Outsourcing Trouble: A Home International Comparison of Alternative Provision Across the UK.

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
British Journal of Educational Studies Pub Date : 2025-05-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/00071005.2025.2481869
Sally Power, Jemma Bridgeman, Gavin Duffy, Gillean McCluskey, Alice Tawell, Annie Taylor
{"title":"Outsourcing Trouble: A Home International Comparison of Alternative Provision Across the UK.","authors":"Sally Power, Jemma Bridgeman, Gavin Duffy, Gillean McCluskey, Alice Tawell, Annie Taylor","doi":"10.1080/00071005.2025.2481869","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper explores the complex landscape of alternative provision across the UK and its implications for school exclusion. Drawing on interviews with over 400 professionals, parents, and pupils in ten selected local authorities in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, we find marked differences in the scale and nature of provision. These differences reflect the UK's diverging political economies of education. England's provision reflects its preference for quasi-market mechanisms. Scotland's reflects a commitment to inclusive education. Wales supports public provision but bears the legacy of historic control by England, while Northern Ireland's landscape is almost entirely publicly provided. The data suggest that the scale and diversity of alternative provision does not reduce school exclusions. England has the highest rates of exclusion and the greater number and diversity of providers. Scotland has lower rates of exclusions and fewer providers. It may even be that the availability of alternative provision creates its own demand. However, the relationship between exclusion rates and alternative provision is not straightforward, nor are its implications for educational parity. The paper concludes by arguing there is a pressing need for research on the opportunity costs of alternative provision for young people and the public sector.</p>","PeriodicalId":47509,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Educational Studies","volume":"73 4","pages":"429-448"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12327216/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Educational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2025.2481869","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper explores the complex landscape of alternative provision across the UK and its implications for school exclusion. Drawing on interviews with over 400 professionals, parents, and pupils in ten selected local authorities in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, we find marked differences in the scale and nature of provision. These differences reflect the UK's diverging political economies of education. England's provision reflects its preference for quasi-market mechanisms. Scotland's reflects a commitment to inclusive education. Wales supports public provision but bears the legacy of historic control by England, while Northern Ireland's landscape is almost entirely publicly provided. The data suggest that the scale and diversity of alternative provision does not reduce school exclusions. England has the highest rates of exclusion and the greater number and diversity of providers. Scotland has lower rates of exclusions and fewer providers. It may even be that the availability of alternative provision creates its own demand. However, the relationship between exclusion rates and alternative provision is not straightforward, nor are its implications for educational parity. The paper concludes by arguing there is a pressing need for research on the opportunity costs of alternative provision for young people and the public sector.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

外包的麻烦:英国国内的国际比较。
本文探讨了整个英国替代条款的复杂景观及其对学校排斥的影响。通过对英格兰、北爱尔兰、苏格兰和威尔士10个选定的地方政府的400多名专业人士、家长和学生的采访,我们发现在提供的规模和性质上存在显著差异。这些差异反映了英国教育政治经济的分化。英国的规定反映了其对准市场机制的偏好。苏格兰的教育反映了对全纳教育的承诺。威尔士支持公共供应,但历史上由英格兰控制的遗产,而北爱尔兰的景观几乎完全是公共提供的。数据表明,替代性教育的规模和多样性并没有减少学校排斥现象。英格兰的排斥率最高,提供者的数量和多样性也更大。苏格兰的排除率较低,提供者也较少。甚至可能是,可供选择的供应创造了自己的需求。然而,排斥率和替代条款之间的关系并不直接,其对教育平等的影响也不直接。论文的结论是,迫切需要对年轻人和公共部门的替代供应的机会成本进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Educational Studies
British Journal of Educational Studies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.30%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Educational Studies is one of the UK foremost international education journals. It publishes scholarly, research-based articles on education which draw particularly upon historical, philosophical and sociological analysis and sources.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信