Flow of Ideas: contributions - The Role of Business in Education - Sharon Illiff

Customer Relationship Managment through Library Automation Systems by Indrani Bhattacharyya

Education Studies - Louise Jemmett

Free University of Brighton by Koos Couvée

Learned Helpfulness by Steve Osmond

Learning Outcomes by John Crocitti

Mental Health Provision by Steve Osmond

New Labour and Variable Tuition Fees by Alison Tuffs

Paul Willis and Learning to Labour - James Thomson

Robert Owen on Education by Neil Southwell

The Role of Business in Education - Sharon Illiff

Universities - Amy Leach

Universities - Michaela Starkey

The Role of Business in Education

Examine the arguments for and against the role of business/private enterprise in education using relevant policy statements from at least two political arties, downloaded from the internet

An Essay by Sharon Illiff, A First Year Education Studies Student, School of Education, University of Northampton

April 2007

The two political parties I will examine are New Labour and the Conservatives. These, for me, are the most interesting to look at as we have a Labour government at present and the Conservatives were in power before New Labour and are also Labour’s strongest rival.

An increased role for business and private enterprise in education is what the New Labour government want in order to achieve ‘successful education companies and companies with the capacity to generate value from educational services’ (Rikowski, 2005, online). Private enterprise in education seems to be about profits and making money which will increase competition between schools. The role that a business would have in education would enable them to take control in state schools, meaning that these private enterprises will run and manage such schools to whatever way they want (Hill, 2005).

New Labour was to reconfigure the Labour Party after the leader, Tony Blair, attempted to ‘redefine Labour as the new middle party’ (Michael, 1996, online). Tony Blair wanted his party to look new and refreshed after the Conservatives (the radical right wing party) had failed to give the people of Britain what they wanted and needed. New Labour was to be seen as ‘the party of modern social democracy’ (Michael, 1996, online).

New Labour introduced a White Paper in 2005 that covered all aspects of education and immediately had some strong opposition resulting in a number of Labour backbenchers drawing up an alternative. John Prescott, Deputy Leader for the Labour Party, was against Tony Blair’s idea of the party being a modern social democracy, and also held fears regarding the White Paper, believing that it would ‘lead to a two tier system that would disadvantage pupils from poorer backgrounds’ (CASE, 2006, online).

One of New Labour’s principles in education is privatisation, and the very first privatisation of education was the Education Action Zones (EAZs). These are the partnerships between schools and businesses. New Labour believed that EAZs would ‘modernise education in areas of social deprivation’ (Bailey, 2005, online). According to Rosalind Robson New Labour wanted to be seen as if they were addressing the issue of social deprivation in order to appeal to the middle classes by replacing the comprehensive schools with specialist schools and academies giving more of a choice to parents and pupils. The Conservatives had also promised more choice regardless of social background before New Labour came to power in 1997 (Robson, 2005, online).

BBC education correspondent Mike Baker looked into privatisation of education and compared it to the United States version and has regarded the business take over as a quiet revolution in this country as it ‘is happening almost unnoticed’ (Baker, 2001, online). Privatising education was clearly happening before the White Paper of 2005 came out. This could have meant that the government were ‘testing the waters’ before turning it into something bigger.

The privatisation of education is debated by many in authority such as MPs, teachers and unions to name a few. In September 2006 education unions came together in a bid against privatisation. General Secretary for the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) named Mary Bousted stated that her union believed that New Labour had achieved progress in raising the standards for education but felt that the governments’ achievement was going to waste because they are obsessed with privatisation. This was backed up by the general secretary of NASUWT whom added that ‘it is a disgrace that, in the third term of a Labour government, they are still focusing on reform rather than building on the progress that has been made in public services’ (Unison, 2006, online). The campaigns against privatising education have left them with little success up against the government with the main problem of raising awareness to all of the issues (Mansfield, 2006, online).

School Standards Minister Estelle Morris is in favour of the government’s education policy as are many others including James Tooley, an education professor, from Newcastle University. Tooley argues that ‘private sector education companies should be allowed to take over struggling and failing schools’ continuing with his argument he stated that ‘the involvement of the private sector led to higher paid and better motivated teachers’ (Smithers, 1999, online). Education Secretary, Ruth Kelly, is in favour of the education markets with her neo-liberal ideology as she wants to see state schools under pressure from competitiveness in the event that it will improve standards (Rikowski, 2005, online).

The Conservatives were big on education when they got into power in 1987 and the Education Reform Act of 1988 saw new types of schools being introduced creating a competitive market between them (Lawton, 1994). Not all Conservatives were in favour of this system. David Willets, shadow education secretary, feared that the exams on offer from the private schools differed from the standard GSCEs which would create a separation between the private sector and state schools (BBC News, 2006, online). The Tories have a neo-liberal ideology and believe that competition creates profits and wealth (Hill, 1999) but they have not progressed a lot further in education since the 1980s and have struggled to maintain a policy that would be more appealing than the Labour party’s policy. The Conservatives are in favour of privatisation but are focussing more on standards such as creating an extra 600,000 school places to offer more choice and to remove the current top up fees. The Conservative national conference in 2004 took place in Bournemouth with shadow education secretary, Tim Collins, explaining the current Conservative education policy. The response from the NASUWT was sceptical as acting general secretary, Chris Keates, said ‘consequently, when reflecting on the Conservative’s overall package of proposals for education, it is difficult to shake off the chilling feeling of staring into the abyss’ (Epolitix, 2004, online).

The Radical Right groups called for privatisation of education in the 1980s under the Thatcher government but unlike Labour they only wanted to privatise certain parts of the education system. Writers such as Dennis O’keeffe were in favour of this as they believed that more choice would raise the standards in schools (Lawton, 1992). The Conservative Party politicians Keith Joseph and Rhodes Boyson have been very influential in arguing in favour of education markets stating how relevant they are at creating more effort which will naturally occur from the competition (Bowe et al, 1992).

It is clear that the debates in favour of privatising education are all about more choice to raise the standards and making profits out of the education market. Debates against privatising education cover the area of competitiveness. Private sector involvement will create competition as each school will perform to be the best which may disadvantage poorer children. These debates have shown a divide within the parties involved such as John Prescott being against Tony Blair’s ideas and Ruth Kelly being in favour of privatisation. New Labour display neo-liberal and neo-conservative ideologies within their education policies. John Major also displayed neo-conservative ideology within the Conservative government. The Conservative government appeared to have had the ideas for education that have led New Labour to go a step further.

Private sector control of education can have a big impact on society in general. Inequalities emerge from these schools that are controlled by businesses as competition is the key to the education market. Bowe and others have said that the education market ‘is not necessarily fair or equal, indeed if it did generate equality it would remove incentive and competitive drive’ (Bowe et al, 1992, p24). Kasseem and others have stated how New Labour’s neo-conservative and neo-liberal policies have continued to increase the inequalities within social classes by having a selection intake into schools and also differences in university top up fees (which was introduced under the Conservative government) which has an impact on the wider society (Kassem et al, 2005).

According to Dennis Reed, schools that are seen as successful will have more freedom and by adding a range of schools that are funded and run by the private sector will reduce the democratic accountability. Reed believes that the central government should allow local governments to have the power to introduce new ideas and asks how many local governments are democratic because democracy includes the involvement of all members of communities. Without local democracy the most disadvantaged people are less likely to vote for what they want and with the private takeover of schools these people will not have a say. The disadvantaged are people such as the young, old, hard to reach, isolated and those who suffer from discrimination (Reed, 2001, online).

Schools that are controlled by the private sector may take pupils that are seen as more able academically or may even produce aptitude tests. This type of intake is very appealing to the middle class families as these schools are of a high status. With the middle classes filling the places the working class families are pushed aside meaning that there are inequalities within selection processes of the schools resulting in an ‘increasingly raced and gendered social class differentiation’ (Kassem et al, 2005, p83).

James Tooley, whom is in favour of privatisation, argues that the education markets can create equality of outcome suggesting ‘that there is a respectable tradition in moral philosophy that points to an interpretation of equality, or equity, as meaning adequate opportunities for all’ (Hill & Cole, 2001, p45). Bowe and others have stated an argument from Bowles that argues ‘marketing begins with a policy, a statement of intent, or a mission statement’ (Bowe et al, 1992, p30). At this point it would be interesting to know what the marketing professionals would have in their mission statement regarding equalities of sexuality and disability as well as other equalities of outcomes.

Competitive markets in education not only have inequalities in schools but also in society. The poorest people go to the poorer schools meaning they do not have the same choice of better schools as the non poorer people, this keeps society apart and some may feel socially excluded. It is hard to establish whether inequalities of sexuality will emerge from private control of education as ‘British society remains strongly prejudiced and members of gay and lesbian communities are offered few rights and little protection within schools and in wider societies’ (Hill & Cole, 2001, p226). However, Mike Cole, feels that things have improved slightly for the lesbian and gay people and a survey carried out on British Social Attitudes has proven the percentage of prejudiced people in Britain has decreased although research carried out by Ellis shows that ‘the quality of educational experience for young lesbian, gay and bisexual people shows no sign of improving and may, in fact be worse than ever’ (Cole, 2006, p107).

Schools run by the private sector may have a big impact upon children with disabilities as they could be seen as a hindrance for the workforce in later life and therefore pushed aside. This theory dates back to many years ago and it has been a constant battle for disabled people to have a good quality education (Cole, 2006). Bowe and others question whether the private schools would be prepared to ‘make philosophies about whole school provision for children with special educational needs either too expensive or too problematic’ and further questions if ‘schools will decide not to have any pupils with special educational needs if their presence affects enrolment’ (Bowe et al, 1992, p123). With these questions in mind it could be argued that the education market place would create inequalities for people with disabilities as previous arguments shown above have stated that it is all about money and making profits for the private sector.

There have been a lot of arguments for and against the private enterprise of education and those who are against have more reasons to be against it. The Conservative government had made plans for the future regarding education and New Labour came to power took on these plans and extended them. The private takeover of schools to me seems as if businesses want to produce the best children for working life when then reach adulthood and it’s all about money and making profits. After extensively researching this topic on the arguments for and against I feel that I would be against private enterprise of education. I am a parent myself and I want the best education possible for my children but I believe that there is no need for so much competition and the poorer or disadvantaged people should not be pushed aside especially as this leaves society on a hierarchal system that is unfair.

Bibliography

Bailey, M. (2005) [online] Stop privatising education! available from http://www.workersliberty.org/node/4123 [Accessed 5 April 2007]

Baker, M. (2001) [online] Business moves into UK and US schools, available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/features/mike_baker/1238936.stm [Accessed 5 April 2007]

Bowe, R. Ball, S.J & Gold, A. (1992) Reforming Education & Changing Schools: case studies in policy sociology, London, Routledge.

CASE (2006) [online] MPs dispute that government plans mean “Better Schools for All”, available from: http://www.casenet.org.uk [Accessed 05 April 2007]

Cole, M. (ed.) (2006) Education, equality and human rights, Abingdon, Routledge.

Epolitix (2004) [online] Conservative education policy, available from: http://www.epolitix.com/EN/ForumBriefs/200410/ffb0f616-cb86-4439-b653-e9a464f [Accessed 31 March 2007]

Hill, D. (1999) New Labour and Education: Policy, Ideology and the Third Way, London, Tufnell Press.

Hill, D & Cole, M. (Eds.) (2001) Schooling and Equality, Abingdon, RoutledgeFalmer.

Kassem, D & Mufti, E & Robinson, J. (Eds.) (2005) Education Studies: Issues and Critical Perspectives, Maidenhead, Oxford University Press.

Lawton, D. (1994) The Tory Mind on Education, London, Falmer Press.

Mansfield, M. (2006) [online] Forces combine in fight against privatisation, available from: http://www.casenet.org.uk [Accessed 5 April]

Michael, P. (1996) [online] British ‘debate’ about neo-liberalism, available from: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/61/054.html [Accessed 31 March 2007]

BBC News (2006) [online] Tories fear ‘education apartheid’, available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6189190.stm [Accessed 6 April 2007]

Reed, D. (2001) [online] Give people more power, available from: http://society.guardian.co.uk/futureforpublicservices/comment/0,,507488,00.html [Accessed 14 April 2007]

Robson, R. (2005) [online] Stop privatising education! available from: http://www.workersliberty.org/node/4123 [Accessed 5 April 2007]

Rikowski, G. (2005) The Education White Paper and the Marketisation and Capitalisation of the Schools System in England (in two parts), London, 24th October, online at: http://www.flowideas.co.uk/?page=articles&sub=The%20Education%20White%20Paper%20and%20the%20Marketisation%20of%20Schools [Accessed 31 March 2007]

Smithers, R. (1999) [online] The debate, available from The Guardian, http://education.guardian.co.uk/specialreports/theguardiandebates/story/0,,104593,00 [Accessed 5 April 2007]

Unison (2006) [online] Education unions unite against privatisation, available from: http://www.unison.org.uk/education/news¬_view.asp?did=2840 [Accessed 4 April 2007]

© Sharon Illiff, 24th February 2008

Print Friendly - Print Friendly with links

current date time:

Website Design and Coding by Digo PC

Site optimisation by Bytec Solutions