I will not join the baying mob calling for Ruth Kelly’s resignation, what she has done in sending her children to the best school possible is what any parent wishes to do.
What this tells us however is that we cannot simply keep our eyes closed and mutter the mantra that the state sector is fine and dandy and all it needs is more money, or more gimmicks or some small attempt at reforming a small part of the section or super heads or any of the half-hearted reforms of this government. We need radical, dare I say it, liberal reform of education.
Its generally accepted that education should be provided, at least in part, through taxation. I will not argue with that, that is sensible, its the best for society. What this does not mean however is that the state should run education. Indeed, that is a dangerous thing and was opposed by JS Mill for philosophical reasons, and should also be opposed because of the evidence of a failing system before us.
The first law of economics is that incentives matter. What incentives to state schools have? They get pupils no matter what. Okay, so they may get a ticking off by Ofsted and a bit of bad press, but that’s not so bad. Incentives are lacking and where they exist the forces against them are strong.
One of the principles of liberalism is that no one person or group knows best, but what do we have in education? Central dictat from Westminster, or only slightly better the LEA. This also runs against the liberal principle of localism.
Another liberal axiom is choice - you should be free to choose what’s best for you. In education, unless you’re rich enough or lucky enough to get a scholarship you have no choice, or if you’re lucky perhaps a little bit of choice between virtually identical schools.
Its no wonder that the state educations system if failing. Teachers, many of whom are dedicated to really helping children and inspiring them are constrained by regulations and misallocation of resources from on high. There is no option for parents to remove their children from a failing school or to spend extra on their child’s education if they wish. Schools have little control over themselves in important areas.
We need reform. Reform to allow choice, to bring in competition, to enable teachers to teach their pupils as best they can and for schools to run themselves.
The only way I can see to do this is the voucher system. Give every child a voucher to be spent on education. Place minimal restrictions on that (I’d suggest the school must not be a place of religious indoctrination - that is the parent’s decision and should not be funded by the state - plus good coverage of subjects and openness to inspection by an independent inspectorate).
These vouchers enable choice, the supplier of education can be private for profit, a charity or the current state sector, they can be run how the school likes, parents will not choose schools they don’t approve of for their children.
Make it easy for new schools to start, parents have shown themselves willing to do this time and time again, only to be thwarted by government.
The competition will drive up standards, schools which don’t meet parents’ and children’s wishes will fail, those which do will succeed. Innovation will occur, new teaching methods will be explored. Schools to cater for almost all needs will be created.
Furthermore, vouchers should be supplementable by parents. Egalitarians will cry out ‘but that’s unfair!’, but if you pause to think about it you will realise it is not only fair but will improve standards.
Fairness arises from the fact that everyone who has a child will get that which they have paid for through taxation.
True, there will always be some who can, and will, spend huge amounts of money on their children’s education, but if part of that comes from a voucher is opens up more money for scholarships. Parents can pay less for their child’s education, but the fees could be higher, the extra going to fund scholarships which will also cost less now because of the voucher.
Most private schools also do not charge much above the state sector’s funding, this would open up such schools to a greater than ever number of people. Even the poorest may find money to supplement, but the far reduced cost of scholarships would mean that they would most likely not have to.
Being able to raise more money would be a great boon for many schools.
In my experience, the vast majority of teachers wish to teach and help children. Schools are run with this aim in mind. If private schools were simply ghettos for the rich children then why do they offer so many scholarships and bursaries? They want to educate those children who would benefit most from their more specialised education.
Teachers wish to educate to the best of their ability. We should be giving them that opportunity, not limiting them.
Schools exist to educate. In a market they will disappear if they fail at that.
Parents generally want the best for their children, we should be giving them that opportunity.
Out children deserve the best we can offer, not some compromise or some failing system imposed on them because of the prejudices and ideologies of politicians.
We need to act to save our children’s future. We throw too many lives away with poor schools. Schools exist to offer opportunity. Today far too many cannot do that because of the structure of schooling in this country. We are failing our children and destroying their futures.
