The bodies representing ed tech and publishing firms have been granted permission by a high court judge to proceed with their judicial review of Oak National Academy.
The British Educational Suppliers Association and the Publishers Association launched judicial review proceedings in November.
They said that establishing Oak National Academy as an arms-length government curriculum body would pose an “existential risk” to the sector.
In the High Court order, the co-claimants said Rory Dunlop KC observed that the argument over whether Oak “is an economic actor” was an “arguable point of low suitable for a substantive hearing”.
The claimants say Oak amounts to an “unlawful state subsidy”.
In a statement today, the co-claimants said: “A judicial review has always been a route of last resort, but as the government continues to press ahead with its plans for Oak – disregarding the concerns of authors, edtech innovators, publishers, schools, teachers, unions, and many others across the school sector – we are left with no other option to protect the autonomy of teachers, the experiences of learners, and the UK’s world-class education resources sector.
“The court has recognised that these concerns deserve a proper hearing.”
High Court papers state the PA estimate Oak’s impact on their members will amount to a more than £60 million hit across English, maths and science resources alone.
The co-claimants also told the court that “major” investment levels of “well over” £100 million in the sector is at risk of being “undermined”.
They added the government’s plans for Oak are “unprecedented and unevidenced intervention that risks causing irreparable damage to the school sector as we know it.
“It puts unnecessary strain on already stretched public funding for education – soaking up £45m of public money that could otherwise be given to schools directly. It creates a one-size-fits-all state publisher that promotes a single curriculum, controlled by the ministers of the day. No existing provider can compete fairly with this. It will undo decades of work by publishers, tech innovators and others whose expert workforce have created our existing rich range of world-leading resources for school children across the country.”
A spokesperson for Oak said they remain “totally focused on serving the needs of teachers, pupils and schools. They greatly value the support of Oak.
“Our independent evaluation shows that exploring evidence-informed curriculum models, and having high quality resources alongside them, reduces teacher workload and improves expertise, wellbeing and retention.
“We want to continue to see a thriving market, and we work with a range of commercial providers to develop and improve ourresources. Our research has found teachers don’t use Oak exclusively – instead mixing with other providers – and our resources will always be entirely optional.”
The National Education Union was an interested party in the case, but appears to have withdrawn.
