money. Other schools were “free” to become ethnically, religiously and academically selective. The 2010 act was not just a recipe for soaring cost, it was social selection by the front door. School admission by the sharpness of parental elbows – and ability to pay for tutoring – is not responsible public education.The crisis came with the 2010 Academies Act, an accident waiting to happen. It told the councils to get lost. In future all new schools would be free or academies, answerable to central government. Yet at the same time, local councils would remain responsible for finding “a place for every child”. There was no way this circle could be squared. One consequence was that ailing private schools had simply to declare themselves “free” for the government to shower it, and its parents, with money. Other schools were “free” to become ethnically, religiously and academically selective. The 2010 act was not just a recipe for soaring cost, it was social selection by the front door. School admission by the sharpness of parental elbows – and ability to pay for tutoring – is not responsible public education.
Any public infrastructure must be planned. The government believed local councils were bad at doing it and that the free market – regulated by Whitehall – would do it better. This has failed. A quarter of free schools are in areas with empty places in existing schools. Sooner or later Whitehall will have to set up “central government school agencies” in communities throughout the country. Ministers will be responsible for finding a place for every child, on criteria that will be challengeable at law.Any public infrastructure must be planned. The government believed local councils were bad at doing it and that the free market – regulated by Whitehall – would do it better. This has failed. A quarter of free schools are in areas with empty places in existing schools. Sooner or later Whitehall will have to set up “central government school agencies” in communities throughout the country. Ministers will be responsible for finding a place for every child, on criteria that will be challengeable at law.
Anyone who thinks such “nationalisation” of the school system will yield a sensitive and responsive public service is foolish. It will be state-subsidised segregation, sectarianism and “white flight”. It will be state-subsidised inefficiency.Anyone who thinks such “nationalisation” of the school system will yield a sensitive and responsive public service is foolish. It will be state-subsidised segregation, sectarianism and “white flight”. It will be state-subsidised inefficiency.