Margaret Thatcher's Case Study

“The flaw in Margaret as Education Secretary was the same flaw that became apparent in her as Prime Minister. Everything had to begin, continue and end with a vigorous argument. It is not always the best way of getting things done” (Norman St John-Stevas, cited in Aitken 2014, p. 126). These are the words of Junior Minister at the Department of Education and Science (DES) who later wrote: “if only she’d occasionally let them win a point or two! But no, she just had to crush them into the ground and grind them into little pieces” (Ibid., p.130). It is important to mention, however, that such statements represent only one face of Margaret Thatcher. Also, most of her criticism was aimed at high-ranking officials at DES because “Below this level,

She was able to raise the school leaving age to sixteen, despite of strong objections from Treasury. Likewise, she managed to preserve future of the Open University about which she was convicted it can “offer graduation opportunities to mature students at low cost” (Aitken 2014, p. 128). Another of her priorities was the preservation of the grammar schools. According to the section 13 of the 1944 Education Act, she, as the Secretary of State, had a limited power to withhold approval for school reorganization schemes. Out of 3500 schemes she examined that were submitted to LEAs, she intervened in 326, and finally proclaimed that she managed to preserve 94 grammar schools. Some of them, however, were later turned into comprehensive schools, which further reduced the number. These achievements were noticed by the then Prime Minister Ted Heath, who supported her high spending attitude. At the end of 1972, Margaret Thatcher published a White Paper called Education: A Framework for Expansion. The document “identified five areas – nursery education, school building, staffing standards in schools, teacher training and higher education” (Moore 2013, p. 226). Her plans were widely supported by many politicians, some of them formerly disagreeing with her political agenda. As a result, she regained her former political fame and “achieved her stardom by going from wicked witch to heroine of

228), which means that the school “ought to have the same independence and the same freedom to conduct its affairs as it thinks best. The head of the school ought to decide the curriculum, the rules of conduct, the appointment of teachers and the selection of pupils” (Ibid., p. 237). But the development of education in England after the Second World War indicated a clear contrast. “The connection between school and family has been weakened by a growing disposition to think of schools as part of the state, because most schools have become parts of a publicly administered and funded ‘system of education’” (Ibid., p. 228 – 229). This ‘system of education’ refers to local education authorities that were established at the beginning of the 20th century. Further shift away from family and towards the state was to be seen in 1944 Education Act and its notorious threefold division of secondary schools and eleven plus examinations. It caused that “by 1979, some ninety-three per cent of all schoolchildren were attending schools maintained by the state, which made it seem reasonable to regard schools as part of the state” (Ibid., p. 229). Moreover, the practice showed that the performance of most of the state schools was very