Edited by Angela Tang METIS and Harriet Craft Volume 2, 2011 / © IPPR The journal of IPPR@universities, the student thinktank network EDUCATION Contents Foreword. Angela Tang and Harriet Craft...................................................................................... 1 the.philosophy.of.education:.How.principles.conflict. Alexander Gann........................................................................................................... 3 the.importance.of.being.educated:.Why.equality.matters.in.education. Nadezhda Borislavova Buhova..................................................................................... 6 the Scandinavian.model:.the.history.and.success.of.free.schools.in Sweden. Will Vittery..................................................................................................................11 the.development.of.the.national.curriculum.and.the.case.for.localisation.. Jonathan Goggs.........................................................................................................16 Higher.education.in.the.UK:.An.appraisal.of.the.status.quo. Parama Chakravorty...................................................................................................20 the.case.against.a.graduate.tax. Joshua Scarlett..........................................................................................................25 new.ideas.for.funding.universities.. Michael Conn.............................................................................................................29 Higher.education.and.access.for.all. Victoria Shreeve.........................................................................................................35 ABOUT IPPR ABOUT IPPR@UnIveRsities IPPR, the Institute for Public Policy Research, is the UK’s IPPR@universities involves the formation of partnerships leading progressive thinktank. We produce rigorous research between IPPR and student-led thinktank societies. The aim and innovative policy ideas for a fair, democratic and of the initiative is to extend our networks and draw students sustainable world. into the policymaking domain. We are open and independent in how we work, and with For the students participating in the IPPR@universities offices in London and the North of England, IPPR spans a programme, we believe it offers an opportunity for them to full range of local and national policy debates. Our enhance their understanding of policymaking and politics, to international partnerships extend IPPR’s influence and see their thinking reach a wider audience, and to build their reputation across the world. enthusiasm and skills in policymaking, potentially equipping IPPR them for a future career in the area. 4th Floor For more, visit http://www.ippr.org/universities 14 Buckingham Street London WC2N 6DF T: +44 (0)20 7470 6100 E: [email protected] www.ippr.org Registered charity no. 800065 September 2011. © 2011 The contents and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) only. Foreword Angela Tang and This year’s edition of Metis shows how far the IPPR@universities Harriet Craft programme has come in the last year. While last year’s journal Co-editors symbolised the partnership between Warwick University and IPPR, this year’s journal sees the collaboration of ideas between students from both Warwick and Sheffield universities. This collaboration highlights the beginning of IPPR@universities as a national network of student thinktanks. Alongside Sheffield, King’s College London also joined the programme in early 2011. Through the IPPR@universities programme, all three universities and IPPR aim to help students throughout the United Kingdom to be connected to the front line of thinktank research and policy analysis. Metis aims to provide students with the opportunity to engage with the policy process and gives them a unique platform to express opinions, critiques and solutions. It also has created a support network between political thinkers at a university level across the country, and also with experts in the policy and thinktank field. This platform is particularly important given the current political climate that faces students, academics and experts alike. Our choice of this year’s theme –education – emphasises the importance of a constructive dialogue between students, regardless of degree discipline and background, on policy matters. Education is arguably one of the most important factors in improving people’s lives. This past year has seen anger and a clear backlash against the increase in tuition fees and reduction of the education maintenance allowance. The passion and determination seen in both education receivers and education providers highlights how contentious the issue is and proves that a decent standard of universal education is something worth fighting for. The journal is divided into three main groupings that tackle different areas of the education debate. The first section is related to the philosophy of education. Gann’s article explores the philosophy of education, and what role this takes. The second section is a little larger, and explores the area of compulsory education. Buhova explores why equality in education is vital and looks to the international community for answers. Vittery continues this international theme, and analyses the Scandinavian model of education to see if there are any clear improvements on the British system. The last article in this section is by Goggs and explores the debate surrounding the increased localisation or centralisation of our compulsory education system. The third and final section is on universities specifically. Chakravorty’s article mirrors Buhova’s exploration of the need for METIS 2011 equality and fair access within our university system. The next three 1 articles each explore the contentious issue of funding for universities. Scarlett explores the possibility of a graduate tax, Conn analyses the relationship between the private sector and course type, and finally Shreeve analyses the overall debate around the funding of higher education. The creation and continuation of Metis and the rest of IPPR@ universities programme has given like-minded students across the country an opportunity to link up, under invaluable guidance from the IPPR team. It has been a pleasure working with all areas of the team and we would both like to thank everyone for their hard work to ensure that the standard of work produced is professional and of a high level. We would also like to give special thanks to the Politics and International Studies Department at Warwick University and The Exchange at Sheffield University for their continued support. Lastly we would like to thank the following individuals who participated as members of the editorial board, dedicating their time to help with the publication of this issue: Mark Ballinger, Dalia Ben-Galim, Laura Chappell, Glenn Gottfried, Jenni Viitanen, Jonathan Clifton, Leo Ringer, Michael Johnson, Nick Pearce, Rick Muir, Tamsin Crimmens, Tim Finch, Tony Dolphin and Will Paxton. METIS 2011 2 THe philosophy oF education How PrinCiPles ConFlict Alexander Gann Examining education from a philosophical point of view throws up a Economics, politics and number of questions, including, the relationship between parents, international studies, University of Warwick children and society, the fundamental objectives of education, and the nature of distribution of resources. In short, thinking about education means thinking about the very same questions with which much of political philosophy is concerned. Elaborating extensively on these themes would stretch the limits of this short essay, so it will be constrained to giving a brief outline of some of the issues that lie at the heart of talking about education from a philosophical point of view, touching on the aims of education, on parents’ influence on education and, finally, and on the issue of equal opportunity. Parents, children and society Before talking about how education should be distributed or who is to determine its contents and take responsibility for its supervision, it is of interest to define who ought to be educated and why. Society is composed of individuals, each with his or her own preferences and a concept of the life they consider is worth pursuing. There is no reason to suppose that these individuals are not equally able to make choices that will determine their path through life, or that other people are in a superior position to make these choices for them. We can therefore grant the individual a large amount of autonomy in order for them to make their own decisions. Brighouse (2006) sees this as a prerequisite for an individual being able to fully weigh the implications of alternative lifestyles and being content with the educated choices they make. However, the individual only has a complete understanding of their desires and tastes upon reaching adulthood – children lack the capability to make fully autonomous decisions. Education is therefore necessary in order for children to attain the maturity of adulthood and to be able to put themselves in a position to make judicious decisions about their own lives. Furthermore, education enables them to take up jobs and participate in civil society. Society itself has an interest in having educated citizens, as an educated citizenry is a necessity for guaranteeing a stable and active society. Arguments for education can therefore be made both in terms of empowering the individual as well as the strengthening of civil society. who decides what