Tooley and Dixon imply in their "research" that the free market is the best way to provide a decent education ("Private need not be a middle-class preserve", October 9).
They say private schools are better than state schools. Why is this? Is it because they are largely populated by privileged pupils taught in smaller classes with better resources? So when all schools are privatised, all pupils will end up in smaller classes with better resources (and, of course, better teachers)?
OK, let's privatise schools. Entrepreneurs (or heads) vie for customers (pupils), by convincing shareholders (parents) to invest in their businesses (schools). The employees (teachers) are profit driven and will be fired if they fail to meet their targets. Businesses will be shut if they don't make a profit (get good results). What could go wrong?
Richard Hand, Little Heath School, Reading.