Revision Library

revisionlibrary.co.uk

A-Level · Sociology

GSOC.AL7 Education Policy: Selection, Marketisation and Privatisation

AQA 7192 · Calculators not allowed · about 75 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Use sociological terms where appropriate. Spend about 75 minutes on this pack. At least four answers must be full sentences: Q9(b), Q10, Q15 and Q16.

Which 1944 UK Act established the Tripartite System of grammar, secondary modern and technical schools?

A) Education Reform Act 1988
B) 1944 Education Act
C) Further and Higher Education Act 1992
D) Education Act 2011

(Total for Question 1 is 1 mark)

Define what sociologists mean by 'selection' in the context of schooling.

(Total for Question 2 is 2 marks)

Identify and explain two features of the marketisation policies introduced by the 1988 Education Reform Act in England and Wales.

(Total for Question 3 is 4 marks)

Identify one meaning of 'parentocracy' as used in debates about school choice and marketisation.

(Total for Question 4 is 2 marks)

Explain two ways that 'cream-skimming' and 'silt-shifting' operate as effects of marketisation on schools.

(Total for Question 5 is 4 marks)

Give one example of how 'cola-isation' of schools is used to describe privatisation trends in education.

(Total for Question 6 is 2 marks)

State one reason why comprehensivisation aimed to reduce educational selection.

(Total for Question 7 is 2 marks)

Which term describes a government policy that allows groups to set up state-funded schools independent of local authority control, often with a distinct curriculum or sponsor?

A) Free schools
B) Maintained schools
C) Local education units
D) Grammar clusters

(Total for Question 8 is 1 mark)

Item A: Short extract about a local authority area. The local authority of Newbridge has a mixture of schools: two selective grammar schools, several comprehensive community schools, three academies sponsored by a regional trust and one new free school. Over five years the grammar schools show rising average GCSE scores and high application rates. Two comprehensives have seen rising percentages of pupils eligible for free school meals and falling published performance. The academies report increased autonomy over curriculum and use a give-and-take admissions agreement with neighbouring schools.

(a)Using Item A, identify two trends in the Newbridge area that illustrate effects of selection or marketisation.(2)

(b)Using Item A, explain one reason why the academies' autonomy might lead to different curriculum choices from community comprehensives.(2)

(Total for Question 9 is 4 marks)

Outline and explain two effects of marketisation policies on schools, using any example you know.

Outline and explain two effects of marketisation policies on schools.

(Total for Question 10 is 6 marks)

Define 'formula funding' as used in the context of post-1988 school funding.

(Total for Question 11 is 2 marks)

State one way faith schools can be selective and one effect this may have on equality of opportunity.

(Total for Question 12 is 2 marks)

Identify and explain one criticism of using league tables as a measure of school quality.

(Total for Question 13 is 4 marks)

Explain two ways academies differ from maintained community schools.

(Total for Question 14 is 4 marks)

Applying your knowledge, evaluate one argument that academies increase inequality of opportunity in education.

Evaluate one argument that academies increase inequality of opportunity.

(Total for Question 15 is 4 marks)

Item B: Short policy extract. New national guidance encourages local authorities and multi academy trusts to cooperate on admissions and inclusion, but funding formulas still create financial competition between schools. A recent study found that when trusts expand, popular schools in the trust raised entry requirements for certain programmes, while partner schools in deprived areas saw slower improvement. Applying material from Item B and your knowledge, evaluate the view that marketisation policies have increased inequalities in education.

Applying material from Item B and your knowledge, evaluate the view that marketisation policies have increased inequalities in education.

(Total for Question 16 is 12 marks)

Mark scheme · GSOC.AL7 Education Policy: Selection, Marketisation and Privatisation

Question 1

B1 B (1944 Education Act)
Answer: B

Question 2

B1 identifies selection as choosing pupils for different types of school or places based on tests, exams or other criteria (oe)
B1 development, e.g. selection can be by ability test such as the 11 plus, by aptitude, faith, or by entrance exam
Answer: Selection is choosing pupils for different types of school or places based on tests, exams or other criteria; examples include ability tests like the 11 plus, faith criteria or entrance exams.

Question 3

B1 identifies a feature, e.g. league tables
B1 explains how it works, e.g. league tables publish exam results giving schools incentives to compete for higher performance
B1 identifies a second feature, e.g. formula funding or open enrolment
B1 explains the second, e.g. formula funding gives schools money based on pupil numbers so schools compete to attract pupils
Answer: Example answer: League tables publish exam results, creating incentives for schools to compete for better outcomes; formula funding gives schools money based on pupil numbers, so schools have incentives to attract and retain pupils.

Question 4

B1 identifies parentocracy as rule by parents in the educational market where parents choose schools
B1 development, e.g. it suggests parents make choices and their preferences determine school success, rather than central planners
Answer: Parentocracy is the idea that parents, through choice, determine school success in an education market; it implies parents drive which schools thrive rather than central planners.

Question 5

B1 identifies cream-skimming as selective recruitment of high-achieving pupils by popular schools
B1 development, e.g. this raises average results and reputation while leaving other schools with harder intakes
B1 identifies silt-shifting as avoiding or offloading less desirable pupils
B1 development, e.g. schools may use admissions policies, exclusion or steering to avoid pupils likely to lower performance
Answer: Cream-skimming is when popular schools recruit higher achieving pupils, boosting results and reputation; silt-shifting is when schools avoid or push away less desirable pupils, for example by strict admissions or exclusions, leaving other schools with more difficult intakes.

Question 6

B1 identifies an example, e.g. schools using corporate sponsors, branded resources or private management models
B1 brief development, e.g. this shows private business influence and marketing in school life
Answer: An example is schools using corporate sponsors, branded teaching resources or adopting private management models, showing business influence and marketing in education.

Question 7

B1 identifies a reason, e.g. to provide equal opportunities by having one type of secondary school for all pupils
B1 brief development, e.g. to end the separation of pupils by ability at age eleven
Answer: Comprehensivisation aimed to provide equal opportunities by replacing separate grammar and secondary modern schools with one type of secondary school for all pupils, ending selection at age eleven.

Question 8

B1 A (Free schools)
Answer: A

Question 9

(a) B1 identifies one trend, e.g. grammar schools rising scores and high applications
(a) B1 identifies a second trend, e.g. comprehensives with more FSM pupils and falling performance
(a) Answer: Rising average GCSE scores and high application rates at the grammar schools, and comprehensives showing increasing proportions of pupils eligible for free school meals with falling published performance.
(b) B1 identifies autonomy allows academies to set their own curriculum or subject emphasis
(b) B1 develops, e.g. academies can specialise to attract particular pupils or meet trust priorities, creating variation between schools
(b) Answer: Academies' autonomy allows them to set their own curriculum or subject emphasis, so they may specialise to attract particular pupils or to meet the priorities of their sponsor trust, creating variation from community comprehensives.

Question 10

B1 identifies an effect, e.g. increased competition between schools
B1 explains the effect, e.g. schools respond to league tables and funding formulas by trying to improve exam results
B1 identifies a second effect, e.g. greater diversity of school types such as academies and free schools
B1 explains the second effect, e.g. autonomy and sponsorship lead to differences in admissions, curriculum and management
B1 AO2 style development linking to example, e.g. cream-skimming by selective or popular schools
B1 further development, e.g. schools may prioritise resources to boost measured performance such as GCSEs
Answer: Possible points: Marketisation increases competition between schools, with schools responding to league tables and funding formulas by focusing on exam performance. It also increases diversity of school types, with academies and free schools having autonomy over admissions and curriculum, leading to variation between schools and possible selective practices like cream-skimming.

Question 11

B1 identifies formula funding as funding allocated to schools according to a set formula based on pupil numbers and characteristics
B1 development, e.g. it creates financial incentives linked to recruitment and pupil mix
Answer: Formula funding allocates money to schools according to a set formula based on pupil numbers and characteristics, creating financial incentives linked to recruitment and pupil mix.

Question 12

B1 identifies a way faith schools can be selective, e.g. using religious criteria in admissions
B1 identifies an effect, e.g. this can reduce access for pupils of other faiths or none, affecting equality of opportunity
Answer: Faith schools can use religious criteria in admissions, which may reduce access for pupils of other faiths or none and so affect equality of opportunity.

Question 13

B1 identifies a criticism, e.g. league tables focus on exam results only
B1 explains the limitation, e.g. they ignore other aspects like pastoral care or progress from given starting points
B1 further example or development, e.g. schools with selective intakes will appear higher due to intake rather than teaching quality
B1 link to effect, e.g. this can encourage teaching to the test and excluding or off-rolling low attaining pupils
Answer: League tables are criticised for focusing on exam results only, ignoring progress, pastoral care and context; selective intakes can boost positions and encourage teaching to the test or off-rolling pupils who may lower results.

Question 14

B1 identifies a difference, e.g. academies have greater autonomy over curriculum and staff pay
B1 development, e.g. they are run by trusts and not controlled by local authorities
B1 identifies a second difference, e.g. academies can set their own term dates and admission arrangements to some extent
B1 development, e.g. this can lead to variation between academies and community schools in organisation and admissions
Answer: Academies differ by having greater autonomy over curriculum, staff pay and management, being run by trusts rather than local authorities, and by being able to set some aspects of admissions and organisation such as term dates, creating variation from community schools.

Question 15

B1 identifies the argument that academies increase inequality, e.g. by enabling cream-skimming or by creating uneven resources across areas
B1 supports the argument with a reason or example, e.g. some academies recruit more advantaged intakes and attract more funding
B1 offers a counterpoint or limitation, e.g. some academies serve disadvantaged areas and improve standards, or academies are still accountable for admissions rules
B1 gives a reasoned judgement, e.g. a balanced conclusion recognising both risks and possible benefits
Answer: A valid evaluation notes academies can increase inequality by enabling cream-skimming, uneven resources and varied admissions, but also that some academies improve schools in disadvantaged areas and that policy safeguards and oversight can limit selection. On balance the evidence suggests academies can increase inequality where market incentives and weak oversight combine, but they are not uniformly harmful.

Question 16

Level 1 (1-3): Basic assertions about marketisation with little evidence or development. May describe marketisation superficially with no clear application to Item B.
Level 2 (4-6): Some developed points about how marketisation could increase inequalities, with limited use of Item B or general examples. Limited evaluation and a simple conclusion.
Level 3 (7-9): Clear analysis of how marketisation can increase inequalities and consideration of counterarguments. Good use of Item B and knowledge, showing cause and effect. A reasoned judgement is present.
Level 4 (10-12): Balanced, well developed evaluation covering several mechanisms by which marketisation increases inequality and also strong counter-evidence. Integrates Item B carefully with wider knowledge, considers policy responses and reaches a supported conclusion.
Indicative content:
- Arguments that marketisation increases inequality: league tables, formula funding and parentocracy give advantages to middle class parents who can choose and move to better schools, increasing segregation by class and ability.
- Cream-skimming and silt-shifting: popular schools select or recruit higher achieving pupils and avoid challenging intakes, leaving disadvantaged pupils concentrated in weaker schools.
- Privatisation and cola-isation can create uneven resources and differential opportunities between schools, advantaging pupils in better funded or sponsored schools.
- Evidence from Item B: trusts expanding and raising entry requirements for popular programmes suggests internal stratification and selective practices that increase inequality; partner schools in deprived areas seeing slower improvement is direct evidence of unequal benefits.
- Counterarguments: marketisation proponents argue competition raises standards and that some academies and free schools improve outcomes in disadvantaged areas, increasing choice for parents.
- Policy mitigations and complexity: admissions codes, fair access agreements, pupil premium funding and cooperative guidance can limit inequalities, as Item B mentions cooperation on admissions.
- Methodological caution: measured inequalities in published performance may reflect intake differences rather than school effectiveness; the 'dark figure' of unmeasured support or progress matters.
- A balanced conclusion might argue marketisation has increased some forms of inequality, particularly where oversight is weak and socioeconomically advantaged parents can exploit choice, but it can also improve opportunities in specific cases; the net effect depends on policy design and regulation.

Education Policy: Selection, Marketisation and Privatisation - Worksheets, Questions and Revision