Please explain exam boards to me: why so many? Why doesn't the DofE do it?

@Piggywaspushed I think oligopoly (few sellers) is a better description.
There are few providers of this service, so competition is very limited, which is why many school heads complain about how much these costs keep increasing above inflation (see previous links).

Note that this doesn't mean the solution would be to have dozens of boards to compete on price.

Monopsony means one buyer (which dictates the terms). But Ofqual oversees the content; if I understand correctly, there is no government oversight on how much these companies can price.

Ahhhh, so your argument is that undersubscribed schools do not discriminate on religion? Considering that most schools are oversubscribed, that's really clutching at straws, but whatever...

It also confirms that your earlier claim that

many of them have admissions policies identical to non faith schools.

is false.

@Plantatreetoday Understood, this much wasn't fully clear to me. It's one of the most helpful answers, thank you.

@Octavia64

Most faith schools are primaries (but secondaries are also larger). So what? I have never said anything about the breakdown between primaries and secondaries. The point was that faith schools discriminate based on religion. You denied that. You said:

These schools are majority primary schools and many of them have admissions policies identical to non faith schools.

Can you prove how many faith schools do not discriminate based on religion? So far you haven't. Your own link confirms my point: page 6:

faith schools are exempt and are permitted to use faithbased oversubscription criteria in order to give higher priority in admissions to children who are members of, or who practise, their faith or denomination irrespective of designation. This exemption only applies if a school is oversubscribed.

So I ask again: will you:

1. back your earlier claim that many faith schools do not discriminate based on religion, or
2. Admit that I was right, you were wrong, and retract, or
3. Ignore me because you cannot admit that your claim was factually false?

@Octavia64
the fact that about a third of state schools are faith schools does not mean that a third of schools discriminate on entrance by faith. These schools are majority primary schools and many of them have admissions policies identical to non faith schools.
so that’s just wrong.

Humanists UK https://humanists.uk/campaigns/schools-and-education/faith-schools/ maintains a table with the various types of school and the type of religious discrimination allowed by law: https://humanists.uk/wp-content/uploads/schools-with-a-religious-character.pdf

Voluntary aided faith schools, foundation faith schools and faith academies can all discriminate on religious grounds.

Voluntary controlled faith schools are the only type of faith schools which in theory cannot.

Where did you get that most faith schools are primary schools which do not discriminate based on religion?

Would you maybe like to retract that statement?

then you say that people should be ashamed for wanting to have religious schools

never said that. We can add misrepresenting other people's words to the list to be ashamed of.

I said people should be ashamed for advocating a system that uses everyone's tax money to finance crucial state-funded services which discriminate based on religion. That's a very different thing.

You are very welcome to send your children to whatever religious school you want to. Just don't use everyone's tax money for that.

Yes, that's my opinion. Because my opinion is that certain crucial services, paid for with everyone's tax money, should be open to all and not discriminate based on religion, nor on any other characteristic.

Would you be fine with a hospital that sends non-Catholics, non-Muslims or whatever to the longer queue? Yes or no?

moving onto accountability, there has never been much accountability in schools.

So what? We shouldn't worry our pretty little heads that we have schools bullying and emotionally abusing children, or creating hostile environments for special needs family because... there has never been much accountability? What kind of a logic is that???

For the last time: I am NOT focusing on exam boards. I asked a question. That's all. I repeated numerous times that I have never considered it a priority. I am not going to repeat it again.

Faith schools: ca. 1/3 of state schools have a religious denomination. I.e. ca. 1/3 of state schools discriminate based on religion, despite being funded by everyone's taxes. That seems like kind of a biggie to me. It's not peanuts. Again, we would not accept this in any other crucial state-funded service.

The lack of accountability is not a small thing, either. You are welcome to dismiss it as irrelevant when hundreds of pupils former pupils and teachers come forward denouncing a climate of emotional abuse and bullying (Mossbourne), and absolutely nothing happens. But that's not my view.

And it's not just that school. The focus on exam results and Ofsted inspections, combined with the lack of accountability, is one of the main reasons why children with special needs are being failed across the country: because schools care only about Ofsted and exam results, because creating an environment which is hostile to special needs is a cheap and easy way to achieve that by incentivising special need families to sod off elsewhere. And all of this is enabled by the lack of accountability I mentioned.

I see this directly in my kids' school, which has become much more hostile to special needs since it got an Outstanding. I doubt it's a coincidence. My family is not affected directly, but I still think it is a bit of a biggie.

Saying that academies are "overall OK" doesn't mean anything, since most secondary schools are academies anyway.

@Araminta1003 I suppose I didn't explain myself clearly.
I didn't mean that all academies are terrible. Some are great and some are terrible, as is normal.

But that in itself is a moot point, since the vast majority of secondary schools are now academies.

My point was that the complete lack of accountability is a huge flaw in the system.

If there is a complaint, academies investigate themselves. In theory, the final stage of the complaints process is the DfE. In practice, it's not, because the policies clearly state that not even the DfE can overturn a school's decision.

Some academies are great. But they are not great because they are unaccountable. Lack of accountability was not required to achieve those results.

Some academies achieve great results on paper, while in practice hiding a culture of bullying terrifying and emotionally abusing their children. In these cases, the schools are not accountable to anyone.

Holland Park school was "closed" and reopened under a different trust. The head retired and was not even investigated.

Mossbourne: nothing happened.

How about some honesty?
What would I have said that's not honest? Please, enlighten me

It is their parents not reading with them that leads to them failing English language
I do not remember having said anything on this topic

Pretending that mixing them in with more middle class kids is completely disingenuous
I don't follow. Who has advocated mixing whom with whom???
Are you saying that grammar schools are good because this way kids who struggle to read are not mixed with more academic kids? Or were you trying to say something else?

@HostaCentral 100% of pps have explained the current system to you, how it works, and works pretty well. You are arguing against the fact.

Which part of

I do not think it is the most pressing issue in education.
It seemed like an oddity, and I asked about it. That's all.

was unclear?
Which part of that means I am arguing against which facts???

It is perfectly possible to find something odd while at the same time not finding it a priority. Disagreeing with something doesn't mean it is my life mission to change it.

@Araminta1003 If you are talking about a random allocation within a certain distance in densely populated areas like London, that would not necessarily increase traffic. If someone who lives 1 mile from a school has the same chance of getting in as someone who lives 100 yards from it, that need not increase traffic. But that's another topic.

Good schools boil down to excellent leadership who respect and value long term staff, reasonable regulation from Central Government and supportive parents and plenty of funding

Sure. But accountability is also important. The academy model, which has kind of privatised secondary schools making them unaccountable to anyone, does not work. Mossbourne is an example.