Frictions between formal education policy and actual school choice: Case studies in an international comparative perspective.

1. FRICTIONS BETWEEN FORMAL EDUCATION POLICY
AND ACTUAL SCHOOL CHOICE: CASE STUDIES IN AN
INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
CHRISTINE TEELKEN, GEERT DRIESSEN and FREDERIK SMIT
Abstract – This contribution is based on comparative case studies of secondary
schools in England, the Netherlands and Scotland. The authors conclude that
although opportunities for school choice are offered in a formal sense in each of the
locations studied, in certain cases choice is not particularly encouraged. In order to
explain this disparity between formal education policy and actual school choice, they
identified seven areas of friction which determine school choice. This approach
allowed a more detailed and accurate view of the operation of school choice on a
local, day-to-day basis. Active or passive discouragement of choice became apparent
in factors such as availability of transport and information; bureaucratic procedures;
strictly enforced admission criteria; and lack of educational diversity.
Zusammenfassung – UNGLEICHHEIT ZWISCHEN FORMALER POLITIK
UND TATSA¨ CHLICHER SCHULWAHL: FALLSTUDIEN IN EINER INTER-
NATIONAL VERGLEICHENDEN PERSPEKTIVE – Dieser Beitrag basiert auf
vergleichenden Fallstudien weiterfu¨ hrender Schulen in England, den Niederlanden
und Schottland. Die Autoren kommen zu dem Schluss, dass, obwohl die Mo¨ glichkei-
ten der Schulwahl im formalen Sinne an jedem der untersuchten Standorte angeboten
werden, in bestimmten Fa¨ llen die Wahl nicht in besonderer Weise unterstu¨ tzt wird.
Um diese Ungleichheit zwischen formaler Bildungspolitik und tatsa¨ chlicher Schulwahl
zu erkla¨ ren, haben sie sieben Faktoren identifiziert, welche die Schulwahl bestimmen.
Dieser Zugang erlaubt eine detailliertere und genauere Sicht auf den Vorgang der
Schulwahl auf o¨ rtlicher und ta¨ glicher Grundlage. Aktive oder passive Entmutigung
bei der Wahl wurde bei Faktoren wie Transportmo¨ glichkeit und Informationszugang,
bu¨ rokratischen Verfahren, streng angewandten Zulassungskriterien sowie Mangel an
erzieherischer Mannigfaltigkeit deutlich.
Re´ sume´ – DISPARITE´ ENTRE POLITIQUE FORMELLE ET CHOIX RE´ EL
D’UNE E´ COLE : E´ TUDES DE CAS DANS UNE PERSPECTIVE COMPARA-
TIVE INTERNATIONALE – Cette contribution est base´ e sur des e´ tudes compara-
tives de cas d’e´ coles secondaires en Angleterre, aux Pays-bas et en E´ cosse. Les
auteurs en concluent que, bien que des opportunite´ s pour le choix d’une e´ cole soient
offertes sur un plan formel dans chacun des emplacements e´ tudie´ s, dans certains cas
le choix n’est pas particulie` rement encourage´ . Afin d’expliquer cette disparite´ entre la
politique formelle d’e´ ducation et le choix re´ el d’une e´ cole, ils ont identifie´ sept fac-
teurs qui de´ terminent le choix d’une e´ cole. Cette approche a permis une vue plus
de´ taille´ e et plus juste de l’ope´ ration de choix d’une e´ cole sur une base locale, au jour
le jour. Un de´ couragement actif ou passif du choix est apparu dans des facteurs com-
me la disponibilite´ de transports et l’information ; les proce´ dures bureaucratiques, les
crite` res d’admission applique´ s strictement et le manque de diversite´ e´ ducative.
International Review of Education (2005) 51:35–58 Ó Springer 2005
DOI 10.1007/s11159-005-0590-0

2. Resumen – DISPARIDAD ENTRE LA POLI´ TICA FORMAL Y UNA VERDA-
DERA ELECCIO´ N ESCOLAR: ESTUDIOS DE CASOS EN UNA PERSPECTI-
VA COMPARATIVA INTERNACIONAL Esta contribucio´ n esta´ basada en
estudios de casos de escuelas secundarias realizados en Inglaterra, Paı´ses Bajos y
Escocia. Los autores llegan a la conclusio´ n de que, pese a que en un sentido formal
en cada una de las regiones estudiadas existan las oportunidades de eleccio´ n escolar,
en ciertos casos esta eleccio´ n no se fomenta en gran medida. Para explicar esta dis-
paridad entre una polı´tica de educacio´ n formal y una verdadera eleccio´ n escolar, los
autores identificaron siete factores que determinan la eleccio´ n escolar. Este enfoque
permitio´ echar una mirada ma´ s detallada y precisa al funcionamiento de la eleccio´ n
escolar, sobre una base local y cotidiana. El desaliento activo y pasivo de la eleccio´ n
se hicieron evidentes en factores tales como disponibilidad de medios de transporte e
informaciones, procedimientos burocra´ ticos, criterios de admisio´ n sumamente severos
y falta de diversidad en la oferta educativa.
Since 1980 the education systems of several European countries, as well as
the United States and New Zealand, have shown a tendency towards restruc-
tured and deregulated state schooling, often related to greater parental
choice. In general, this trend has been part of a greater drive to bring public
services more in line with the private sector. This study attempts to bridge
the gap between the wider theoretical picture of international educational
reform and the actual experience of individual schools and their local choice
situations. It seeks to provide insight into differences between the national
policy framework and the actual circumstances of choice as experienced by
schools and students. The move from primary to secondary education is
emphasised, as this is a crucial step in a child’s education.
The public debate on the desirability, fairness and consequences of choice
has been extensive and has received new impetus with the publication of pol-
icy studies such as that by the Dutch Education Council (van Dyck 2001)
undertaken at the request of the Dutch Secretary for Education. In Britain,
social inclusion and exclusion in relation to schools has been a major issue
36 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

3. for the New Labour government (Whitty, Power and Halpin 1998; Whitty
2001).
Some advocates of choice (Chubb and Moe 1990; Glenn 1989; Nathan
1993; Raywid 1987) argue that choice and the quasi-market of education
offer great benefits, especially for disadvantaged students. Critics (Whitty
et al. 1998) suggest that such reforms actually increase inequality between
schools. Tooley (1997) provides us with an overview of the different opin-
ions: whether choice leads to inequalities and reinforces social division (Ball
1993; Edwards and Whitty 1992; Gewirtz, Ball and Bowe 1993a, b, 1995;
Ranson 1993; Walford 1994; Woods 1992), or whether we should see choice
as a way to improve educational opportunities (Holmes, DeSimone and
Rupp 2003; Lee, Croninger and Smith 1996). Whitty and Power (1997)
reviewed the whole package of reforms introduced by the British government
and are concerned about increased inequality in education provision result-
ing from the commitment to market forces (see also Bagley 1996; Gillborn
1997; Gorard, Taylor and Fitz 2002; Tomlinson 1997).
Conceptual framework and research method
After decades of discussion, the actual consequences of greater market influ-
ence and choice are still undetermined. The general increase in inequality in
education can partly be explained by a disparity between the formal avail-
ability of choice and its actual availability on a day-to-day basis.
Bearing in mind the unclear role played by increased market forces in
education systems, this study aims to analyze three fundamental factors in
the provision of local choice in education: the disparity between formal and
actual choice situations; the presence of the market; and whether the market
leads to increased differences (i.e., unequal opportunity) or increased diver-
sity in secondary education. Two distinct forms of diversity are involved
here: educational diversity, by which we mean different educational philoso-
phies, schooling programmes or actual educational content; and institutional
diversity, by which we mean the different types of schools available, in terms
of finance, foundation and governance. It can be argued that educational
diversity prevents inequality in a school system since no single type of school
suits every student (Teelken 1998; Tenbusch and Garet 1993). However,
Adnett and Davies (2000) demonstrated that competition between schools
does not necessarily lead to greater diversity, but rather tends to lead
to greater curricular conformity. Gorard (2000) concluded that patterns of
segregation among local schools can at least partly be attributed to the
organisation of these schools and the way appeals are dealt with.
This study puts forward the view that the disparity between formal and
actual choice opportunities can explain unintended consequences of making
school choice. There is always some inconsistency between formal policy
goals and their execution. However, by comparing local choice situations
37Formal policy and actual school choice

4. from an international perspective, it is possible to expose a considerable
degree of inconsistency. Generally, the central and local authorities approve
of school choice in theory, but in the actual functioning of choice on a day-
to-day basis a different attitude is revealed.
The market can act as a good coordinating mechanism in education; it
allows diversity, creativity and new experiments in education (Teelken 1999).
Constraints on the functioning of the market mechanism have a much
greater impact on the school system than formal policy statements. The gaps
identified between policy and practice help us to find a clearer picture of
how choice actually functions.
This study compares different contexts of choice in the Netherlands,
England and Scotland. The Netherlands has always offered a large measure
of school choice, since catchment areas for secondary schools were never
officially established. In the final year of primary school, pupils choose
between the available secondary schools. In England and Scotland, school
choice has historically been more restricted, but opportunities have been
increasing over the last decade. Choice is made possible by means of placing
requests and, increasingly, by open enrolment. However, the Scottish school
system is arguably more uniform than most other school systems in Europe
(Echols, McPherson and Willms 1990).
In order to investigate and compare the availability of choice in the Neth-
erlands, England and Scotland, three variables were identified.
1. Demand for choice, that is, whether choice is actually provided in terms of
information and transport.
2. Supply of choice, that is, the encouragement of choice, including formal
policy in relation to choice and the degree of diversity in secondary educa-
tion.
3. The regulative structure of choice, which includes school autonomy. Dis-
tinction can be made between financial and administrative autonomy.
These three variables can be used to investigate the disparity between the
formal availability of choice and its actual operation on the ground. Within
the variable demand for choice, distinctions are most clearly visible in the
provision of information and transport, since these factors influence ability
to choose an alternative to a designated school. For the variable supply of
choice, we look at the opportunities to choose in terms of the availability of
a diverse supply of schools and the accessibility of these schools. It is likely
that less-educated, informed or assertive parents will not use their right to
choose, as the bureaucratic procedures may seem inaccessible. Within the
category regulative structure of choice, we look at the extent to which schools
have the autonomy to respond to the wishes and expectations of parents
(i.e., their financial and administrative autonomy), as this determines the
functioning of the educational market mechanism. We present our findings
with reference to these three variables, but also in terms of seven basic areas
38 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

5. Table1.Areasoffrictioninthreecategoriesofvariables
TermofanalysisDescription
ADemandforchoice
1Facilitationofchoice
1aAvailabilityoftransportTheextenttowhichtransportorcoverageoftransportcostsisavailabletostudents
fortravellingtodesignatedandnon-designatedschools
1bAvailabilityofinformationTheamountofgeneralandoutcome-basedinformationaboutschoolsandabout
theschoolchoiceprocessavailabletocurrentandpotentialstudentsandtheirparents
BSupplyofchoice
2Diversityofsupply,includinginvolvement
intheeducationalcurriculum
Varietyofeducationalprovision(educationaldiversity)andthedifferentadministrative
typesofschoolsavailable(institutionaldiversity)
3FormalopportunitiesforschoolchoiceTheactualopportunitytochoosebetweendifferentschools
4AdmissioncriteriaforstudentsAbsolutecriteriarefertocertaincriteriastudentshavetofulfilinordertoenterthe
school,intermsofcatchmentareaoracademicability.Relativecriteriaapplyonlyif
therearemoreapplicationsthanplacesavailableataschool
CRegulativestructureofchoice
5FinancialautonomyAdistinctioncanbemadebetweenthefinancialbasisandthemethodoffunding
6AdministrativeautonomyThedegreeofautonomyexperiencedbytheindividualschools
39Formal policy and actual school choice

6. of friction in the operation of school choice. Table 1 provides an overview of
our analytical model.
Statistical generalisation is not possible in a case study, and that is not its
purpose. What is important is whether and to what extent findings can be
used to support a valid general theory. When generalising to a theory, pre-
dictions are first made on the basis of theory and then confirmation for these
predictions is sought. The local choice situations – geographical areas with a
number of primary and secondary schools – were selected so as to allow for
generalisation. Each of the areas chosen is one of high population density.
This ensures a choice between two or more secondary schools within a rea-
sonable distance. The local choice situations (the unit of analysis) do not
have to be representative of their country, but are merely examples of a typi-
cal choice situation in either country. The internal and construct validity
were improved using the following statistical devices: standardisation of
interviews (to avoid contamination); systematic data analysis (to avoid
biased viewpoints); and the use of categories of differences.
In order to ensure comparability between the schools studied, three sec-
ondary schools providing a similar educational curriculum were selected
within each of the local choice situations. In each of the countries, the
most common types of school were chosen. In the Netherlands, the three
secondary schools selected all had a MAVO-HAVO-VWO curriculum (junior
general-secondary education, senior general-secondary education and
pre-university education). In England and Scotland, mixed comprehensive
state schools were selected, with similar educational provision. Table 2
outlines some general characteristics of the schools included in the study.
The codes introduced in this table (E-1, Sc-2 etc.) are used throughout the
text to refer to the specific schools.
The case studies were conducted by means of semi-structured interviews
with stakeholders from the local authorities and the three schools, including
school principals and members of the school board; a questionnaire given to
a sample of first-year students; and analysis of documents produced by the
schools and the local authorities.
These case studies were carried out in 1996 and 1997. More recent litera-
ture and documents have also been used. Each of the three local choice situ-
ations is described briefly within its national choice context, and an
international comparison between the three local situations is presented for
each of the seven areas of friction.
Three cases: An international comparison
The Netherlands: School choice in Rotterdam
The situation in Rotterdam is a typical example of how school choice oper-
ates in the Netherlands. There is freedom of school choice, no catchment
40 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

7. Table2.Thecase-studyschools
CodeGeneralcharacteristicsNumberofinterviewsNumberofstudentsNumberoffeeder
primaryschools
TheNetherlands:Rotterdam
Localgovernment1
Nl-1Publicschool(offeringGreekandLatin),relatively
highparentalcontribution,middle-classintake,many
extracurricularactivities
3150080–90
Nl-2Publicschool(offeringEnglishstreamandbilingualVWO),
highpercentageethnicminoritystudents
2120070–75
Nl-3Private,Protestantschool,highpercentageofethnic
minoritystudents,catersforstudentswithspecialneeds
275045–50
England:Nottingham
Localrepresentatives2
E-1Communityschool(offeringA-levels),goodfacilities,
middle-classarea
311736
E-2Communityschool(offeringA-levels),formedbymerger
withgrammarschool,goodreputation,traditional
focusondiscipline,oversubscribed
113574
E-3Foundationschool,teachesuptoGCSE,formed
bymergerbetweenboys’andgirls’school
25622
Scotland:Dundee
RepresentativesofEducationAuthority2
Sc-1EAschool,deprivedneighbourhood,receivesextra
funding,newprincipalattemptingtoimprove
qualityofeducation
26113(+2)*
Sc-2EAschool(RomanCatholic),providesreligiouseducation27364(+10)*
Sc-3EAschool(withaspecialunit),hasseenan
increaseinsizeduetobeing‘secondchoice’toavery
popularoversubscribedschool
18893(+7)*
Totalnumber
ofinterviews
23
*Thefirstnumberreferstotheofficialfeederprimaries,thenumberinbracketsreferstoadditionalprimaryschoolsfromwhichplacing
requestshavebeenmadeinthepast.
41Formal policy and actual school choice

8. areas and a wide diversity of secondary schools. Public and denominational
schools receive equivalent central funding (Driessen and van der Slik 2001).
All schools are allowed to request a reasonable, voluntary parental contribu-
tion for extra activities. Rotterdam is the largest city in the Netherlands
(600,000 inhabitants). It is an industrial city with a high percentage of ethnic
minorities. Furthermore, all Dutch religious denominations have schools
there.
Public education in Rotterdam was given new impetus when the ultimate
responsibility for schools was given to school management. One of the aims
of this reform was to improve the transition from primary to secondary edu-
cation. This initiative was linked to central government policies to improve
education, but its ‘businesslike’ approach was unique. Schools for secondary
education were viewed as medium-sized companies with consumers expecting
a high-quality product. This suggested a shift from a collective idea of public
education towards the idea that every school is unique and independent.
Denominational schools (publicly funded and privately managed) in Rotter-
dam were not given as much encouragement to raise their profiles as were
public schools. However, both public and denominational schools experi-
enced a similar policy shift from central government towards more financial
and administrative autonomy.
England: School choice in Nottingham
Nottingham is a large city in the East Midlands of England with 280,000
inhabitants. The Local Education Authority (LEA) assigns students to
schools on the basis of catchment areas and uses a feeder system of primary
schools. Despite this highly controlled form of allocation, school choice has
been formally promoted by a succession of Education Acts (1988, 1992,
1993), and schools are financed on a per-student basis. The feeder system
means that several primary schools are affiliated to one secondary school
and the combined catchment areas of the primary schools form the total
catchment area of the secondary school. This choice situation is certainly not
the most common for England as a whole, since only 25% of researched
community schools still use this form of student allocation (White, Gorard,
Fitz and Taylor 2001).
Admission to community schools and voluntary-run schools is adminis-
tered by the local Area Education Office. Community and voluntary-run
schools have a catchment area defined geographically or by their contribu-
tory feeder schools. The 1994 Nottinghamshire County Council brochure
(NCC 1994) states that attending a local school is attractive because
‘‘most parents wish their child to attend a school as near to their home
as possible’’. Furthermore, a place is reserved and consequently guaran-
teed at the appropriate school for children living in the catchment area or
for children attending a feeder school. This school is known as the desig-
nated school.
42 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

9. If parents wish their child to attend a school other than that designated,
they are asked to complete a preference form requesting a place at an alter-
native school. This form must be submitted 9 months in advance. Prefer-
ences are normally approved if places at the requested school are available.
If more placing requests are received than there are places available, a list of
criteria is applied to establish an order of priority. In the event of refusal,
the Area Education Officer provides information about how to make an
appeal or suggests alternative schools.
The Local Education Authority believes that the feeder system guarantees
certainty for parents and students as well as schools; that it allows students
to stay together with their friends; and that it is convenient for parents, as it
keeps travelling distances short, which is safe and cheap. The LEA represen-
tative we interviewed explained that generally only very mobile families
desire anything other than their designated school (see also Gewirtz et al.,
1995).
In Nottingham, there does not seem to be a great deal of school choice.
However, some recent developments, such as a White Paper entitled ‘‘Choice
and Diversity’’ and the increased powers of the governing bodies may pro-
mote choice.
Scotland: School choice in Dundee
The school choice situation in Dundee is not substantially different from that
in any other city in Scotland. Dundee, situated on the east coast in the Tay-
side Region, is the fourth largest city in Scotland (150,000 inhabitants). Two
types of catchment areas exist: one for non-denominational schools and one
for Roman Catholic schools.
A lot has been written about the distinctiveness of the Scottish education
system, which is regarded as fundamental to Scottish culture. The system is
founded on democratic and egalitarian values. Compared to England, choice
is less widely exercised. Generally, the links between secondary and primary
feeder schools are even stronger (Campbell 2000).
Parents receive information about the designated school for their child.
The principal of their future secondary school is automatically informed of
the student’s progress in order to arrange suitable courses. However, placing
requests to alternative schools are seldom refused, and if so only because the
desired school is oversubscribed. Parents can then opt to put their child on a
waiting list or to lodge an appeal. The Education Authority may also suggest
an alternative school.
Based on our interview with the responsible officer at the Education
Authority in Dundee, it became clear that although parental right to choose
is recognised, local policies encourage parents to send their children to the
school that serves their local community. Sometimes the Education Author-
ity facilitates choice without the need for placing requests by assigning more
than one school to a catchment area. The intention in doing so is to limit
43Formal policy and actual school choice

10. the number of placing requests and thereby protect schools that are becom-
ing smaller.
Most Dundee schools’ maximum intake is never achieved because their
capacity is based on the demographic situation in the 1970s. The birth rate
in Dundee has been decreasing since then. Consequently, most schools are
undersubscribed in a formal sense. In some cases, undersubscription can lead
to closure of schools, but this is strongly opposed politically.
Seven areas of friction
Seven areas of friction were chosen for this study to expose the gaps between
formal policy regarding school choice and how school choice actually oper-
ates at local level. These gaps may explain why choice under some conditions
leads to increased inequalities between schools. For each of these seven, the
local choice situations are discussed within the framework of the national
choice system and in an international comparative perspective.
Availability of transport
No system of organised transport to secondary schools exists in the Nether-
lands. Students walk, cycle or travel by public transport. By contrast, the
English Local Education Authority provides transport to designated schools
if the travelling distance exceeds a certain number of miles. For example, free
travel in the form of a travel pass is offered to students in Nottingham if
their designated school is situated more than three miles away from their
home. Some assistance may be provided if the distance is less than three
miles. However, attending a non-designated school affects the student’s enti-
tlement to travel assistance. In Scotland, parents have to arrange their own
transport if they choose a non-designated school. Therefore, when making a
placing request in Dundee, parents are expected to be aware that they will
be responsible for transport.
International comparison
A sample of first-year students in the nine case-study schools were asked to
fill in a questionnaire regarding their means of transport. The results
revealed significant differences between the three cities. In Rotterdam nearly
all students travelled by themselves, most often by bicycle (42%) or public
transport (38%). In Nottingham the involvement of the Local Education
Authority was substantial (65% travelled by school bus). In Dundee most
students walked to school (59%).
Transport arrangements to secondary schools are absent in the Nether-
lands, while in England and Scotland transport arrangements are quite
generous, at least as far as designated schools are concerned. If parents opt
for a non-designated school, they may be offered only the cost of transport
44 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

11. to their originally designated school or no assistance with transport at all.
This implies that the local authorities do not encourage choice.
Availability of information
The local choice situation in Rotterdam conformed to the general practice in
the Netherlands of providing comprehensive information to students and
parents. Schools increasingly emphasise their individual features. What was
unique to Rotterdam compared to the rest of the Netherlands was that all of
the schools – public as well as denominational – advertised themselves in a
collective brochure. The schools used the collective brochure to present their
unique profiles. Both of the public schools included in this study were trying
to maintain their intake quality either by targeting students from private
non-denominational primary schools and public Montessori and Jena Plan
schools (Nl-1) or by offering bilingual VWO (pre-university curriculum) and
an English stream (Nl-2). A further aid to choice is the availability since
1997 of exam results through the website of the Ministry of Education and
the official Guide to Choice in Secondary Education (Agerbeek 1999).
In Nottingham, the local authorities produced general information about
school admissions. The content of the prospectuses was standardised and
emphasised general, practical information about the school rather than its
actual character and profile. Schools organised open evenings and sent out
separate invitations to primary schools. Word of mouth was an important
source of information for parents, and the reputation of a school was very
important. The brochures appeared to have had little effect.
The Parents’ Charter in Scotland (SOED 1995) states that parents have a
right to information about education and schools in their area. Information
provision to parents by Scottish schools has increased, but it is still tightly
controlled and only limited information is available. In Dundee, no general
information about schools is provided to parents, except for a basic guide.
Parents must ask for prospectuses from individual schools on their own ini-
tiative. The three Scottish schools sent out brochures to the feeder schools in
January as they are obliged to do under the Parents’ Charter. Furthermore,
the school principals visited their feeder schools and organised open evenings
for the final year classes. However, most information on schools tended to
stem from reputation and word-of-mouth transmission. Advertising is
allowed but is rarely used, since it tends to be seen as an attempt to poach
students.
League tables are available to the public in all three countries. These tables
are provided by the local or central government and show the exam results of
all public schools. As the principal of school Sc-1 explained, their only pur-
pose could be to enable comparisons over a few years. The scores reflect the
nature of the local catchment area much more than the actual quality of the
school. Improvements in the league table say more about a school’s ability to
attract better students than about the motivation of students and staff. High
45Formal policy and actual school choice

12. scores in the league table can give a school a false sense of security. The pro-
vision of such information is a contentious issue, but only a small minority of
parents seem take it seriously into account (Sc-1).
International comparison
In Rotterdam, the local authority actively encouraged the provision of infor-
mation to potential students and parents; in Nottingham there was no such
encouragement; while in Dundee, sending information to non-feeder schools
was even seen as a threat to other secondary schools. Information provision
in Rotterdam, in the form of a brochure in which every school publicises
itself, aimed to inform students and parents about the individual identities of
the schools, thereby stimulating a deliberate choice based on educational
diversity. In Nottingham and Dundee, collective publication of information
was limited to outcome-based results, such as league tables. If parents
wanted to obtain information about non-designated secondary schools, they
had to contact the school directly.
Diversity of supply
In Rotterdam, there is a high degree of diversity among schools which con-
tinues to increase. Diversity used to take the form of institutional diversity
between schools, based on religion and denomination, but it is now increas-
ingly based on deliberately emphasised differences in character. Schools Nl-1
and Nl-2 have been motivated to actively develop distinct profiles. School
Nl-3 explained that it has a reputation as a neighbourhood school. Nl-3 pro-
vided longer school days because the first and second-year students do their
homework at school. This approach is especially attractive for students who
can expect little support at home.
In Nottingham, as in the rest of England, legislation has facilitated the
formation of new types of schools. As well as community schools, there have
always been voluntary-run and voluntary-aided schools. Despite the appear-
ance of two new types of schools (Community Technical Colleges and Foun-
dation Schools), there was no evidence of increased educational diversity.
The first explanation for the lack of significant increase in educational diver-
sity is that government policies only target institutional diversity, in particu-
lar by encouraging schools to opt out of LEA control. It seemed as if the
schools in Nottingham simply imitated traditional ‘academic’ features and
all aimed at having similar reputations. This development seems to bear out
Walford’s worry that ‘‘any diversity between schools inevitably becomes a
hierarchy’’ (Walford 1997: 167). A second explanation for the lack of diver-
sity is that schools do not opt out of the LEA for educational reasons, but
for financial reasons, as did school E-3 in Nottingham. Its foundation status
was unlikely to have influenced the choice of students and parents. All three
schools in Nottingham, including the foundation school, followed the
46 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

13. national curriculum, and saw it as a beneficial framework, not least because
the national assessment enables publication of results in the league tables.
Dundee had a very uniform system of schools. Even the Roman Catholic
schools were completely incorporated into the state system. Diversity
between schools was and remains small because of the reorganisation into a
comprehensive system, the failure of self-governing schools and the introduc-
tion of the national guidelines (1989) which, although voluntary, have led to
virtually uniform curricula. The schools are under a common system of
national examinations, since there is one central exam for the whole of Scot-
land. Some of the Scottish respondents feared that the lack of educational
diversity led to an emphasis on other differences between schools, such as
social differences and differences of reputation.
International comparison
From a comparison of the three local-choice situations, it can be concluded
that the diversity between schools in Rotterdam was mainly a matter of
educational diversity, with institutional diversity much less important. In
Nottingham, however, a clear gap existed between an institutional diversity
encouraged by government policy and a lack of educational diversity experi-
enced by students and parents. There was hardly any educational or institu-
tional diversity in Dundee.
Formal opportunities for school choice
In the Netherlands, formal opportunities for school choice have always been
considerable because of the lack of geographical barriers between schools.
Everybody has had to choose. In Rotterdam, there were a large number of
different schools to choose from. Because their intake is uncertain, the
schools in Rotterdam put a lot of effort into making pupils at primary
schools aware of the range of secondary schools available in the city.
There was a certain amount of formal choice available in England, but
the actual opportunities for choosing a school were limited. The market
mechanism of parental choice could lead to the closure of certain schools,
and this was one of the arguments leading to the introduction of choice.
The feeder system in Nottingham involved strict Local Education Author-
ity guidelines for admission. Students were enrolled in the schools in the fol-
lowing order: firstly students from the primary feeder schools, then siblings
from within the catchment area, then students from voluntary-aided primary
school, then siblings from outside of the catchment area, and finally students
with special needs. Exceptions were made for children who had recently
moved into the area and did not have a designated school.
If placing requests were refused, parents and students could lodge an
appeal. However, the appeal hearings did not take place until August, just
before the school term begins. In most cases parents would rather accept a
47Formal policy and actual school choice

14. place at another school than wait for the hearings. A common reason for
going to appeal was that students had siblings at the school but lived outside
the catchment area. Occasionally, parents even lied about their address in
order to get a place at a school.
In Scotland, although legislation has increased opportunities for choice, it
has not met with any great enthusiasm. As the Parents’ Charter in Scotland
states, ‘‘your rights for your child are a choice of school within certain limits’’
(SOED 1995). Approximately 13% of children graduating from primary to
secondary school made this choice in 2000/2001 by means of a placing
request, which means that they chose to attend a different school from the
one to which they were assigned. Adler (1997) indicated that the proportion
of all placing requests granted gradually decreased to 84.8% in 2001/2002
(SOED 2002). For entrance to secondary school in 1990/1991, 8,867 placing
requests were received, of which 87.5% were granted. This had fallen to
76.2% (11,051) by 2001/2002. Ninety percent of the refusals for placing
requests were based on student number constraints (SOED 2002).
The representative of the Education Authority whom we interviewed in
Dundee made it clear that choice is not encouraged. He acknowledged that
parents should have a right to choose education like any other service. How-
ever, the Education Authority thought that parents should, as far as possi-
ble, send their children to a local school in order to maintain a sense of
community. It was argued that, if parents choose, it is for a better school, a
better area or a better environment; and this could lead to the accidental
and indirect creation of magnet schools. In Dundee, formal availability of
choice was accompanied by overcapacity in most of the schools, which
means that placing requests were often granted.
International comparison
Because there was already a great deal of choice available in Rotterdam, there
have been few recent policy changes with regard to school choice. The greatest
change has been in the ever-growing level of educational diversity between
schools. In Nottingham as well as Dundee, choice was not particularly
encouraged. The arrangements set up by the local authorities were so compli-
cated that parents were de facto discouraged from exercising their rights.
Local representatives in particular were eager to emphasise the disadvan-
tages of choice. The Educational Authority in Dundee feared the creation of
magnet schools and subsequent increased differences between schools – what
one representative called the ‘‘antithesis of comprehensive education’’.
Although the English and Scottish school principals were not as negative
about choice as the local representatives were, they did not actively promote
it. It became clear in Nottingham and Dundee that choice was neither
encouraged nor appreciated; it was merely tolerated since it had legislative
approval. As local authorities could refuse placing requests on the basis of
staff or accommodation constraints, gaining entry to a popular school was
often very difficult.
48 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

15. Admission criteria for students
The schools in Rotterdam applied absolute admission criteria in terms of
academic ability. The individual schools dealt with student admissions. The
three schools studied reported that they only admitted students with the min-
imum academic requirement. Denominational schools are allowed to admit
students on an ideological basis, although the Protestant school Nl-3 never
used that opportunity. As a result, only about 10% of the students were
Protestant. Relative admission criteria were only used when schools were
faced with oversubscription. These rarely played a role in Rotterdam. The
schools worked on a first-come, first-served basis.
The schools in Nottingham applied relative admission criteria. The state
schools were not allowed to select on ability; they had to accept students
across the whole ability spectrum, including students with special needs. The
relative admission criteria had a great impact on the choice situation in Not-
tingham, because the popular schools were all full and were hard to get into.
Because school E2 was full, it knew exactly how many students to expect.
On the other hand, the other two schools were undersubscribed. This meant
that they had to accept students from other areas and did not know in
advance how many students to expect. The financial resources of the three
schools were based on their student numbers. This led to increased differ-
ences between over- and undersubscribed schools.
In Dundee, relative admission criteria were more relevant than absolute
criteria, depending on the number of students applying to the school. How-
ever, there was overcapacity in the school system as a whole, because the
population has been falling since the 1970s. Only one school was very popu-
lar and relative admission criteria (in terms of feeder primary school and
catchment area) applied to this school. The schools investigated all had spare
places, and so the admission criteria were largely irrelevant.
International comparison
In Rotterdam, the absolute admission criteria were more important than the
relative criteria, while in Nottingham the situation was exactly the opposite.
Although the relative criteria in Nottingham seemed less severe, they could
have serious consequences in terms of the amount of choice available. They
were the most common criteria used for refusing a placing request. The
schools researched in Dundee did not use their admission criteria because
they were undersubscribed.
Financial autonomy
The schools in Rotterdam have experienced a growing degree of financial
autonomy, but this has not always been as beneficial as it might seem
because some budgets were determined at a non-school level (in the case of
public schools this was by the local authority). The public schools (Nl-1 and
49Formal policy and actual school choice

16. Nl-2) felt that private schools were financially advantaged because they had
more opportunities to select students and could request higher parental con-
tributions. High parental contributions could also function as a selection
mechanism. The private school Nl-3 argued that it was not better off finan-
cially than the public schools. It did not select on an ideological or financial
basis, and the spending of parental contributions had to be fully itemised. If
parents could not afford the contribution, students were admitted at no cost.
The schools explained that although their financial scope has increased in a
formal sense, the actual amount of money available has not.
The English schools remain completely state-funded, while the method of
funding, like the voucher system in the United States, is increasingly student-
based. The local authority finances schools on a per-student basis, and
schools receive little extra funding. The schools explained that accountants
have handled their increased financial responsibilities since the introduction
of Local Management of Schools (LMS) in 1988. According to the principal
of school E-1, ‘‘it is like running a medium-sized business.’’ Gaining control
over its own budget since opting out of Local Education Authority control
has enabled school E-3 to do many things that it could otherwise never have
done, such as reducing vandalism, renovating the school buildings and
improving its information technology infrastructure.
Since the funding of schools tended to be based on student numbers and
age, the schools realised the importance of student numbers and of appealing
to parents. However, that did not only have benefits. Side effects included a
stronger emphasis on exam results, discipline, and the increased popularity
of school uniforms. These are issues perceived as desirable by parents,
according to the schools. The Local Education Authority said it was not in
favour of the ‘marketisation’ of education, because education was something
to be experienced, not something to be bought as a consumer. As the repre-
sentative said, ‘‘education should be local’’. He feared a shift from commu-
nity values to individualistic behaviour with negative consequences for
education.
The main financial issue in Scotland was the introduction of Devolved
School Management (DSM). DSM provided financial autonomy, but only
in certain restricted areas. The Education Authority in Dundee did not see
a relationship between DSM and placing requests because schools were
not supposed to increase their student numbers at the expense of other
schools. The Education Authority was very supportive of DSM inasmuch
as it enabled schools to make their own decisions. In Dundee, DSM was
phased in between 1993 and 1997. The regions were obliged to identify the
different categories of expenditure and to determine, in consultation with
the school board, which decisions were specific to the individual school
and could be taken by the school principal. The Scottish Office stipulated
that at least 80% of the budget should be devolved to the school principal
or the school boards. The Tayside region only devolved material costs, not
staffing costs.
50 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

17. International comparison
In all three cities, the schools studied were gaining financial autonomy. In
Nottingham and Dundee, there was not much evidence that this autonomy
was being used to offer the students more diverse options for choice or to
develop stronger individual school profiles. Popular, oversubscribed schools
felt no such encouragement at all, as confirmed by the study of Adnett and
Davies (2000). In Rotterdam, some increase in differences between schools
was expected because of the increased financial autonomy, while in Notting-
ham there was no such expectation. In Dundee, the consequences were
expected to be limited.
Administrative autonomy
The schools in Rotterdam were given more administrative autonomy
between 1992 and 1996. The local authority in Rotterdam intended to pro-
vide a framework within which the individual schools could develop their
own policies in terms of curriculum, finance, staff development and assign-
ment of tasks to different members of staff. In general, the schools admitted
that the increase in autonomy had been limited and sometimes merely cos-
metic. Because of the close link between increased autonomy and tighter
financial restraints, schools experienced some types of regulations as restric-
tive.
Nevertheless, the public schools (Nl-1 and Nl-2) have been actively
encouraged by their local authority to emphasise their individual identities.
There have been some adjustments between schools which have led to the
development of a very interesting range of schools in Rotterdam. The private
school Nl-3 was governed by a very large regional school board. This school
has not experienced the same level of encouragement. A future merging with
a VBO-MAVO (junior secondary-vocational and general curricula) school
will probably lead to a lower intake level, both in terms of student numbers
and their academic ability.
Like Rotterdam, Nottingham’s schools have also obtained more auton-
omy under Local Management of Schools or by adopting Grant Mainte-
nance (GM). This increased autonomy has largely been obtained at the
expense of the local authority. Although LMS was criticised heavily, the
school principals enjoyed its advantages.
School E-1 explained that under LMS budgets go directly to the school,
which made ‘juggling’ with financial resources possible. This involved more
responsibilities for the school board of governors because the number of
items on the agenda increased enormously. The school deliberately kept
administrative tasks from teachers and hired an accountant for financial
matters. This allowed the school principal to set the broad outline and to
delegate certain tasks in order to have time for actual educational manage-
ment (E-1). School E-2 used the greater autonomy to turn offices into class-
51Formal policy and actual school choice

18. rooms or to get pre-fabricated classrooms, and to provide for the growing
number of students.
School E-3 opted out of LEA control, because, in their experience, the
LEA formula involved a decreasing budget; they felt that LEA interference
hampered them in acting against vandalism and violent students. This made
the school ripe for GM (grant-maintained) management, although the
Nottingham Local Education Authority was opposed to this. Under GM,
the school was able to reduce vandalism and take care of its own repairs.
The three most important administrative changes in Scottish education
were Devolved School Management, legislation for schools to become
self-governing, and the reorganisation of the regional authorities into unitary
authorities. These authorities replaced the former regions and districts.
Self-governing legislation to create the Scottish equivalent of the foundation
schools never gained support in the country and was dropped in 2000.
According to school Sc-1, government reorganisation of the local authori-
ties in Dundee could lead to a change in the catchment areas and even to
pressures to close one or more schools. While this overcapacity makes for a
greater range of choice, closure of schools is very unpopular with parents.
International comparison
The schools in Rotterdam were encouraged by local policies to stress their
distinctive features. Their increased autonomy led to greater diversity. Gener-
ally, each school developed a different culture and ethos, or even an entirely
different profile, as in the case of the international schools. With their
increased autonomy and the introduction of student-based funding, schools
became more dependent on a stable student intake.
As a result of their increased autonomy, thanks to LMS and GM legisla-
tion, the schools in Nottingham were able to use their financial resources to
their best advantage. In particular, the introduction of GM legislation
increased institutional diversity between schools. There were no signs, how-
ever, of any increase in educational diversity.
The schools in Dundee believed that new legislation brought greater
autonomy for them. In the words of the principal of school SC-3: ‘‘How you
actually organise it as a school is your own business, provided you do not
exceed the total number of staff.’’ There was greater organisational auton-
omy, as long as they kept to the general rules such as the minimal curricu-
lum guidelines. Autonomy remained within limits, because staffing still took
up most of the budget.
All three local choice situations reflect an increase in autonomy for indi-
vidual schools. Generally, the schools seemed to appreciate this freedom to
make decisions outside the power of the local authority. In the cases of the
schools studied in Nottingham and Dundee, there was little evidence that
they were trying harder to attract more students or certain groups of
students, or that the actual opportunities for choice were becoming more
elaborate.
52 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

19. Conclusion
The seven areas of friction examined in this study allowed us a more detailed
view of the functioning of choice. In cases where choice generally seemed to
be favoured, splitting the characteristics of choice into separate items served
to clarify whether legislative changes have truly encouraged choice between
schools. In Table 3 presents a summary of our findings.
There have always been extensive opportunities for school choice in
Rotterdam. These opportunities have not increased in recent years in a
formal sense, but the availability of a diverse supply of schools, stimulated
by greater financial and administrative autonomy, has made the choice more
varied. However, popular schools do fill up quickly and this limits the avail-
ability of choice.
In Nottingham and Dundee, opportunities for school choice have increased
in a formal sense. Although choice has been formally encouraged at national
level, opportunities to exercise choice have not improved much at local level,
nor have they been encouraged by the local authorities. This is evidenced by
the nature of availability of transport and information and by the bureaucratic
procedures parents have to go through to choose a non-designated school.
Furthermore, the local representatives were eager to point out the disadvan-
tages of choice. Other barriers included a lack of educational diversity among
schools and, especially in Nottingham, the quite strictly enforced admission
criteria in place to prevent schools from growing, which made it almost impos-
sible for students from outside a catchment area to enter a popular school. In
Dundee, placing requests to nearly any school will be granted, as most schools
are undersubscribed. This provides us with an interesting example of the com-
plexity of the gap between formal and actual choice. Although choice in Dun-
dee is possible in a formal sense as established at national level, it is not
particularly encouraged at local level. The actual situation enables choice
between an extensive, but not very diverse, supply of schools.
The three local choice situations provide further insight into the way
choice is exercised on a daily basis. The question as to whether or not
inequalities and social divisions between schools have increased remains
unanswered (Chubb and Moe 1990; Whitty et al. 1998). Although parents’
and students’ choices are primarily influenced by the likely consequences of
those choices, the present contribution shows that the actual opportunities
for choice, that is, the diversity and accessibility of educational supply, also
play a major role. It has been argued that a certain amount of educational
diversity can prevent increased segregation between schools (Tenbusch and
Garet 1993). From the way choice is actually exercised in the Netherlands,
England and Scotland, it has become apparent that, in some cases, a hierar-
chy of schools may be created, even though this was not the initial intention
of the central and local educational policies.
It should be noted that the topics of concentration and segregation of eth-
nic minority students have not explicitly been dealt with in this study. In the
53Formal policy and actual school choice

20. Table3.Factorsaffectingschoolchoiceinthecomparativecasestudies*
Areaoffriction
1aAvailabilityoftransportR:noorganisedtransport
N&D:notransportarrangementstonon-designatedschools
1bAvailabilityofinformationR:increaseinoutput-basedinformation
NandD:availabilityofinformationaboutnon-designatedschoolslimited
2DiversityofsupplyR:extensiveeducationaldiversity
NandD:littleincreaseinchoicebetweeneducationallydiverseschools
3Formalopportunitiesforschool
choice
R:studentsareobligedtochoose
NandD:littleencouragementtoexercisechoice
4AdmissioncriteriaforstudentsR:admissioncriteriaplayalimitedrole
NandD:relativeadmissioncriteriaprohibittheactualexerciseofchoice
5FinancialautonomyR:someincreaseinfinancialautonomy
NandD:increasedfinancialautonomy,emphasisonmaterialbudgets
6AdministrativeautonomyR:stressingofdistinctivefeatures
N:schoolsenjoybeingmoreautonomousfromtheirlocalgovernment,butdonotusethis
autonomyforanymorespecificprofilingorencouragingchoice
D:fewconsequences.
*R=Rotterdam,N=Nottingham,D=Dundee.
54 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

21. Netherlands, a fierce political discussion regarding the abolishment of educa-
tional freedom is currently taking place in order to prevent segregation. This
discussion includes limitation of the freedom of choice. For future research
concerning school choice, the addition of an ethnic component should be
considered.
Diversity and accessibility are currently even more relevant, for example,
when discussing whether the recently established Islamic schools represent a
welcome addition to educational diversity or an undesirable concentration of
disadvantaged students (Parker-Jenkins and Hartas 2002). In a broader con-
text, the actual constraints of the educational market may harm weaker
groups of students. That this is so may help us understand why a certain
level of institutional involvement in education remains relevant: to sustain
the provision of choice and education on an egalitarian basis in order to
educate every child to the best of his or her potential.
References
Adnett, Nick, and Peter Davies. 2000. Competition and Curriculum Diversity in
Local Schooling Markets: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Education Policy 15(2):
157–167.
Adler, Mike. 1997. Looking Backwards to the Future: Parental Choice and Educa-
tion Policy. British Education Research 23(3): 297–313.
Agerbeek, Marjan. 1999. Keuzegids Middelbare Scholen. Kiezen voor Kwaliteit [Guide
to middle schools. Quality indicators]. Zeist: Uitgeverij Kerckebosch.
Bagley, Chris. 1996. Black and White Unite or Flight? The Racialised Dimension of
Schooling and Parental Choice. British Educational Research Journal 22(5): 569–580.
Ball, Stephen. 1993. Education Markets, Choice and Social Class: The Market as a
Class Strategy in the UK and the USA. British Journal of Sociology of Education
14(1): 3–19.
Campbell, Carol. 2000. An Analysis of a ‘‘Scottish Dimension’’ in the Development
of School-based Management. Scottish Educational Review 32(1): 4–20.
Chubb, John, and Tom Moe. 1990. Politics, Markets and America’s Schools. Wash-
ington, DC: Brookings.
Driessen, Geert, and Frans van der Slik. 2001. Religion, Denomination, and Educa-
tion in the Netherlands: Cognitive and Noncognitive Outcomes after an Era of Secu-
larisation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 40(4): 561–572.
Echols, Frank, and J. Douglas Willms. 1993. Scottish Parents and Reasons for School
Choice. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
Echols, Frank, Andrew McPherson, and J. Douglas Willms. 1990. Parental Choice in
Scotland. Journal of Education Policy 5(3): 207–222.
Edwards, Tony, and Geoff Whitty. 1992. Parental Choice and Educational Reform in
Britain and the United States. British Journal of Educational Studies 40(2): 101–117.
Gewirtz, Sharon, Stephen Ball, and Richard Bowe. 1993a. Parents, Privilege and the
Educational Market-place. Research Papers in Education 9(1): 3–29.
55Formal policy and actual school choice

22. ———. 1993b. Values and Ethics in the Education Market Place: The Case of North-
wark Park. International Studies in Sociology of Education 3(2): 233–254.
———. 1995. Markets, Choice and Equity in Education. Buckingham: Open Univer-
sity Press.
Glenn, Charles. 1989. Choice of Schools in Six Nations. Washington, DC: United
States Department of Education.
Gillborn, David. 1997. Racism and Reform: New Ethnicities/Old Inequalities? British
Educational Research Journal 23(3): 345–360.
Gorard, Stephen. 2000. Questioning the Crisis Account: A Review of Evidence for
Increasing Polarisation in Schools. Educational Research 42(3): 309–321.
Gorard, Stephen, Chris Taylor, and John Fitz. 2002. Does School Choice Lead to
‘‘Spirals of Decline?’’ Journal of Educational Policy 17(3): 367–384.
Holmes, Mark, Jeffrey DeSimone, and Nicolas Rupp. 2003. Does School Choice
Increase School Quality? Available at: http://www.ncspe.org/list-papers.php, accessed
23 December 2003.
Lee, Valerie, Robert Croninger, and Julia Smith. 1996. Equity and Choice in Detroit.
In: Choice and Control in American Education, ed. by Bruce Fuller and Richard
Elmore, 70–91. New York: Falmer Press.
Nathan, Joe. 1993. President Clinton, School Choice, and Education Reform in the
1990s. Education Excellence Network (January): 22–27.
Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC). 1994. Going to School in Nottinghamshire:
A Guide to the Education Service for the School Year 1994–1995. Nottingham: NCC.
Parker-Jenkins, Marie, and Daniel Hartas. 2002. In Good Faith: A Critique of Reli-
gious Schools and Public Funding. Paper presented at the European Conference on
Educational Research, Lisbon, Portugal, 11–14 September.
Ranson, Stewart. 1993. Markets or Democracy for Education. British Journal of Edu-
cational Studies 41(4): 333–352.
Raywid, Mary Anne. 1987. Public Choice: Yes; Vouchers, No! Phi Delta Kappan 67
(June), 762–769.
Scottish Office Education Department (SOED). 1995. The Parents’ Charter in Scot-
land. Edinburgh: SOED.
———. 2002. Placing in Education Authority Schools in Scotland, 1988–2002. Avail-
able at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/stats/bulletins, accessed 12 January 2004.
Teelken, Christine. 1998. Market Mechanisms in Education: An International Compar-
ative Study in the Netherlands, England and Scotland. Ph.D. dissertation, University
of Amsterdam.
———. 1999. Market Mechanisms in Education. School Choice in The Netherlands,
England and Scotland in a Comparative Perspective. Comparative Education 35(3):
283–302.
Tenbusch, John, and Michael Garet. 1993. Organizational Change at the Local School
Level under Minnesota’s Open Enrollment Program. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Education Research Association, April.
Tomlinson, Sally. 1997. Diversity, Choice and Ethnicity: The Effects of Educational
Markets on Ethnic Minorities, Oxford Review of Education 23(1): 63–76.
56 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit

23. Tooley, James. 1997. Choice and Diversity in Education: A Defence. Oxford Review
of Education 23(1): 103–116.
Van Dyck, Marjan (ed.). 2001. Onderwijs in de Markt [Education in the market]. Den
Haag: Onderwijsraad.
Walford, Geoffrey. 1994. Choice and Diversity in Education. London: Cassell.
———. 1997. Diversity, Choice and Selection in England and Wales. Educational
Administrative Quarterly 33(2): 158–169.
White, Patrick, Stephen Gorard, John Fitz, and Chris Taylor. 2001. Regional and
Local Differences in Admission Arrangements for Schools. Oxford Review of Educa-
tion 27(3): 317–337.
Whitty, Geoff 2001. Education, Social Class and Social Exclusion. Journal of Educa-
tion Policy 16(4): 287–295.
Whitty, Geoff, and Sally Power. 1997. Quasi-markets and Curriculum Control: Mak-
ing Sense of Recent Education Reform in England and Wales. Educational Adminis-
tration Quarterly 33(2): 219–241.
Whitty, Geoff, Sally Power, and David Halpin. 1998. Devolution and Choice in Educa-
tion. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Woods, Phillip. 1992. Empowerment through Choice? Towards an Understanding of
Parental Choice and School Responsiveness. Educational Management and Adminis-
tration 20(4): 204–211.
The authors
Christine Teelken, Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Management Sci-
ences at the University of Nijmegen, received her doctorate in Amsterdam
for a study on market mechanisms in education. Her current research inter-
ests concern the change capacity of organisations and comparative research
on higher-education organisations. She is also working on an intersectoral
comparison between higher education and the social-security sector.
Contact address: Nijmegen School of Management, University of Nijmegen,
P.O. Box 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail: c.teelken@
fm.ru.nl.
Geert Driessen, Senior Educational Researcher at the Institute for Applied
Social Sciences of the University of Nijmegen, received his doctorate for a
study of the educational position of ethnic minority students. His research
interests include ethnic and social inequality in education; parental participa-
tion in education; pre- and early school education; first- and second-language
acquisition; minority language and culture teaching; and religion, denomina-
tion and education.
Contact address: Institute for Applied Social Sciences, University of
Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9048, 6500 KJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail:
g.driessen@its.kun.nl.
57Formal policy and actual school choice

24. Frederik Smit, Senior Educational Researcher at the Institute for Applied
Social Sciences of the University of Nijmegen, received his doctorate for a
study of the role of parents in primary education. He has published in the
areas of parental involvement in education, culture differences in education,
and participation in decision-making by teachers, parents and students.
Contact address: Institute for Applied Social Sciences, University of
Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9048, 6500 KJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail:
f.smit@its.kun.nl.
58 Christine Teelken, Geert Driessen and Frederik Smit