ABSTRACT
Not only does it accentuate inequality and deprivation, leading towards a dispirited and hopeless educational environment, but there is a strong probability that it will in many cases contribute significantly to the many invidious decisions which must be taken by LEAs as to which schools should be closed down and when. Those decisions are all the more invidious because the most vulnerable schools-usually those located in run-down inner-city areas-are very often seen as serving a highly significant community purpose. This is not in any way to argue that inner-city schools should never be closed: clearly hard decisions of this nature must be taken by virtually every LEA in a time of falling rolls. What is, however, argued, is that these decisions should not be entirely ‘market-driven’ as now largely tends to be the case through the implementation of the dual policies of open enrolment and formula-funding based on pupil numbers. A balanced and sensitive social policy approach would undoubtedly include consideration of pupil numbers and expressed parental preferences, but would also give great weight to an evaluation of the social cost to the community of any proposed closure. The market forces ideal may appear superficially attractive as offering choice, freedom and direct accountability, but it carries great potential danger for many schools and for many communities, offering only very limited protection for the weak, exacerbating the impact of expenditure constraints upon schools with diminishing pupil numbers, and undermining the capacity of LEAs for rational planning for the long or even the medium term.
