A SCHOOLING SYSTEM WE MIGHT WANT -AND NEED (original) (raw)
Related papers
Teachers on Strike: a struggle for the future of teaching?
FORUM, 2013
Teachers in England and Wales are involved in the largest campaign of industrial action since the mid-1980s. At the heart of their grievances are government plans to abolish a national framework for teachers' pay and the removal of important safeguards relating to working conditions. Wider questions of workload and pensions are also involved. This article argues that the changes to teachers' pay and working conditions cannot be divorced from the wider objective of establishing a largely privatised system of state-subsidised schooling. Such a goal is based on a much-changed vision of teaching, which in turns assumes a low-cost, flexible and fragmented workforce. The article seeks to link the changes proposed to teachers' pay and conditions to wider changes in the nature of teaching as work and the future of teaching as a profession. It argues that the teachers' pay dispute opens up important possibilities to interrupt the trajectory of current policy and to create spaces to present alternative visions of the future of teaching and what a democratic and public education system might look like.
DEMOCRATIC OPTIMISM AND AUTHORITY IN AN INCREASINGLY DEPOLITICISED SCHOOLS ‘SYSTEM’ IN ENGLAND
2018
This paper reports initial outcomes from a short series of semi-structured interviews in 2017 with senior politicians from three parties elected to two contrasting English local authorities (LAs): an urban city authority and a largely rural shire county. These were complemented by continuing interviews with senior officers and head teachers, of both academies and maintained schools, some with positions in multi-academy trusts (MATs), and critical readings of LA strategic documents. Interviews focused on the nature of democratic authority in what is an increasingly privatised schools system in the sense that school governance and decision making have moved steadily away from the authority inherent in democratic representation of a local community towards a more technical (or technicist) conception that depends more on ‘people with the right skills, experience, qualities and capacity’ (DfE, 2017: 10). This process has been described as ‘depoliticisation’ (Ball, 2007), or even ‘destalization’ (Jessop, 2002), whereby there is little public disagreement or debate about schools’ role in achieving national objectives (for example, social mobility). And the new technologies underpinning these changes have in turn engendered new governmentalities and discursive formations focused on little except better ‘outcomes’ (Wilkins, 2016). The principal policy in pursuit of these aims in English schools has been the process of academisation, whereby schools have been steadily removed from the purview of LAs, however etiolated, to be funded directly by central government on the basis of a contract with the minister. More recently, schools have been more progressively organised into Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) – voluntarily or involuntarily – in processes overseen by Regional Schools Commissioners, central government officials also responsible directly to the minister (Riddell, 2016). Politicians interviewed varied in their support for academisation - not always in ways that might be expected to reflect party affiliation – but all felt that schools had an important contribution to make to the realisation of their strategic aims, from economic development to lifelong learning. In addition, they were interested in what happened to the children of their constituents and all felt local authorities needed to engage with schools, reporting varying success in doing so. All acknowledged the difficulties inherent in a system increasingly organised de facto to exclude them, especially with MATs with wider regional or national roles with the attendant more remote offices and boards. According to some politicians (and officers), responses from MATs varied but having an elected mayor in the city authority was seen as one significant mechanism. Nearly all were optimistic for the future. The paper sets these initial findings in the context of what one interviewee described as a ‘stalled process’ (of economic reform), with central government not willing or able to respond to their concerns about the management of the system, especially since the 2017 general election. The reported absence of any space in the national legislative programme for schools because of the preparations for BREXIT means that even the much-discussed National Funding Formula (for school budgets) will be implemented via LAs for maintained schools, retaining some discretion, not the original intention (DfE, 2016: 68). Nor is the process of academisation by any means complete; nor, it is argued, is it ever likely to be. At the time of the first interviews, Regional Schools Commissioners were in the early stages of setting up ‘Sub-Regional Schools Improvement Boards’ involving senior LA representatives, that will most likely remain ‘strategic partners’. In addition, according to several interviewees, a paper setting out the proposed statutory roles of LAs to be amended by subsequent legislation had been drafted before the 2017 election, but not published since. Whereas it could be argued that the newer system based on school collaboration increasingly organised through MATs, overseen by Regional Schools Commissioners, might be more consistent and reliable in attaining greater equity in educational outcomes, a focus so limited leaves major moral (as opposed to technical) questions concerning the nature of ‘state’ schooling in England unanswered in policy: what democratic oversight will local and national communities have of their children’s education; how can and will parents be deeply involved.
The tragedy of state education in England: Reluctance, compromise and muddle— a system in disarray
Journal of the British Academy
This paper is a reflection on the current state of education and education policy in England drawn from over forty years of my involvement in education policy research. It articulates a strong sense of my discomfort, disappointment, and frustra tion with the current state of the English education system and with the educational state. I shall take stock and look across the school system, confining myself to com pulsory education, and argue that there is no 'system' at all. Rather, I suggest, the current iteration of school reform perpetuates and exacerbates the messiness and incoherence, and the mix of meddlesomeness and reluctance, that have always bedevilled education policy in England and at the same time reproduces and legit imates complex social divisions and inequalities embedded in this messiness. I also look back at the several attempts to impose some sort of order on the delivery of schooling (1870, 1902, 1944, 1988, and 2016) and the discordant interests that have confounded these attempts, particularly in relation to church schools.
This paper is about educational policy in England. It explores the Coalition Government's key policies about localism, decentralisation and education, and assesses whether these present opportunities for a radical school to apply for state funding as a Free School. A case study from the independent sector-a democratic school which is run by students as well as teachers-is used as an example. Following this, the conclusion is drawn that the Coalition Government has given mixed messages in terms of its commitment to decentralisation, and that, in fact, they would be challenged by an application for a radical Free School.
The uncertain future of comprehensive schooling in England
European Educational Research Journal, 2015
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
This report analyses how schools in England have interpreted and begun to respond to the government's 'self-improving school-led system' (SISS) policy agenda, an overarching narrative for schools policy since 2010 that encompasses an ensemble of reforms including academies, multi-academy trusts (MATs) and Teaching School Alliances (TSAs). Based on a large-scale, four-year, mixed-methods study, the report asks whether or not the models of coordination and school support emerging locally since 2010 represent a genuine basis for an equitable and inclusive 'school-led' system. It explores the factors that support and hinder such developments as well as the implications for schools and school leadership. The analysis draws on governance theory to evaluate the reforms, which are conceived as an attempt to mix and re-balance three overlapping approaches to coordinating the school system: hierarchy, markets and networks. This shows that while one popular interpretation of the SISS agenda is that it requires inter-school partnerships to 'self-organize' their own 'school-led' improvement, this is in fact a partial account that underplays the dominant influences of hierarchical and market mechanisms on the thinking and actions of schools and school leaders and the networks they are developing. The report includes important new empirical findings, for example on the impact of MATs of different sizes and on the relationship between Ofsted inspection outcomes and levels of socioeconomic stratification between schools. It also combines the perspectives of multiple case study schools across four different localities to provide rich insights into leadership decision-making and agency in the context of local status hierarchies and rapid policy-driven change. As a result, while focusing on changes in England, it provides a unique set of insights into how different governance regimes interact across different local contexts to influence patterns of schooling and school-to-school collaboration – insights that will have relevance for research and practice on school system governance more widely.
1994
This publication contains two papers on the implications of school decentralization for teacher education, student achievement, and democracy. The first paper, "Devolution in Education Systems: Implications for Teacher Professional Development and Pupil Performance" (Geoff Whitty), explores the way education reform movements for decentralization have developed generally by looking at how reforms have worked in England with some cross references to experiences in New Zealand and the United States. In doing so it reviews several studies and discusses the context in which reforms were installed. The conclusion notes that the overall benefits are not yet apparent and that reforms seem to intensify the links between educational and social inequality. The paper also notes that these reforms were part of a larger Thatcherite political project that must have influenced their effects. The second paper, "Decentralisation and Democracy" (Terri Seddon), argues that current educational reform is limited by its neglect of the interdependencies of development, democracy, and education; and that the character of decentralization is the key issue for debate. In three sections the paper comments on contemporary educational reform in Australia, discusses the consequences of decentralization for democracy, and suggests a way to reframe the problem of education reform to recognize the interdependency of development and democracy. (Contains 53 references.) (JB)
Schools, teachers and public debates about education
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 2010
Schools, teachers and education in general are frequently the subject of media interest and public debate. As we draft this editorial the Australian government's 'My School' website is attracting a good deal of comment in the print media and on talkback radio. The stated intention of the government is to enable parents to compare the performance of schools and to then use this information when selecting a school for their child. Making this sort of information available is not a new phenomenon elsewhere in the world. The Australian Federal Minister for Education, Julia Gillard, returned from a visit to New York in 2009 enthusing about the benefits of the systems and practices of teacher recruitment and administration in the United States. The publishing of 'league tables' has also been a feature of information about schools in Britain for some time, as has criticism of the practice. The fundamental tension in this tussle is between a government wanting to satisfy an apparent desire for information about the complex system of education provision and a concern that the measure used for comparison is too simplistic and, ultimately, unhelpful. In the Australian variant, the data used are the results of national literacy and numeracy tests conducted annually in all schools-tests that were never designed for this purpose. Teachers and teacher unions have also noted the folly of ranking schools on this single performance measure. Inviting comparisons in this way inevitably spills over into a debate about the amounts of government funding for government and non-government schools. However, providing information about school enrolments and staffing also permits comparisons that may be more revealing about the relative amounts of funding a school receives. There is clearly public appetite for information about schools and systems of education, and rightly so. Education is expensive to provide, employs large numbers of people in various capacities and is vital to the futures of the students who participate. It is evident that professionals, too, want to know more about the situations in which they work-the policy drivers, the changing contexts, demographic fluctuations, successful strategies and the like. What is most needed to address these issues is the thoughtful presentation of ideas and reasoned debate. These are the things we hope to provide in this Journal and, typically, this issue contributes ideas on a number of the matters mentioned above. The first paper in this issue, by Michelle Forrest, Terrah Keener and Mary Jane Harkins, concerns questions of who teachers feel themselves to be as a teacher and who they might feel themselves to be as a person. The authors use the work of Adrianna Cavarero and Judith Butler to explore this issue. This is an issue that can be overlooked if we assume that pre-service teachers are fully equipped to take on the role of 'teacher' without considering that either a transition or settling-in period may be necessary, or perhaps that differences and distinctions between private and public selves might be important. When we view or read media portrayals of teachers they are often uni-dimensional, suggesting that the person who performs the role of 'teacher' embodies a set of assumed occupational
Education in Britain (Polity Press 2016) Chapter 5
The second edition of my book 'Education in Britain' will be available shortly. This is an extract from Chapter 5, on New Labour. The text is that of the draft version submitted to Polity - i.e. before copy-editing and before proof corrections.