Skip to main content

We know the score with science

I read with interest that Science Community Representing Education (Score) is arguing that the government should continue to fund 16-19 education on a per-qualification basis ("Funding overhaul could force schools to drop science A levels", 11 January). Current funding reforms will return us to the historical norm and restore per-student funding post-16, in line with the rest of schooling. Score believes that this will reduce schools' willingness to offer science A levels.

The empirical evidence, however, does not support Score's argument. On the contrary, it indicates that per-qualification funding has been bad for the uptake of science as well as for the quality of post-16 education more generally.

A qualification-based system provides schools with strong incentives - but not to offer the "best-funded" qualification. Instead, it encourages them to offer the most "profitable" courses. As I and others have found, this system has a pernicious effect on quality.

Alison Wolf, Sir Roy Griffiths professor of public sector management at King's College London and author of the Wolf review.

Log in or register for FREE to continue reading.

It only takes a moment and you'll get access to more news, plus courses, jobs and teaching resources tailored to you