Competitive Markets in Education

As Ofsted evaluated how effective the settings were, it meant that there were printed and league tables were formed showing which schools were 'better' than others. This led to the development of education as a competitive market because it meant that schools competed with each other to be better. It also meant that there was no more of an element of choice for parents and children because children were now going to schools further away because they were deemed better rather than the local school. The Conservative Party would be deemed as central right wing which means they are in favour of the higher classes which explains the development of league tables, as those higher classes, who would attend the better schools could almost show off through these league tables. .
             Neo-liberalism put schools and education within the competitive market through conservative modernisation (Apple, 2006). This increase of choice in schools could lead to segregation within society. Research has found that a 'poor child is less likely to go to a good school' (Cassen & Kingdon, 2007, p.27) which shows that in a lot of cases, those in lower socioeconomic groups have become the losers within the educational setting because they are receiving a poorer education than those in higher classes. The Liberal's would be seen as left wing which means they would want to support those from lower classes etc. which is why they tried to increase attainment for the lower classes. These good schools are effective at helping students to avoid low achievement, however they are not distributed across local authorities evenly (Cassen & Kingdon 2007), which means there may be a lack of this type of school in some areas. This then affect those in that area and makes them the loser in the situation, despite having a lack of choice on their education, as there is simply no option to go to a good school. .
             Features of a failing school, described by Ofsted, included underachievement low attainment and unsatisfactory teaching (Nicolaidou & Ainscow, 2005) which shows that it is not just the attainment of the students that titles a school as failing.