Grammar Schools
Discussion
Listening to the Today program, there's a debate regarding the first new grammar school in 50 years in Kent. Selective education based on capability has to be a good thing doesn't it? As someone who was educated in the 80's in a woeful C of E set up anything that encourages excellence rather than mediocrity should be welcomed.
Derek Smith said:
I think the argument is that everyone deserves a decent education, regardless of ability or potential.
Also, there's the question of how one judges ability. In my day it seemed to be based on English, maths and history. Everything else was ignored. My brother was designing radios at the age of 8 or 9 so was passed onto a secondary modern where he was in classes of nearly 40. I read a lot and so eased through the 11+ and got into a school where each individual child had more money spent on them and enjoyed class sizes of 20-25.
My daughter has a rich friend who brings a lot of money into this country. She is all but dyslexic yet her comprehensive recognised her abilities and developed them. She went on to a university and the rest is, as they say, history.
Grammar schools will take money from other parts of the education system.
I'm not saying comprehensives are best, just that there is an alternative argument. 'Equal opportunity to develop potential has to be a good thing doesn't it?'
Everyone does deserve a decent education, how that's delivered is the question.Also, there's the question of how one judges ability. In my day it seemed to be based on English, maths and history. Everything else was ignored. My brother was designing radios at the age of 8 or 9 so was passed onto a secondary modern where he was in classes of nearly 40. I read a lot and so eased through the 11+ and got into a school where each individual child had more money spent on them and enjoyed class sizes of 20-25.
My daughter has a rich friend who brings a lot of money into this country. She is all but dyslexic yet her comprehensive recognised her abilities and developed them. She went on to a university and the rest is, as they say, history.
Grammar schools will take money from other parts of the education system.
I'm not saying comprehensives are best, just that there is an alternative argument. 'Equal opportunity to develop potential has to be a good thing doesn't it?'
Tailoring that education to ability ensures the best results in all directions not just the grammar schools. I think using a historic selection criteria as a reason why it wouldn't be successful now doesn't stand, just because it wasn't the right format then doesn't mean it can't be now.
As for grammar schools sucking cash from other parts of the education system I'd be interested in the foundation of this view (genuinely not provocatively).
turbobloke said:
Agreed it's imperfect but like democracy and capitalism it's better than the alternatives.
As somebody pointed out earluer, many secondary schools try to do the same thing in a less objective way inside one building, so they might as well put their bias to one side and do it properly in the first place and have as few negative influences as possible anywhere in sight, for all concerned...this includes teachers who can't quite make it happen with the top sets but for various reaosns get one to teach now and again.
Interesting point, the teaching element of the culture is one that hasn't been discussed fully here.As somebody pointed out earluer, many secondary schools try to do the same thing in a less objective way inside one building, so they might as well put their bias to one side and do it properly in the first place and have as few negative influences as possible anywhere in sight, for all concerned...this includes teachers who can't quite make it happen with the top sets but for various reaosns get one to teach now and again.
A selective school with ambition and high expectations of achievement will encourage and demand teaching standards accordingly. This can only motivate the team knowing the contribution to the school as a whole is represented at the highest level.
The secondary school I went to had a goal of ensuring as many students achieved five GCSE'S at C and above. This was the first year GCSE'S were introduced- the bar couldn't have been set any lower!
As a result a culture of mediocrity was entrenched and if you were remotely bright had little or no challenge. No one had any aspiration. I would like to think this doesn't happen in a modern comprehensive but I'm not confident given the range of challenges this set up brings.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff