Grammar Schools

[Sharpe's Fox]

This is a story that has built up momentum over the last week and the education secretary has made a move:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37303348

 

Seems to me like a issue that was only for Tory old boys who hark back to a return to the 1950's way of doing things has got itself back into mainstream thinking. 

[Jon the Hat]

I can't take seriously a debate where we aren't allowed to consider whether intelligence is linked to poverty and lack of ambition as well as your kids being crap at school, rather than assuming that Grammar schools somehow ignore poor children.

[Guest MattP]

Crikey, the Tories actually considering implementing something Conservative. They should go for it, it has huge public support as well, even 47% of Labour voters support this according to yougov.

 

A system where the best education is avaliable to those who can pass an exam, an example of meritocracy that could be implemented to seek out the brightest and best, a system that rewards hard work, it would have to be done properly and with thought of course, but there is no reson why it can't.

 

Why shouldn't bright young kids from poor areas be allowed to go to schools where they can fully explore their talent and gifts I still haven't heard a good argument for, a chance to make this national rather than just avalaible to the middle classes in wealthy areas is a huge opportunity, Why would the Labour party would seek to deny that?

 

If ever there was a time to push this through it's now though, virtually all of Corbyn and his team attended them. It won't happen though, governments are scared of radical reform. Michael Gove's basic reforms of bringing back the O-level and trying to create a generation of bi-lingual British children even fell flat.

[Steven]

It will be for middle class children who are tutored for the entrance exam using the money of their middle class parents. Plus all the extra costs that come with going to a Grammar school.

 

Most of my family for many generations (three at least) have gone to different forms of Grammar school.

[SecretPro]

Not like Labour can even moan about this one, considering their current cream of the crop

 

• Jeremy Corbyn – Attended a grammar school. His son went to a grammar school.

• John McDonnell – Attended a grammar school.

• Seumas Milne – Sent both his son and daughter to grammar schools.

• Diane Abbott – Attended a grammar school and sent her son to a private school.

• Jon Trickett – Attended a grammar school.

• Grahame Morris – Attended a grammar school.

• Paul Flynn – Attended a grammar school.

[ousefox]

I don't understand why people seem to like the idea of grammar schools. It actually seems mental to me. A test at 10/11 years old is madness.

 

Some people are late developers. My SATS at primary school were poor to average and at secondary school and particularly sixth form I thrived and could hardly have got better grades. Even the difference from being born in August and being the youngest in your year, to September and being the oldest is going to be significant at such a young age. I seriously don't get it. Massive step backwards imo.

[Merging Cultures]

Crikey, the Tories actually considering implementing something Conservative. They should go for it, it has huge public support as well, even 47% of Labour voters support this according to yougov.

 

A system where the best education is avaliable to those who can pass an exam, an example of meritocracy that could be implemented to seek out the brightest and best, a system that rewards hard work, it would have to be done properly and with thought of course, but there is no reson why it can't.

 

Why shouldn't bright young kids from poor areas be allowed to go to schools where they can fully explore their talent and gifts I still haven't heard a good argument for, a chance to make this national rather than just avalaible to the middle classes in wealthy areas is a huge opportunity, Why would the Labour party would seek to deny that?

 

If ever there was a time to push this through it's now though, virtually all of Corbyn and his team attended them. It won't happen though, governments are scared of radical reform. Michael Gove's basic reforms of bringing back the O-level and trying to create a generation of bi-lingual British children even fell flat.

I don't disagree. However, one does have to acknowledge that some children have more support from parents, better access to educational materials, less peer pressure, and more opportunities to study.

I do believe some very intelligent children are co-opted into being less productive citizens than they would be if their circumstances had dealt them a better hand.

BUT!!!! As a parent, I want the best for my kids. So I go out of my way to invest in them and their education.

Obviously though, there is the argument that some people do not see the value in education because they never had the opportunities and jobs are scarce.

What should happen is that teachers should identify potential stars and lea's should ensure the children get every opportunity.

I do think streaming should happen. It benefited my Dad (working class family from Aylestone). I was in top sets, but I wish I was in a more focused schooling system like he was.

[Merging Cultures]

I don't understand why people seem to like the idea of grammar schools. It actually seems mental to me. A test at 10/11 years old is madness.

 

Some people are late developers. My SATS at primary school were poor to average and at secondary school and particularly sixth form I thrived and could hardly have got better grades. Even the difference from being born in August and being the youngest in your year, to September and being the oldest is going to be significant at such a young age. I seriously don't get it. Massive step backwards imo.

I did well until all the bigger lads started puberty and started picking on us smaller lads.

Imo get kids before they have an idea what 'cool' is and they start to act like delinquents trying to please their mates. That is ages 10-11.

[Sharpe's Fox]

43 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

Not like Labour can even moan about this one, considering their current cream of the crop

 

• Jeremy Corbyn – Attended a grammar school. His son went to a grammar school.

• John McDonnell – Attended a grammar school.

• Seumas Milne – Sent both his son and daughter to grammar schools.

• Diane Abbott – Attended a grammar school and sent her son to a private school.

• Jon Trickett – Attended a grammar school.

• Grahame Morris – Attended a grammar school.

• Paul Flynn – Attended a grammar school.

Struggling to see the logic on taking issue with people who attended grammar schools and being against them, especially if they were educated in the 50's and 60's when the only options were grammars and secondary moderns. Do you seriously expect politicians to have had a serious principled opposition to selective education in short trousers? Paul Flynn is in his eighties for petes sake.

[Fox92]

What did May say when she became PM. Something along the lines of "a good education regardless of background". Hmm...

 

I wouldn't fancy sitting an entrance exam for some school at age 10 or whatever it is. Nobody even knows what they want at that age. That said, I didn't enjoy school anyway and left at the earliest opportunity. 

[Jon the Hat]

Plenty of kids sit the 11+ without any problems.  Can someone explain how the top students doing better makes anything worse for those in comprehensive schools?  Or is this about tall poppy syndrome?

[Jon the Hat]

42 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

What did May say when she became PM. Something along the lines of "a good education regardless of background". Hmm...

 

I wouldn't fancy sitting an entrance exam for some school at age 10 or whatever it is. Nobody even knows what they want at that age. That said, I didn't enjoy school anyway and left at the earliest opportunity. 

No reason why someone who develops well at a comprehensive should do any worse than now is there?  And if you wanted you could apply to transfer if you were a late bloomer being held back.  People do move schools.

[hairy]

My nephew attends one. His Mum and dad could easily afford a private school along with 95% of the other pupils in Amersham but why pay when you get it for free

 

My issue with them is they are Londoncentric. Where is the nearest state funded grammar to Leicester?

[Jon the Hat]

Do you know how much private schools cost?  No way could anything close to 95% of any town afford them.

[Sharpe's Fox]

14 minutes ago, hairy said:

My nephew attends one. His Mum and dad could easily afford a private school along with 95% of the other pupils in Amersham but why pay when you get it for free

 

My issue with them is they are Londoncentric. Where is the nearest state funded grammar to Leicester?

 

Here's a map in the article I linked. Loads of them in the south east, as you say, especially Kent as well as the usual cities.

[Webbo]

9 minutes ago, hairy said:

My nephew attends one. His Mum and dad could easily afford a private school along with 95% of the other pupils in Amersham but why pay when you get it for free

 

My issue with them is they are Londoncentric. Where is the nearest state funded grammar to Leicester?

I think they're only in Kent and Lincolnshire and that's down to the local councils.

 

My elder sister went to a grammar school and did quite well out of it, admittedly there weren't many working class girls there. Her best mate came from Saffron Lane area and I think they stuck together because they had more in common than with the other girls who were a bit more middle class.

 

The year I would have gone up,and I'm pretty sure I would have passed my 11+, was the year they banned them, something that's pissed me off ever since. I'd bring them back in a heart beat.

[Darkon84]

37 minutes ago, hairy said:

My nephew attends one. His Mum and dad could easily afford a private school along with 95% of the other pupils in Amersham but why pay when you get it for free

 

My issue with them is they are Londoncentric. Where is the nearest state funded grammar to Leicester?

 

This'll give a more precise answer as to where the nearest are. As Webbo said, most are in Lincolnshire and Kent, but that's down to their councils. There aren't any in our shire anymore, but some not a million miles away in the West Midlands.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grammar_schools_in_England

[fuchsntf]

According to my reckoning, since I was a boy, British politicians have been telling us we are in the

middle of austerity.

Education at middle to lower standards have stood still even  deteriated

They got rid of school playing fields, and discouraged teacher volunteers in extra curriculum ideas or activities.

ASBOs have increased, while unemployment has increased.No semi or fully skilled jobs on offer.

Or a large amount of Apprenticeships offered or created in new careers as well as old crafts.

Nobody in politics in power as ever shown real interest, in the education of British children no matter

the origin. Your country is only as good and strong as your lower educated.

 

It costs more money to quell ASBOs , than to give  ALL a disciplined interesting education.

Yes it is British politicians who have failed, the children and business in the UK, by not

finding a worthy education system that is not effected, by poltical party  change.

Why on the schoolyard and in political office have the idiots, incompetent and bullies

been allowed to progress. We suppose to be richer...education, Health support, and housing

shows we aint...

 

And FFS sake dont come out with past lives comparisons. We have reached 2016 and still

cant give any decent education across any avg.or basic level.

I was educated in Secondary modern, with asportsfield, and Library, and healthy discussion.

Though our books were not to the quality of richer better off grammer  schools.

Strange thing was I took a technical/mechanical m/c builder apprenticeship, in my 1st 2yrs at

dual college, not one of the grammer school lads knew about cosines, tangents nor logarithmen.

Then came along the comprehensives...

 

IMO  no matter what my experience was, its not the school systems themselves, but any would work,

if political lobbies would be forced out of the education system, quality teachers supported, sylabus held to,

with various geo location differences.School leavers informed two years before completion on their

areal work possibilities, with All local small/large Employers being encouraged to take even more interest.

More money must be invested in education, if the richer families send their children to payed and upper schools,

then there must be more money on the table, to also push the lower levels, and support 100% the talented

children to come through. Its the better spread of money that is needed.

Its so simple education ,at all levels are and is the future of our country, but more so from the

majority from low  and avg. Levels.  More working, more spending  more tax, less benifits, but a  strong

society that can support the weak...But neither at the cost of the other.

Britain have had it  wrong for over 60 years, because it was from then the virus began.

Parents have a lot to answer for...but they also need  society support before they

even decide on kids..

 

 

 

[Vacamion]

 

 

Educational standards in general deteriorated after they abolished the 11 plus, but I think this is more down to kids' "rights" being steadily prioritised above school discipline.

 

You can't learn very well in a disruptive class. 

 

FWIW I went to a comprehensive, but they separated us based on ability in most subjects pretty much from the start and on an ongoing basis, and it seemed to work.  Those who wanted to be swots could get on with it. Those who belatedly excelled moved up the classes according to ability in later years and generally took exams suited to their ability.

 

I say let people have whatever form of school they want.

[sdb]

Scum bags. Dividing and judging people on ability at 11 years old. Splitting society into groups, how backwards is that?! Children learn from each other, they need to be stretched by the brightest, who should understand any restraints and limitations and disadvantages of the weaker and less privileged. Surely that builds a stronger and more tolerable society and surely that's what schools should do above all else. Elitism at 11 years old. Jesus wept. 

[Thracian]

People aren't all the same, never will be and should never want to be.

 

Education should get the best from people and part of that should be about presenting opportunities, recognising different talents, interests and inclinations and then developing those abilities.

 

Some people are much more practical than others and those abilities should be celebrated as much as any other.

 

Putting people in suitable groups would seem the most practical way or developing abilities as kids get older.

 

The brightest orator would not necessarily help the brightest computer nerd any more than the best sportsman would necessarily inspire a future vet. or engineer.     

 

 

[SMX11]

Let parents and local authorities decide. I welcome the lifting of the ban to see the egalitarians squirm.

[KFS]

Going to a grammar was the best thing to happen to me. I come from a rough area where people tend to spend the entirety of their lives worrying about who ate what for dinner. 

 

My school taught me to broaden my horizons to the point where I'm working for one of the world's largest companies, earning more than my parents combined in my first year of graduating University, with prospects of living and working abroad in jobs that will prepare my for future leadership positions.

 

Say what you want about them, but give a rough kid (like me) the tools that they need in education (Grammar schools by design should do that) and they'll achieve more than any upper social class toff will. I'm a fan of them personally.

[Strokes]

9 hours ago, sdb said:

Scum bags. Dividing and judging people on ability at 11 years old. Splitting society into groups, how backwards is that?! Children learn from each other, they need to be stretched by the brightest, who should understand any restraints and limitations and disadvantages of the weaker and less privileged. Surely that builds a stronger and more tolerable society and surely that's what schools should do above all else. Elitism at 11 years old. Jesus wept. 

Oh yeah the last 18 years have been utopian, our children have thrived in it

What age do you think it's appropriate to judge on ability? 

[Vacamion]

Just now, Strokes said:

Oh yeah the last 18 years have been utopian, our children have thrived in it

What age do you think it's appropriate to judge on ability? 

 

 

Errr, never. We should never judge people at any stage. It's ability-ist. 

 

Everyone gets a medal for competing.

 

Because that's what real life is like.