Primary cause for concern

Schools are fertile territory for reforming governments. Labour's first legislation in 1997 abolished the assisted places scheme; now the Conservatives have rushed through their academies bill. This will turn more schools into academies more quickly, and pave the way for privately run, state-funded "free schools" set up by parents, teachers and charities. David Cameron needs a quick win in public service reform to show that his government is about more than slashing spending. "We need to change the way we do education," he said.

Will he succeed? Ministers have received just 62 applications for free school status. But new schemes often start slowly. The charity charged with promoting them is talking to 700 interested groups. Governments can cajole and bribe to advance change—as they did with grant-maintained schools (Conservatives), specialist schools (Conservative and Labour) and academies (Labour). The real question, though, is not how many free schools there will be, but whether they will improve standards. Michael Gove, secretary of state for education, said that in Sweden they have not only raised standards but have led to a "virtuous dynamic," spurring other schools to "raise their game," and that "they help close the gap between the poorest and wealthiest."

The evidence for his optimism is thin. In Sweden, free schools launched in the mid-1990s now educate 10 per cent of 11 to 16 year olds. Research by Susanne Wiborg at London University's Institute of Education shows that while their pupils get better results at 16, the advantage disappears when they reach 18. Sweden has slipped down education league tables since the schools were introduced. As for "closing the gap" in one of the most socially equal countries in the world, Wiborg found that such schools increased the divide between rich and poor. Do we need research to tell us that the people most likely to battle with bureaucrats and spend hours filling in forms are likely to be affluent and articulate? Any British local authority will tell you that many parents of children at the bottom of the pile don't even fill in preference forms for existing schools.

Research on the US equivalent of the Swedish institutions—charter schools—is more extensive and harder to interpret. A 1991 law allowed any group to apply for a charter to run a free, state-funded school if it could demonstrate the need for one. A US study published in January showed that pupils in New York charter schools made more progress in maths and reading than their peers in other schools. But the picture from national studies suggests that, at best, charter schools make little difference. A Stanford University study last year found that for 46 per cent of pupils of similar socio-economic background the type of school they attended made no difference to attainment.

So much for Gove's argument that free schools will raise standards and improve neighbouring schools. Instead, the effect on the school next door is likely to be an exodus of pupils and dwindling funds. The Tories' pre-election plans estimated the country will need 220,000 new school places over nine years. That will cost money, and in an era of austerity, other schools will pay the price. The logic is that half-empty schools will close as parents choose the free alternative. But while parents agree in theory that "we need to do education differently," they will fight back if it comes at the cost of their child's school.

They are right. Since the 1944 Education Act set up grammar, secondary modern and technical schools, governments have mistakenly used school organisation as the remedy for educational ills. For years, the debate was over the merits of grammar schools or comprehensives. Then the Conservatives decided schools would do better if they opted out of local authority control. City technology and specialist schools followed. Then Labour invented academies. Soon foundation and trust schools were tumbling out of white papers until most people had lost track of the different varieties on offer. Labour started well in 1997 with a promise to concentrate on "standards not structures" but, as the struggle to reform secondary schools faltered, it soon reverted to type. If in doubt, invent a new breed of school.

Yet there is no evidence to suggest that such tinkering will mean fewer pupils leaving school without any qualifications. Campaigners for a return to grammar schools used to cite the success of Germany's selective system—until the country slipped down the education league tables.

The problem is that politicians are in a hurry. If you can pass a bill promoting academies in eight days, why embark on the long haul of changing what happens in the classroom? New schools are eye-catching. Good teaching isn't. But to "do education differently" governments need to concentrate on what happens between students and teachers. Academies were given the freedom to improve teaching by paying teachers more, but this has had limited effect, perhaps because academies receive the same running costs as other schools. Teachers' skills need constant updating, yet the quality of professional development courses is often woeful. Teenagers who truant or abandon school altogether need programmes that relate directly to the world of work—not more lessons about the empire.

Most school reorganisations involve secondaries, yet it is primary schools that hold the key to improvement. Intensive reading schemes are expensive but essential. An 11 year old who struggles with reading is usually lost to education. The tradition of funding secondary schools better than primaries should be reversed. Above all, support for the poorest children should begin long before they reach school. Labour's Sure Start scheme had mixed results, but it had begun to address this. With more well-trained early years teachers, it might succeed. Free schools, in short, are a distraction from the more difficult business of making a difference to what happens behind every classroom door.

See Jacob Reynolds, who has just completed his A-levels, on "The real education scandal"