Grammer schools.

[Gwylan]

and Wilson shut most the mines. funny how the view of history gets coloured.

Indeed. How incovenient those pesky facts are

as i think about it, there isnt a problem with grammars - whats wrong with selection - but they arent the answer either. people have different abilities and so on, so seems to me provision of a range of targeted eductional institutions would be a good idea. that takes to acedemies, with different focuses - pure academia, vocational, sports, etc.

There's nothing wrong with selection per se: it's when grammar schools are presented as a way to introduce social mobility - as they're not. It's fine to have a variety of schools with their own focus but what you don't want happening is grammar schools getting the lion shares of funds/the best teachers etc - which is what happened in the 50s and 60s

 

[crookie]

I bet decent tradesmen like plumbers and electricians earn plenty more than all those graduated with useless Media Studies etc degrees. Although how many of those went to a grammar school, I have no idea.

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

A grammar school took me, with a brain but no family money, into the stratosphere. Comps are find as long as they have streaming so white van man kids who have a job lined up working for the old man can sit in a room where they can take the piss and leave those who need to earn a living by their own graft to suck up the education they need to survive. There were plenty of WVM kids in my school (HGSB) but they were in the D stream if they had decided to not engage. Elitism works, as long as the elite are pritected, and entry into the elite is based on talent and a willingness to engage. 'One size fits all' fits none.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

A grammar school took me, with a brain but no family money, into the stratosphere. Comps are find as long as they have streaming so white van man kids who have a job lined up working for the old man can sit in a room where they can take the piss and leave those who need to earn a living by their own graft to suck up the education they need to survive. There were plenty of WVM kids in my school (HGSB) but they were in the D stream if they had decided to not engage. Elitism works, as long as the elite are pritected, and entry into the elite is based on talent and a willingness to engage. 'One size fits all' fits none.

Sadly I flunked proofreading classes

 

[Albion my Albion]

Just waiting to see who would "spot that one".

Pinkie Pie - Aw, shucks! - YouTube
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...x28jtvfnGP_UlkifA&sig2=8ekgTvNNCfnLthRQvTRGZg

 

[Albion my Albion]

Tend to agree with your comments.

Sent from my G7-L01 using Tapatalk

But then he would have shite in the woods if he had lived in the middle ages.

 

[sllugaes]

But then he would have shite in the woods if he had lived in the middle ages.

What a peculiar comment.

Sent from my G7-L01 using Tapatalk

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

It wasn't so cut & dried even when the 11+ was the deciding factor. I passed and went to Hove County, but there were children who moved up at 13 because they showed academic promise, when at the secondary modern.
In those days the secondary modern didn't offer any exams at all, which was why the CSEs were introduced. Now it would be more practical subjects rather than academia.

Funnily enough, a lot of girls did better, having a secondary modern education, because shorthand and typing were taught. Secretaries were well paid, whereas very few people from grammar schools were able to go to university. Only the top 1% went in those days.

I was at Hove CGS from 1965 and during that period we had one boy move across from a Secondary Modern (Knoll); I well remember this subject being part of an inter-school debate with the Girls Grammar when I was in the sixth form. My g/f at the time went to Varndean and my wife was at Chelmsford High School (still a Grammar School) from 1967; neither had/has any personal knowledge of a girl "transferring" from a Secondary Modern.
In my Science Sixth we all went on to University or Polytechnic, the Arts and Economics sixths probably less so but there's a bit more subjective opinion in this as I just don't remember all the students. However with an entire sixth form of around seventy, of which 30-40 were in the two Science groups, my year would have seen something like 70-80% of the entire sixth form going on to some form of higher education leading to a degree. From memory (ie headmaster's wittering's at my final Speech Day) we had eleven students who went to Oxbridge.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I was at Hove CGS from 1965 and during that period we had one boy move across from a Secondary Modern (Knoll); I well remember this subject being part of an inter-school debate with the Girls Grammar when I was in the sixth form. My g/f at the time went to Varndean and my wife was at Chelmsford High School (still a Grammar School) from 1967; neither had/has any personal knowledge of a girl "transferring" from a Secondary Modern.
In my Science Sixth we all went on to University or Polytechnic, the Arts and Economics sixths probably less so but there's a bit more subjective opinion in this as I just don't remember all the students. However with an entire sixth form of around seventy, of which 30-40 were in the two Science groups, my year would have seen something like 70-80% of the entire sixth form going on to some form of higher education leading to a degree. From memory (ie headmaster's wittering's at my final Speech Day) we had eleven students who went to Oxbridge.

It wasn't commonplace but it did happen. I wax at HCGS, from 59-64. We had three classes per year, X,Y & Z. It was mainly the X class stayed to go onto sixth form. Most of us left at16, which was a year longer than at secondary moderns. In those days 5 O levels got you into a decent job, registered nurse, civil service, officer in the forces etc.
There were also streams within subjects. I was not good at science, but in the top streams for history, English, French, and geography.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

It wasn't commonplace but it did happen. I wax at HCGS, from 59-64. We had three classes per year, X,Y & Z. It was mainly the X class stayed to go onto sixth form. Most of us left at16, which was a year longer than at secondary moderns. In those days 5 O levels got you into a decent job, registered nurse, civil service, officer in the forces etc.
There were also streams within subjects. I was not good at science, but in the top streams for history, English, French, and geography.

Lower school class streaming was much the same for me although both classes X & Y tended to move on to the sixth form with X taking the majority of O levels 12 months early in year 4. Very,very few from year Z went on to A level, probably dependent upon O level results but I can't remember tbh. Not sure we were actually streamed within subjects, maybe the class was split for some (eg chemistry and physics) to make it more manageable but we all took the same O levels so were being taught to the same syllabus.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Lower school class streaming was much the same for me although both classes X & Y tended to move on to the sixth form with X taking the majority of O levels 12 months early in year 4. Very,very few from year Z went on to A level, probably dependent upon O level results but I can't remember tbh. Not sure we were actually streamed within subjects, maybe the class was split for some (eg chemistry and physics) to make it more manageable but we all took the same O levels so were being taught to the same syllabus.

We had options at 14, so I dropped Physics & Chemistry, just taking the obligatory science via Biology. Everyone had to take a modern lanaguage, but as I was so good at French, I dropped Latin and took German instead.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

We had options at 14, so I dropped Physics & Chemistry, just taking the obligatory science via Biology. Everyone had to take a modern lanaguage, but as I was so good at French, I dropped Latin and took German instead.

No options for us class X high flyers. Compulsory dropping of Art and Woodwork after year 2 then full on for x8 O levels in year 4 (Maths, Eng Lang, Chem, Phys, French, Latin, Geog, Hist), followed by a year of cramming in a five year syllabus if you wanted to do Eng Lit, Biol, German or Addn Maths. Seems a bit weird looking back at it all, very much an impersonal, conveyer belt approach.

 

[withdeanwombat]

I went to a grammar school and I'm dead clever and all.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

No options for us class X high flyers. Compulsory dropping of Art and Woodwork after year 2 then full on for x8 O levels in year 4 (Maths, Eng Lang, Chem, Phys, French, Latin, Geog, Hist), followed by a year of cramming in a five year syllabus if you wanted to do Eng Lit, Biol, German or Addn Maths. Seems a bit weird looking back at it all, very much an impersonal, conveyer belt approach.

I was a duffer in Z, but still took 8 O levels. It was very academic, which wasn't for everyone.

Interestingly, whilst on holiday in France, a couple of years ago, a coach load of Russian youngsters arrived. They were all ballet trained. They offered to put on a show for a discount for three or four days. They explained, that in Russia, everyone has State education, but it was general in the mornings only. Once they got to 11, they were divided up according to their talent.
Youngsters good at ballet/dance went to a school where the general education was taught until midday, then all afternoon was dance training.
This applied to gymnastics, sport, engineering, sciences etc. Even in a Communist state, there was a selection process.

 

[maltaseagull]

This idea that grammar schools offer opportunities for kids from poorer backgrounds is a bit of a myth. Yes, there are some kids but, when I was at Varndean, there weren't many from Moulsecoomb, Whitehawk, Coldean or Hollingdean. There is plenty of evidence that grammar schools perpetuate middle-class dominance. It will be the professional parents who will hire private tutors to help kids pass the exams, shutting out more the poorer pupils.

The other problem is what happens to the rest of the kids, the ones who don't go. As Lord B points out, 80% of the population will have a worse education. Grammar schools will attract the best teachers, have the best facilities and have better staff/pupil ratios. The 80% will get the dregs.

Grammar schools are a massive step backwards, we should be looking at improving education for all, not just an elite

Not disagreeing with your main point about cons of grammar schools but the reason "there weren't many from Moulsecoomb, Whitehawk, Coldean or Hollingdean." was that most of them went to Westlain which was most peoples 3rd choice.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

My wife and I both went to Grammar Schools in the 1960s and in to the very early 1970s. We would both argue that our two daughters, who went to the local comprehensive in the 1990s received a better education in every way than we did - better taught, better everything. I went to Worthinh High School for Boys and, although we had some very good and inspirational teachers, we also had some lousy and lazy teachers.

There are two schools where we live in Chandlers Ford, the one which estate agents choose to advertise properties as being in the catchment area of and the other one. Our girls both went to the other one, partly because of catchment areas but mostly through our choice because we deemed it a better school - not so good with results (not an exam factory.) but better at dealing with the whole range of children that was its intake, taking each child seriously. And the daughters both did well.

A lot of our education system is moulded in my view by the prejudices, short-sightedness and ignorance of parents. An excellent OFSTED report from a couple of years ago does not necessarily say anything about what the school is doing now.

The thought, though, of people being "selected" at the age of 11, or 13 as used to happen as well, fills me with horror. But the main place where serious action is needed is in the very early years at infant type age, which is where people's life-chances are mainly shaped. Some kids won't be bothered because they know they will be working with their dad, as has been mentioned elsewhere, but others won't because neither they nor their parents think they will ever achieve anything in life and so write themselves off. That is the biggest crime.

Maybe we should have a referendum on it........ but we'd probably get that wrong as well.

 

[Creaky]

I am the product of a grammar school education and looking back found grammar schools restrictive in their range of subjects and facilities.

The grammar school system reinforced a general perception that teaching those students with academic abilities non-academic subjects would be a waste of resources and that those not satisfying the academic criteria to qualify for a grammar school place wouldn't benefit from an academic education.

The very idea that any subject that would get your hands dirty should be taught in a grammar school would have horrified the school governors!

In my twilight years my greatest satisfaction has been to learn, (at a very basic level), various trades including brick laying, carpentry, plumbing and electrical installation - and ironically my 'academic' background has assisted immeasurably in this.

It's not the theory of a comprehensive school system that is failing in some cases but the implementation. In theory a comprehensive school should have the resources to stretch its pupils in all areas and at all levels of abilities - in practice not so simple.

 

[Gwylan]

Not disagreeing with your main point about cons of grammar schools but the reason "there weren't many from Moulsecoomb, Whitehawk, Coldean or Hollingdean." was that most of them went to Westlain which was most peoples 3rd choice.

Yes, more would have gone to Westlain but still not that many. I grew up in Moulsecoomb and among the kids I played with, just two went to Westlain. I can't speak for other areas, so there may have been well have been a lot more from there, nearly all the grammar school kids from my primary school (Bevendean) went to Westlain

Westlain wasn't necessarily third choice for many people though. Some parents (like mine) wanted to send their kids to a single-sex school, others thought a mixed school would be better. I really wish I'd gone there as I don't think single sex education is that great (and it's not for boys, they do better in mixed schools: girls, however, do better in single sex ones)

 

[alfredmizen]

Why describe the current debate about the future of secondary education as if it was all about the re-introduction of grammar schools?

For most young people it will be all about the re-introduction of secondary modern schools, where children are condemned to a lifetime of failure, starting at age 11.

So youre telling me that to go to a secondary modern school was to be condemned to a lifetime of failure ? For everyone , Really ??

 

[Arthritic Toe]

The problem is 11+. Its just not right to determine a childs acedemic ability at that age and have their whole future dependant upon that determination. In village primary school I went to, my entire year failed it. Was the entire year thick? Unlikely - or maybe the school wasn't very good. Either way, that sentenced the entire year to life at the secondary school. Fortunately, that secondary school became a comprehensive soon after and the bright kids were able to rise to the top.