Parental Choice & Competition Between Schools (WJEC Eduqas GCSE Sociology): Revision Note

The tripartite system (1944 Education Act)

• The 1944 Education Act introduced to provide free state education for all children based on ability, not wealth

• It aimed to create a meritocratic system where children were educated according to their ability

• Pupils took the 11-plus exam, which determined which of three schools they attended:

  • Grammar schools: academic education for the most able (around 20%)

  • Technical schools: practical and vocational training (around 5%)

  • Secondary modern schools: general education for the majority (around 75%)

The comprehensive system

• A 'comprehensive' school was introduced by the Labour government in 1965 to replace selection with a more inclusive system

• Comprehensive schools accept children of all abilities and social backgrounds

• Some local authorities, however, retained grammar schools, creating a two-tier system that still exists today

Advantages of the comprehensive system

• Promotes social mixing and breaks down class divisions

• Removes the label of ‘failure’ linked to the 11-plus exam

• Provides a fairer system with no entrance exams

• Offers a wider curriculum and more subject choices

Disadvantages of the comprehensive system

• Parental choice can be limited by local catchment areas

• More able students may be held back in mixed-ability classes

• Comprehensives often reflect local inequalities — inner-city schools remain mostly working-class

• Setting and streaming reintroduce selection by ability, reproducing class differences

Marketisation and parental choice (1998 Education Reform Act)

• The Conservative government introduced marketisation into education

• Schools began to compete for pupils, with funding linked to student numbers

• The goal was to raise standards through competition and give parents more power — known as 'parentocracy' (rule by parents)

• However, Ball et al. (1994) argue that marketisation has reinforced the advantages of middle-class parents and has led to social class inequality in education

Features of marketisation

League tables

• The government publishes exam results and Ofsted ratings so parents can compare schools

• ‘Successful’ schools attract more pupils and funding

• ‘Failing’ schools risk losing students and closure

School promotion

• Schools market themselves to attract students through:

  • open days and prospectuses

  • websites with exam performance and inspection results

  • social media, advertisements, and newsletters

Funding and business links

• Schools are funded by the number of pupils they enrol

• Popular schools gain more money and better resources, creating a cycle of success

• Businesses can sponsor schools, offering funding, expertise, and work experience

Types of schools

• Parents can now choose between a wider range of schools, including:

  • Free schools – set up and run by teachers, parents, or businesses, independent of local authorities

  • Faith schools – linked to a particular religion

  • Academies – state-funded but independent of local councils, with freedom over their curriculum and pay

Academies

• Introduced to improve ‘failing’ schools and raise standards

• Academies can set their own term dates, pay scales, and curriculum and may be sponsored by businesses

• Most secondary schools in England are now academies or are in the process of becoming one

Advantages of marketisation and parental choice

• Introduced more choice and accountability into the education system

• Competition between schools has led to higher standards and improved GCSE results

• Parents have more power to influence schools and demand improvement

Disadvantages of marketisation and parental choice

• Stephen Ball argues that parental choice is not truly free

  • Middle-class parents are better equipped to navigate the system and use their cultural and social capital to secure good schools

  • Working-class parents may lack information, confidence, or transport to send children outside their local area, leading to greater social inequality rather than equality of opportunity

• Catchment areas and transport costs limit choice for poorer families

• Schools under pressure to climb league tables may exclude lower-achieving students or focus only on exam results

• Teaching to the test narrows learning and increases stress for pupils

• Education is treated too much like a business, with schools competing rather than cooperating