ument of national interest rather than personal fulfilment. It was during this period that the question of racial and ethnic minority groups entered the debate for the first time, due to increasing immigration. However, it was taken for granted that these children needed to become like the white population as quickly as possible, and so little genuine progress was made (Finch, 1984). Despite the lack of enthusiasm from Conservative Governments, comprehensivisation accelerated in the 1970s, so that by 1974, 62% of secondary pupils were in comprehensive schools. Mrs.Thatcher, as, Education Secretary, did little to slow down the erosion of education as an instrument of social improvement; her first action was to remove free school milk for children over seven and her ideas indicated a departure from the principles of 1944: a strong emphasis on standards, and a fear of the power of teachers.Education became more and more under central (and parental) control in the 1980s; the 1980 Education Act made it no longer the duty of LEAs to provide free school meals, and introduced parental scrutiny and choice. The second half the 1980s saw a restructuring, and the unashamed acknowledgement that the market was the new cornerstone of education (Dale, 1989). Key aims were now to keep output constant and affordable, to remove LEAs as a source of education policy making, and to replace effectiveness with efficiency. Parents became consumers, and pupils the viable product to be produced and then exploited in the name of national interest. The 1988 Education Act is a set of 'compromises and interventions' (Ball, 1990): it sets out the National Curriculum (fine in principle, but unfair in practice), more power to school governers, and the possibility of 'opting out' of LEA control by individual schools. Despite the good intentions of the 1940s, and the many worthwhile recommendations made in the (largely ignored) reports, education in the 1990s is still not...
