Grammar Schools
Discussion
The debate around Grammar schools tends to end up centring around the selection process and the rights and wrongs of it. Perhaps the best answer would have been to address this rather than scrapping something that otherwise worked well.
I understand that in Germany there is a grammar school entrance exam. However if you fail it you can reject the decision and have your children go anyway and be reassessed after (IIRC) 2 years.
I understand that in Germany there is a grammar school entrance exam. However if you fail it you can reject the decision and have your children go anyway and be reassessed after (IIRC) 2 years.
RicksAlfas said:
Esseesse said:
Contrary to what the OP posts, this is not technically a new Grammar school BTW. Opening new Grammar schools is not allowed.
Surely it's as good as?Esseesse said:
Moulder said:
I have no issue with this
Contrary to what the OP posts, this is not technically a new Grammar school BTW. Opening new Grammar schools is not allowed.Esseesse said:
The debate around Grammar schools tends to end up centring around the selection process and the rights and wrongs of it. Perhaps the best answer would have been to address this rather than scrapping something that otherwise worked well.
.
Evidence that it works well please. You need to show that the system provides better outcomes for children attending both grammar and secondary schools. If you are going to compare the results of counties with selective system with those using the comprehensive systems you need to factor out parental affluence. .
Better education for smarter kids can only be a positive thing. Some kids are smarter than others, it's life.
I went to a public secondary school in 2000 and whilst there was internal separation based on ability (class sets, top set, 2nd, 3rd, 4th / bottom) these classes were still very big and probably only around 50% of the kids actually wanted to learn anything.
I was fortunate (not to blow my own trumpet) that I was identified as being 'gifted' and made part of a special little group. It was arranged that we would go on a trip to Italy but later the idea was abandoned because it was seen as unfair. This wasn't just a jolly, it was to learn about the Roman Empire, but it never happened.
In the later years there was huge encouragement to engage with local universities and try to understand how important higher education was. Being one of this 'gifted group' I went on lots of little trips to university open days with my pals.
The ideology that they portrayed was what totally put me off of any more education. I'd roughed it with all sorts of oiks to battle my way through to GCSE stage and the overwhelming impression from these unversity trips was that higher education was 'open to everyone', even those miscreant tw*ts who were always so disruptive, they could do a degree in watching Hollyoaks (media studies I think is the proper name) or some other nonsensical field.
I decided from very early on that I didn't want to spend a day longer than I had to with this sort of crowd and went into an apprenticeship instead.
In hindsight, a degree would have done me huge favours. But it was never about the education, it was always about the 'social integration' - "Oh," they said, "you'll meet lots of wonderful characters and life-long friends" - What they failed to communicate was how this would unlock greater opportunities in work life, the social lifestyle was the overbearing factor.
It's why I fully supported the gross inflation of student fees a few years ago, and I would also support selective education like a grammar school would operate. If a person is truly fit for university education, they'll pay off their (interest free) costs quickly. If you've still got the debt years and years after being in full time employment, well...I hopefully don't need to answer that one.
I went to a public secondary school in 2000 and whilst there was internal separation based on ability (class sets, top set, 2nd, 3rd, 4th / bottom) these classes were still very big and probably only around 50% of the kids actually wanted to learn anything.
I was fortunate (not to blow my own trumpet) that I was identified as being 'gifted' and made part of a special little group. It was arranged that we would go on a trip to Italy but later the idea was abandoned because it was seen as unfair. This wasn't just a jolly, it was to learn about the Roman Empire, but it never happened.
In the later years there was huge encouragement to engage with local universities and try to understand how important higher education was. Being one of this 'gifted group' I went on lots of little trips to university open days with my pals.
The ideology that they portrayed was what totally put me off of any more education. I'd roughed it with all sorts of oiks to battle my way through to GCSE stage and the overwhelming impression from these unversity trips was that higher education was 'open to everyone', even those miscreant tw*ts who were always so disruptive, they could do a degree in watching Hollyoaks (media studies I think is the proper name) or some other nonsensical field.
I decided from very early on that I didn't want to spend a day longer than I had to with this sort of crowd and went into an apprenticeship instead.
In hindsight, a degree would have done me huge favours. But it was never about the education, it was always about the 'social integration' - "Oh," they said, "you'll meet lots of wonderful characters and life-long friends" - What they failed to communicate was how this would unlock greater opportunities in work life, the social lifestyle was the overbearing factor.
It's why I fully supported the gross inflation of student fees a few years ago, and I would also support selective education like a grammar school would operate. If a person is truly fit for university education, they'll pay off their (interest free) costs quickly. If you've still got the debt years and years after being in full time employment, well...I hopefully don't need to answer that one.
Esseesse said:
RicksAlfas said:
Esseesse said:
Contrary to what the OP posts, this is not technically a new Grammar school BTW. Opening new Grammar schools is not allowed.
Surely it's as good as?The entry test for Grammar school is largely based (66% for the school My children will aim for) on a subject not taught in school: Verbal reasoning.
Maths equates for 33% of the remainder, with an English test being used to decide between the last places.
A child who excels in school will have very little advantage over the class idiot for this section. It just so happens private tutoring is available for Verbal Reasoning, and is pretty much essential, as you need to know how to answer each type of question. Some of the questions are not easy either. There is a technique for each that needs to be learnt. I would wager that without guidance most of the top 5% of school children would fail miserably.
Given the cost of private tutoring, this means Grammar entrance is utterly parental-income based.
I like the idea of specialist schools for the brightest and best, but this is certainly not that.
Maths equates for 33% of the remainder, with an English test being used to decide between the last places.
A child who excels in school will have very little advantage over the class idiot for this section. It just so happens private tutoring is available for Verbal Reasoning, and is pretty much essential, as you need to know how to answer each type of question. Some of the questions are not easy either. There is a technique for each that needs to be learnt. I would wager that without guidance most of the top 5% of school children would fail miserably.
Given the cost of private tutoring, this means Grammar entrance is utterly parental-income based.
I like the idea of specialist schools for the brightest and best, but this is certainly not that.
I live in Kent, so this is very relevant to me.
Firstly, locally to me there are several grammars. More importantly, however, none of the schools in my local area, whether grammar or not, are poor. They are all good. The fallacy that grammars suck money and the best out of the system to the detriment of the majority is patently rubbish.
Grammars are not for everyone - my daughter passed and could have gone to a great grammar, but it wasn't the right choice for her. This is also evidenced by a noticable fallout from the first couple of years where some kids don't cope.
Personally, I think that we all have different skills. I have helped create a UTC - a sort of modern technical college - and I firmly believe that this is the right option for some kids - not better than a grammar, not worse, just fitting the skills and outcomes for some appropriately.
Alot of the brightest people I know couldn't change a lightbulb let alone build a car or a boat like the UTC's do, or some of the comprehensives/academys do in their Design & Technology departments.
So provide the options, teach the kids in the way that works for them and create the best outcomes. Not everyone needs to go to Oxford and become a lawyer, indeed I pity those that do, but don't hold them back if that is the right option for them.
I have 3 kids. The 2 eldest were always academically well above most of the other pupils in their primary school. Both sat the entrance exams for the local grammars and were accepted.
The youngest is not so academically bright but is far brighter in other ways, far more pratical and hands on minded. We didn't even bother putting him forward for grammar as we knew that the heavily academic focus would not suit him.
What I find surprising every time I hear this being discussed on media, is that most people's opinions on grammar eduction are either based on an outdated model based on 11+ segregation of pupils from some time back in the 60's, or a posiiton of complete ignorance of what modern grammar schools are about.
Admission to the school is not limited by income, location, brown envelopes or any other influence other than the child's ability to pass the entrance exams. The social mix of pupils that gain access is about as varied as it can be with introducing quotas or sending people out to farm rough areas for bright kids who's parents don't care.
For me, the gap and failing in the eduction system at the moment is schooling for those at the other end of the scale, there should be far more vocationally aligned education to allow less academic kids gain a good old fashioned 'trade' that will see them employed and earning and with a sense of hope.
The youngest is not so academically bright but is far brighter in other ways, far more pratical and hands on minded. We didn't even bother putting him forward for grammar as we knew that the heavily academic focus would not suit him.
What I find surprising every time I hear this being discussed on media, is that most people's opinions on grammar eduction are either based on an outdated model based on 11+ segregation of pupils from some time back in the 60's, or a posiiton of complete ignorance of what modern grammar schools are about.
Admission to the school is not limited by income, location, brown envelopes or any other influence other than the child's ability to pass the entrance exams. The social mix of pupils that gain access is about as varied as it can be with introducing quotas or sending people out to farm rough areas for bright kids who's parents don't care.
For me, the gap and failing in the eduction system at the moment is schooling for those at the other end of the scale, there should be far more vocationally aligned education to allow less academic kids gain a good old fashioned 'trade' that will see them employed and earning and with a sense of hope.
Efbe said:
The entry test for Grammar school is largely based (66% for the school My children will aim for) on a subject not taught in school: Verbal reasoning.
Maths equates for 33% of the remainder, with an English test being used to decide between the last places.
A child who excels in school will have very little advantage over the class idiot for this section. It just so happens private tutoring is available for Verbal Reasoning, and is pretty much essential, as you need to know how to answer each type of question. Some of the questions are not easy either. There is a technique for each that needs to be learnt. I would wager that without guidance most of the top 5% of school children would fail miserably.
Given the cost of private tutoring, this means Grammar entrance is utterly parental-income based.
I like the idea of specialist schools for the brightest and best, but this is certainly not that.
Where I live they have recently removed the Verbal Reasoning part of the test.Maths equates for 33% of the remainder, with an English test being used to decide between the last places.
A child who excels in school will have very little advantage over the class idiot for this section. It just so happens private tutoring is available for Verbal Reasoning, and is pretty much essential, as you need to know how to answer each type of question. Some of the questions are not easy either. There is a technique for each that needs to be learnt. I would wager that without guidance most of the top 5% of school children would fail miserably.
Given the cost of private tutoring, this means Grammar entrance is utterly parental-income based.
I like the idea of specialist schools for the brightest and best, but this is certainly not that.
Southend has had grammar schools for generations, and you have a full range of parental views from "my kid has to get in and will be tutored", to "my kid will never go to a school with those posh weird snobs" and every view in between.
I think that in Primary school the kids a generally put into sets based on ability so that they can get the education that is appropriate for their level of learning at that age, why should this stop because they are 12?
RicksAlfas said:
FredClogs said:
From what I understand of the methods of getting kids into these selective schools that's exactly what it's about, tutoring and tutoring hard from aged 9 to 11.
The fact is that the entrance exams require a technique which is not covered by any of the primary school curriculum (and nor should it be). The tutoring is to make sure the kid understands the exam paper and structure, so when they turn their paper over on the big day they are not phased by what they find. The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
I am against tutoring. After familiarisation* with the type of question tutoring will only help some people to get in who will struggle to survive at grammars - I have seen it happen to friends and it can ruin childhood for some kids.
- http://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/14513/Kent-Test-familiarisation-booklet.pdf
Efbe said:
Question from 11+ Verbal Reasoning:
The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
Disagree.The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
Tutoring is trying to give a child an artificial 'edge' whereas the question you cited is clearly looking to get the child thinking. Tutoring might make them smarter in the long run, great, but it's cheating a bit, trying to unlock something which isn't 'there' to start with.
If an adult needs 'guidance' on how to solve the above, then unfortunately they're just not very smart. That's not going to stop them going on to do wonderful things and get a high paid job, but it would prevent them from going on to be a part of a group of talented individuals who deserve access to the best level of education.
I hate the way it is stated that to get into a Grammar you need to be middle class and have rich parents paying for tuition. I come from a working class family and lived on a council estate when I went to grammar school in 1990. I got in because my teachers at primary school and my parents could see I had the ability.
I hate the way everyone must be the same to appease the apologists of the feckless. If grammar schools were widespread anyone could go to one if they and their parents had the desire. The fact is there are some schools that are full of the feckless, destined for a life on benefits like their parents and their parents before them. Why should they stop those that truly want to get on in life from doing so in the name of equality?
Everyone deserves a decent education, but grammars don't prevent that from happening. If anything the opposite it true. I'm just truly grateful for my daughter's sake that I live in Kent and she will have the opportunity of a grammar education if it is suitable for her when the time comes.
I hate the way everyone must be the same to appease the apologists of the feckless. If grammar schools were widespread anyone could go to one if they and their parents had the desire. The fact is there are some schools that are full of the feckless, destined for a life on benefits like their parents and their parents before them. Why should they stop those that truly want to get on in life from doing so in the name of equality?
Everyone deserves a decent education, but grammars don't prevent that from happening. If anything the opposite it true. I'm just truly grateful for my daughter's sake that I live in Kent and she will have the opportunity of a grammar education if it is suitable for her when the time comes.
Efbe said:
RicksAlfas said:
FredClogs said:
From what I understand of the methods of getting kids into these selective schools that's exactly what it's about, tutoring and tutoring hard from aged 9 to 11.
The fact is that the entrance exams require a technique which is not covered by any of the primary school curriculum (and nor should it be). The tutoring is to make sure the kid understands the exam paper and structure, so when they turn their paper over on the big day they are not phased by what they find. The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
3265
TERM
Never even heard of Verbal Reasoning , is this correct ?
gregf40 said:
Some parents push their kids into playing football as soon as they can walk - others don't. Guess which ones become footballers?
The ones with genuine talent. Loads of footballers come from deprived backgrounds with no dad on the scene at all, yet make it because they are out on the street all day kicking a ball. And not that many sons of pro footballers themselves become footballers, despite probably having the ultimate advantage of money and an in house coach. So you're talking tripe. The brightest kids do not get into grammar schools, but the kids of parents who can afford private tuition where they are coached to pass the entrance exam are the ones who get in. Yes, they may be quite bright kids in order to pass even after tuition, but certainly no brighter than loads of kids from less affluent families who can't pass because their parents can't afford the extra tuition.
All comps have internal selection anyway, with set 1 maths, set 2 maths etc.
Efbe said:
Question from 11+ Verbal Reasoning:
The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
You overstate it, surely?The number codes for three of these four words are listed in a random order.
Work out the code to answer the questions.
REST MITE STIR TRIM
1456 3154 4231
1. Find the code for the word MITE. ( ______ )
2. Find the code for the word SEMI. ( ______ )
3. Find the word that has the number code 1246. ( ______ )
There is a very specific technique for answering this question. Most adults would not be able to work this out without some inital guidance.
The tutoring is not to make sure the children understand the structure. It's so that they can apply specific techniques to each question so they pass. Otherwise tutoring would be complete in only a few lessons
I saw the answer in a few seconds. I cannot believe most adults couldn't grasp that.
wiggy001 said:
I hate the way it is stated that to get into a Grammar you need to be middle class and have rich parents paying for tuition. I come from a working class family and lived on a council estate when I went to grammar school in 1990. I got in because my teachers at primary school and my parents could see I had the ability.
I hate the way everyone must be the same to appease the apologists of the feckless. If grammar schools were widespread anyone could go to one if they and their parents had the desire. The fact is there are some schools that are full of the feckless, destined for a life on benefits like their parents and their parents before them. Why should they stop those that truly want to get on in life from doing so in the name of equality?
Everyone deserves a decent education, but grammars don't prevent that from happening. If anything the opposite it true. I'm just truly grateful for my daughter's sake that I live in Kent and she will have the opportunity of a grammar education if it is suitable for her when the time comes.
+1, not for me but for my 2 kids that went to grammar. They weren't tutored, they didn't come from a 'rich' background, they were just lucky enough to be academically bright enough to pass the entrance tests.I hate the way everyone must be the same to appease the apologists of the feckless. If grammar schools were widespread anyone could go to one if they and their parents had the desire. The fact is there are some schools that are full of the feckless, destined for a life on benefits like their parents and their parents before them. Why should they stop those that truly want to get on in life from doing so in the name of equality?
Everyone deserves a decent education, but grammars don't prevent that from happening. If anything the opposite it true. I'm just truly grateful for my daughter's sake that I live in Kent and she will have the opportunity of a grammar education if it is suitable for her when the time comes.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
gregf40 said:
Some parents push their kids into playing football as soon as they can walk - others don't. Guess which ones become footballers?
The brightest kids do not get into grammar schools, but the kids of parents who can afford private tuition where they are coached to pass the entrance exam are the ones who get in. Yes, they may be quite bright kids in order to pass even after tuition, but certainly no brighter than loads of kids from less affluent families who can't pass because their parents can't afford the extra tuition.
t, the agenda that the media keeps pushing. It's true that I knew some parents that were paying for tution, maybe 1 hour or so a week, not exactly the sort of expense likely to ruin a family's finances over a 2 or 3 month timescale. You might also be surprised to learn that almost without exception, it made no difference, the kids didn't get in, they still couldn't pass the exams.The children that got in were those recognised at primary school as being 'gifted' AND where the parents put in the effort to make enquiries and put their children through the entrance process. Without these two basic things, the child is not getting to grammar. If the child is not 'gifted' it won't pass the tests, if the parents don't try even the most gifted child won't get in.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff