Are We Spending Too Much On Education?

How more can be less

Education, education, education.

And sure enough, during Labour's time in office, they whacked up state education spending by an astonishing 73% in real inflation adjusted terms. By 2009-10 spending had increased to £88.3bn - around £8 grand pa for every pupil and student between 5 and 21.

But what precisely have we taxpayers had in return? Where's the pay-off?

You can forget all those fiddled tractor production stats - as everybody now understands, they're not worth the dumbed down exam papers they're written on.

Much more important is yesterday's report from the OECD - the 2009 results from their Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). That is based on a consistent and regular set of tests sat by 15 year olds across over 60 developed countries. And what it shows is us sinking further down the international league tables with each year that passes.

The Mail has a useful summary:

What should we make of that?

Some argue that it's largely a question of race - we're simply not as bright as the superbrains out East, and we just need to accept that as they build up their education systems we will sink ever further behind.

But even if true, that doesn't explain why we're so much worse than European countries like Finland and, gulp, Estonia.

Immigrants then. Some argue that Finland and others do well because they have far fewer immigrants dragging down the overall scores.

But while with 10.6% immigrant pupils we are much higher than say Finland, other countries with high immigrant percentages also do much better than us. For example, Canada and Australia both have higher percentages, yet both beat us in the league tables.

No, the real problem seems to lie with our school system rather than the pupil mix per se. Despite a huge additional injection of cash, we still aren't getting the results we need - in fact, we seem to be going backwards.

Which raises the obvious question as to whether spending all that extra money was worth it? And whether in these straitened times we ought to cut some of it back?

Because what the OECD report also highlights is that although we are now among the world's top education spenders, others achieve similar or better results while spending much less:

"Only seven OECD countries spend more per student than the United Kingdom...

[but]... moderate spending per student cannot automatically be equated with poor performance by education systems. For example, Estonia and Poland, which spend around US$ 40 000 per student, perform at the same level as Norway and the United States, which spend over US$ 100 000 per student. Similarly, New Zealand, one of the highest performing countries in reading, spends well below the average per student. While the United Kingdom spends almost US$ 85 000, Germany or Hungary achieve a similar average performance and spend around US$ 63 000 and US$ 44 000 respectively."

So if we cut spending back to say German levels, then according to Tyler's fag packet we could save an average $22k over each pupil's 10 years of school education up to age 15. Which works out at an annual saving to taxpayers of around £10bn pa. Not bad.

And it isn't just schools. When last sighted (2006) we were spending 5.9% of our GDP on education as a whole, whereas Germany was spending only 4.8%. Which is equivalent to about £15bn pa - money British taxpayers could save if we cut back to German spending levels.

And remember this - in this post-bubble world, Germany is beating the pants off us. Jeremy Warner has the picture story here including this chart that shows how much lower is their youth unemployment:

It seems German companies actually want to employ the products of German schools.

So what does Germany do right and we do wrong?

Hmm... now, let me see... what could it be... ah yes, selection. That thing nobody is allowed to mention here any more.

It is surely time to ask ourselves a serious question - can we any longer afford an education system that is run by the social engineering commissariat? Prizes for all and A*s all round was a lovely way of spending the last days of summer, but winter's here now.

In this new and tougher world nobody owes us a living. We need an education system that prioritises academic excellence for those with the ability to generate our future wealth, and a strong grasp of basic skills for those at the bottom - it is shocking that the OECD finds that after a decade or more of schooling, 20% of our 15 year olds are functionally illiterate.

Germany shows it can be done. We can get over the fact that our school pupils are not all Chinese. We can cope with the fact that over 10% of our pupils are immigrants. And we can even save £10 - £15bn pa in the process.

We just need to grasp one nettle.

And this time, we should do it properly and fairly (see this blog).

PS And while we're on the subject, Tyler keeps swallowing his false teeth listening to those future politicos who "speak for" the revolting students. You see, English literature degrees are not essential to the future of the nation. There is no God-given right for 18 year olds to spend three years getting pissed at taxpayer expense. The Browne recommendations on university funding and student loans are fair to everyone - both taxpayers and students (see this blog). And the thought of these future Jack Straws ruling over us for the next 40 years makes Tyler gag.

PPS Talking of English Lit degrees, Mr and Mrs T saw Rory Kinnear's Hamlet last night. Stunning - possibly the best live Hamlet Tyler has ever seen. Fresh interpretation, strong performances all round. Mrs T thought they'd slightly overdone the modern instances, but Tyler was... well.. stunned. Highly recommended.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: Education, Schools

Larf?

The chippy grammar school boys are on the right... and they still are

Well you've got to laugh, haven't you.

Today Tyler had a rather long, and shamefully liquid, lunch with an old friend from the Treasury bunker. Two old Treasury hands, and two grammar school boys from the old days.

Ah yes, the old days.

The days when public school toffs were not the only game in town. The days when the richest fifth of students were not seven times more likely to be admitted to the top unis than those from deprived backgrounds. The days when kids who were eligible for free school meals (such as Tyler) had a serious chance of making it to Oxbridge and beyond. And the days when comfortable middle class parents (such as Tyler and his friend) did not feel the need to send their own kids to public schools.

Yes, indeed, ladies and gentlemen. Our new coalition cabinet comprises 23 members, of which no fewer than 14 went to fee-paying schools. Eton, Westminster, St Pauls, Charterhouse, Rugby, Wellington - they're all there (although interestingly, not Winchester).

Does it matter?

On one level no. As long as they can do the job, that's all we need. In fact, grammar school girl Mrs T reckons that when it comes to leading a charge into the machine guns, your average toff is a far better bet than your average prole. It's not just brains you see. It's character. Breeding. Bred to lead. And Cam is right out of the top drawer.

But jeeps, what does it say about the state of our state education system?

93% of our kids get educated in state schools, yet state school pupils comprise just 39% of the cabinet.

We know the Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton, but this is 2010, not 1810. As things stand, Tyler and his friend feel like some historic aberration. We benefited from a short burst of sunshine when those at the bottom of the pond had a real chance to crawl out and become butterflies. But now the dark clouds of privilege have rolled back in.

We've said it before, but we'll say it again: the single most important thing our new government must do is to push through Gove's free schools reform. We need the sunshine back again.

Let's hope it wasn't all just blather.

PS Declaration of personal involvement - Tyler knows our new Home Secretary personally. We thought Theresa did a good job at the Police Federation Conference today. The police don't like the idea of elected sheriffs, but Theresa got them to listen by putting it into the context of returning authority to the police themselves, and away from Whitehall. Most people on the right wrote Theresa off long ago. She may yet surprise them. Apart from anything else, she's one of the 9 cabinet members who were state educated, so she immediately gets six bonus points in our book.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: Education, Schools

Does The Swedish Model Actually Work?

The independent Kunskapsskolan schools certainly look better*

As regular BOM readers will know, Tyler is a big fan of the Swedish free schools model - the one that allows new independent schools to set up in competition with local authority schools, and then lets parents choose whether to have their children educated in an authority school or have the authority pay for a place at the free school. Choice and competition to drive improvement - what could be better? Which is why Tyler is so excited about the Tories' promise to adopt roughly the same model in the UK.

So you can imagine Tyler's distress at Monday's Newsnight report which basically said the Swedish model is failing in Sweden itself, and has not delivered the improvement in standards supporters claim (you can watch the report here, along with Gove's somewhat back-footed response here).

The basic charge seemed to be that, while the new free schools are fantastically popular with parents, those parents are the very same pushy bourgeois elements that are the bane of commissariat life everywhere. And while the new schools may help their pampered undeserving offspring, everyone else gets left behind. With the result that in the international league tables of scholastic achievement, Sweden is now actually falling back.

Can that possibly be true? Tyler scrabbled around on the internet for the international league tables.

The best known of these is the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which applies a consistent set of student tests in reading, maths, and science to 15 year-old pupils across (now) 57 participating countries. And so far, there have been three PISA surveys, the first in 2000.

We blogged the latest 2006 study here, focusing on the alarming plunge in the relative performance of English schools. But how did Sweden do?

It turns out that Sweden beat England in reading and maths, but fell below in science (see league tables here). Overall, Sweden was ranked 10th in reading, 21st in maths, and 22nd in science (out of 57 countries).

So is that a decline over time? Here are Sweden's league positions from the first PISA in 2000: reading 9th, maths 15th, science 10th. Which would indeed seem to indicate a decline.

However, when you look at the two league tables more closely, you find that it's less a question of Sweden falling back, and more a question of some sparkling new entrants joining the PISA programme since 2000, and going straight into the top ten. These include countries like Hong Kong-China, Macao-China, Taiwan, and some of the new EU members from the East. It seems to be the survey itself that's changed, recognising for the first time the huge competitive challenge all the decrepit old western economies are now facing.

So what's the truth about progress in Sweden? How can we find out?

Tyler turned to the New Schools Network, a most excellent new operation with the energetic Rachel Wolf as its Director. They talk Tyler's language:

"The Network aims to improve the quality of education – particularly for the most deprived – by increasing the number of independent, innovative schools within the state sector.
 
Schools should drive social mobility. Talent and hard work, not background, should determine success. Yet successive governments – of all parties – have failed to make opportunity equal in our schools. The wealthy can buy a good education - paying for private schools or by buying a house in the right neighbourhood. Others are denied those options. The Network believes that allowing new schools – accountable to government, but not run by politicians – will raise achievement across the country. We will help groups who want to set up new schools, and work to create the conditions which allow them to succeed."

Spot on. And here's how they summarise the detailed evidence from Sweden (and see here):

• Students in Swedish free schools get much better scores than in traditional schools. The Grade Point Average (GPA) in free schools is 20 points higher than in state schools.
• Swedish free schools improve standards across the local authority. Several studies have found that an increase in the number of children attending free schools improves performance across the area. A study by Anders Bohlmark and Mikael Lindahl of Stokholm University found that an increase in the percentage of free schools in an area increased pupil performance across all schools. Most of this increase was due to competition in the school sector, forcing all schools to improve their quality. Åsa Ahlin of Uppsala University found that a ten per cent increase in the number of children attending free schools led to a five per cent increase in Mathematics performance across the area. Similarly, the National Agency for Education found that municipalities with larger proportions of pupils in independent schools were more likely to say that the presence of independent schools in their jurisdiction had contributed to school improvement in compulsory schools in their municipalities.
• Parents are happier with new independent Swedish schools. 91 per cent of parents whose children attend free schools are happy with the results compared to just 63 per cent of parents at state schools.
• Parents think independent schools are a good idea. The Swedish National Agency for Education has found that more than 90 per cent of parents think that parents and children should get to choose what school children attend. More than half of parents think it is good for schools to compete with one another.

Now it is true that a full assessment of Swedish experience is hampered by the fact that until very recently, there has been a dearth of standardised testing across all schools. But what evidence there is looks pretty compelling to Tyler.

And as NSN quite correctly point out, there is considerably more evidence on the results of very similar reforms in the US - ie their Charter Schools. And that evidence is unambiguous - choice and competition really does lift all boats, both in the new independent Charter Schools, and in the remaining state schools.

The bottom line is that Tyler is now even more convinced this is the way to go. As we've blogged many times, Gove and Cam must be prepared for huge opposition, both from the teaching unions, and it seems from the state broadcaster. But they must press on. The PISA study underlines that we face fearsome competition from the new players in the global economy, several of whom seem to do better in education than we do.

We really have no option - we need to secure the very best educational opportunities we can possibly provide for all our kids - not just the rich ones.

*Footnote - the chart is taken from this Policy Exchange paper. It shows the average grade scores in the independent Kunskapsskolan chain of schools, compared against the average scores across all the schools in the municipalities in which they operate, and also the national averages.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: Education, Schools