![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
A policy of school choice has, in various shapes, been implemented in educational systems across the world during the last decades. Drawing on various empirical and theoretical sources, the aim of this article is to distinguish the key defining elements of the Swedish school choice policy and to present and discuss some of its outcomes in terms of segregation, costs, and student achievements. Thus I show that the policy design contains some peculiarities since it nourishes both a strong market‐orientation and an equally strong market‐skepticism. Regarding the outcomes I show that the research is pervaded by ambiguity and uncertainty regarding whether the policy has delivered its promises or, on the contrary, it has worsened the state of education by increasing segregation and crowding out some schools of their socially strongest students. Finally, I argue that due to its peculiarities the school choice policy in itself so far has, surprisingly or not, had a relatively small impact on the overall educational quality and equity in Sweden. I also argue that since the market forces are definitely gaining the upper hand under the current liberal‐conservative government, we can soon expect some decisive changes in the way school choice operates and with what results in Sweden.
Notes
1. However, the international is mostly confined to literature from Anglo‐Saxon countries (USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada) and from some other countries (Holland, Belgium, South Africa and Germany). Recently, interest has been growing in educational policy changes in, e.g., China, Chile, and in post‐communist Europe (see Plank and Sykes Citation2003).
2. My intention is not to present the school choice policy designs across the nations, or a specific research about them (e.g., about charter or private schools in the USA, private schools in the UK, denominational schools in Holland, etc. or the organization of public education in these countries for that matter) but rather to present how a number of researchers have described and analyzed the market metaphor as a decisive propelling force in school development or as a policy cementing and deepening the rift between the haves and the have nots.
3. The work done by Coleman (Citation1966, Citation1990; Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore Citation1982; Coleman and Hoffer Citation1987) has been repeatedly pointed out by the advocates of private education as an empirical proof that the alternative school forms are desirable.
4. ‘Provider capture occurs, according to this [neoliberal] perspective, when well‐organized public‐interest groups such as teachers’ unions ‘capture’ agencies and twist public policy in their favor at the expense of the broader public interest. Transaction, or agency, costs arise in ensuring that the incentives of employees who deliver public services are aligned with legislated policy objectives. To avoid provider capture and to minimize transaction costs in the context of education, such thinking calls for minimizing the role of the central government … encouraging competition among schools, giving parents and students maximum choice in determining which school to attend … weakening the power of unions …’ (Ladd Citation2003, 8).
5. Independent or free (sometimes even called private) schools in Sweden are run by private interests, ethnic and religious organizations, and business companies. They are obliged to follow the national curriculum and are forbidden to take fees from their students. They are, like their municipal counterparts, completely financed by tax‐payers.
6. After an initial period when students opting for independent schools were allowed to take with them only 85% of their voucher – while those opting for other public schools were allowed to bring with them the whole voucher – since the middle of the 1990s these terms are equalized.
7. Since 2008 there is a new national authority, although created out of the core of NEA’s inspection unit, performing inspections in public and independent schools alike in the entire country.
8. PISA stands for ‘Program for International Student Assessment’ conducted among OECD and comparative countries (around 40 in total) on 15‐year‐old students’ achievement in Mathematics, Natural Science, and reading. TIMSS stands for ‘Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study’ and is a comparative study conducted in 66 countries across the world. Results from both are widely discussed in the public forum, although often in pessimistic and, to use a rather strong word, depressive style asserting how the Swedish education is hopelessly behind, e.g., Finland and South Korea when it comes to results in Mathematics.
9. In order to exemplify this claim I will take an example from my personal experience. Having contacts with leading politicians from the Department of Education and even given a lecture to the members of the parliament from a leading conservative party in the country in which I presented some critical views and empirical evidence about the practical operations of school choice policy I encountered the same comment: ‘Very interesting and thought provoking indeed, but we believe this is the right policy anyway.’ It was more than obvious that this belief was not based on other research but on a pure ideological conviction already sketched by Milton Friedman back in the 1960s.
