Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

`No role for state' in education

Judith Judd
Wednesday 13 March 1996 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

JUDITH JUDD

Education Editor

The state should get out of education because government intervention in schools does not work, according to Dr James Tooley of Manchester University, in an article published yesterday.

Writing in the journal of the Institute of Economic Affairs, Dr Tooley argues that most young people were already in schooling and that literacy and numeracy among young people was higher before 1870, when state intervention in education began.

His proposals come as the Government is considering ways of financing more schools through private funding.

In a paper to be published next month, he will suggest that, eventually, all parents should pay fees for schooling, though there would be a small "safety net" of government money for the very poorest.

He said last night: "This would be possible because there would be a completely different tax regime where people did not have large amounts of money confiscated by the state."

As an interim measure, compulsory education would end at the age of 14, when all pupils would leave with a voucher to spend on education or training.

Dr Tooley says in his article: "Given the huge proportion of young people who are failed by the system, it is time to challenge educationists as to why they think governments should be involved."

He attacks the view that the state must intervene in education to promote equality of opportunity.

Why anyone assumes that government could promote equality or equity is not clear. Middle-class parents have always been able to buy in to better school districts and hence reinforce social inequality."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in