Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T20:39:47.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Education Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Rebecca Allen
Rebecca Allen*
Affiliation:
Reader in Economics of Education at UCL Institute of Education, currently on leave as Director of Education Datalab at FFT
*
E-mail: r.allen@ioe.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article summarises the 2010–15 Coalition government's education policy, contrasting their attempts to liberalise education markets with the desire to impose a highly traditional curriculum. The government's quite radical reforms have not been easy to implement, taking place against severe budgetary constraints and a minority Coalition partner with ambitions to improve the educational outcomes of children from low income families. It could be argued that the reforms have been successfully implemented, and there is little prospect of wholesale reversal by any future government. However, their combative approach to reform leaves a demotivated teacher workforce, a possible impending teacher recruitment crisis as the economy recovers, and a tangled web of accountability structures that will need to be resolved.

Keywords

education policycoalition governmentI28
Type
Research Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 231 , February 2015 , pp. R36 - R43
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank Meenakshi Parameshwaran and Ian Moss for research assistance. Chris Cook and Heather Rolfe gave very helpful reviewer comments that have materially improved the article.

References

Allen, R., Belfield, C., Greaves, E., Sharp, C. and Walker, M. (2014), The Costs and Benefits of Different Initial Teacher Training Routes, IFS Report R100, available at www.ifs.org.uk/publications/7435.Google Scholar
Allen, R. and Burgess, S. (2010), The Future of Competition and Accountability in Education, 2020 Public Services Trust at the RSA report.Google Scholar
Allen, R. and Burgess, S. (2011), ‘Can school league tables help parents choose schools?’, Fiscal Studies, 32(2), pp. 245–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, R. and Burgess, S. (2013), ‘Evaluating the provision of school performance information for school choice’, Economics of Education Review, 34, pp. 175–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, R., Burgess, S., Rasul, I. and McKenna, L. (2012), Understanding School Financial Decisions, Department for Education Research Report RR183.Google Scholar
Chowdry, H., Dearden, L., Goodman, A. and Jin, W. (2012), ‘The distributional impact of the 2012–13 higher education funding reforms in England’, Fiscal Studies, 33(2), p. 211–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chowdry, H., Dearden, L., Wenchao, J. and Lloyd, B. (2012), ‘Fees and student support under the new higher education funding regime: what are different universities doing?’, IFS Briefing Note BN134.Google Scholar
Chowdry, H. and Emmerson, C. (2010), ‘An efficient maintenance allowance?’, IFS Observations, available at www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5370.Google Scholar
Chowdry, H., Greaves, E. and Sibieta, L. (2010), ‘The pupil premium: assessing the options’, IFS Commentary 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chowdry, H. and Sibieta, L. (2011) ‘Trends in education and schools spending’, IFS Briefing Note BN121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, C. (2013), ‘Academies overpaid in funding blunder’, Financial Times, 9 January.Google Scholar
Cusick, J. and Garner, R. (2013), ‘Cash for academies: Michael Gove ‘bribes’ schools to change their status’, The Independent, 13 February.Google Scholar
Dearden, L., Emmerson, C., Frayne, C. and Meghir, C. (2009), ‘Conditional cash transfers and school dropout rates’, Journal of Human Resources, 44(4) pp. 827–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department for Education (2013a), National Curriculum, available at www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-curriculum.Google Scholar
Department for Education (2013b), ‘Participation in education, training and employment by 16–18 year olds in England’, Statistical First Release SFR 22/2013.Google Scholar
Department for Education (2013c), More Great Childcare: Raising Quality and Giving Parents More Choice, London, The Stationery Office Ltd.Google Scholar
Department for Education (2013d), ‘92,000 2-year-olds already receiving free childcare’, Press release 11/11/2013 available at www.gov.uk/government/news/92000-2-year-olds-already-receiving-free-childcare.Google Scholar
Directgov (2014), ‘Sure Start Centres’, available at http://childrenscentresfinder.direct.gov.uk/snapshot-childrens-centre.Google Scholar
Elledge, J. (2014), ‘Why don't we care that the further education budget has just been cut by 20 per cent’, New Statesman, 14 February, available at: www.newstateman.com/lifestyle/2014/02/why-dont-we-care-further-education-budget-has-been-cut-20-cent.Google Scholar
Fryer, R. (2013), ‘Teacher incentives and student achievement: evidence from New York City public schools’, Journal of Labor Economics, 31(2), pp. 373–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, F., Allen, R. and Jenkins, A. (2015), ‘Are free schools socially selective? A quantitative analysis’, British Educational Research Journal (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HM Treasury (2010), Spending Review 2010, London, The Stationery Office Ltd.Google Scholar
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (2013), Department for Education: Capital funding for new school places, Twelfth Report of Session 2013–14, London, The Stationery Office Ltd.Google Scholar
Kitchen, S., Tanner, E., Brown, V., Payne, C., Crawford, C., Dearden, L., Greaves, E. and Purdon, S. (2012), Evaluation of the Free School Meals Pilot, Department for Education Research Report RR227.Google Scholar
Lavy, V. (2009), ‘Performance pay and teachers’ effort, productivity, and grading ethics’, American Economic Review, 99(5), pp. 1979–2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J. (2014), ‘RAB charge debate will ‘perplex’ future generations, says Willetts’, Times Higher Education, 29 May, available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/rab-charge-debate-will-perplex-future-generations-says-willetts/2013615.articleGoogle Scholar
National Audit Office (2013), Department for Education: Establishing Free Schools, London, The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Pascal, C., Bertram, T., Delaney, S. and Nelson, C. (2013), A Comparison of International Childcare Systems, DfE Research Report RR269.Google Scholar
Slater, H., Davies, N. and Burgess, S. (2012), ‘Do teachers matter? Measuring the variation in teacher effectiveness in England’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(5) pp. 629–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, H. (2014), ‘Teacher supply crisis feared as School Direct struggles to fill places’, Times Educational Supplement, 27 November, https://news.tes.co.uk/b/news/2014/11/27/teacher-supply-crisis-feared-as-two-in-every-five-school-direct-places-left-unfilled.aspx.Google Scholar
Wolf, A. (2011), Review of Vocational Education – The Wolf Report, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/180504/DFE-00031-2011.pdf.Google Scholar
Wormald, C. and Lauener, P. (2012), Written Evidence from the Department of Education and the Education Funding Agency, Public Accounts Committee Evidence HC787, available at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmpubacc/787/787we02.htm.Google Scholar