| Abstract: | For more than a decade, LEAs have been under pressure to close schools. During this period the scale of contraction in school provision has been substantial but has nevertheless lagged behind DES expectations. This paper is concerned with the selection of schools for closure or amalgamation and examines in detail the procedures adopted and the proposals advanced in one LEA. While existing evidence suggests that the selection of schools for closure has generally been less than rational, the case selected is an example of what has been officially described as ‘strategic planning’ and ‘good practice’. Policy statements, criteria for selecting schools, and the characteristics of schools earmarked for closure are compared to assess the relationship between theory and practice. In practice, the criteria cited by the LEA were generally not capable of strict application. In addition, unstated criteria, notably school size, appear to have been significant. Thus, the LEA's proposals did not correspond directly to its own stated policy. Further, the extent to which the procedure adopted by the LEA conformed to notions of rational planning was limited. Current legislation is likely to reduce still further the ability of LEAs to produce rational schemes of contraction. |
