Jump to content

Grammar schools v Comprehensive and other schools


Recommended Posts

My brother went to a sec mod. trained as an electrician, worked as such for BG and rose to become a top manager working in their gas fields abroad.

 

If you were a late developer you could get into the 3rd form of a grammar school, as several did at my school.

 

My brother did very similar...now works over the pond as electrical superintendent for a large mining company over there....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, if you live in rented accommodation on a sink estate, there's not much hope of you selling up or being able to afford private rented accommodation to live in a catchment Grammar school area.

 

If the grammar school offers selective entry though then you don't have to necessarily live in the catchment area. I managed to win a place at a grammar school and get out of what you call a "sink estate" and then on to Uni, if that's not acceptable social mobility then I don't know what is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grammar schools are STATE schools where entrance is dependent on passing the 11+ exam.

After that entrance does depend on the same criteria as comps. ie. distance, siblings etc..

In Lincolnshire 25% of pupils are educated in the Grammar School System and my local schools also take pupils from outside the county eg. Newark.

They are excellent schools but don't suit all students even if they are capable of passing the 11+.

Some are coached to pass and then struggle once they are there.

My eldest attends the local comp and loves it.

My youngest has just passed her 11+ and after much deliberating chose the Grammar (or Selective Academy now its got Academy status).

With the right environment and parent/teacher support any pupil can attend a grammar school if they live in the right County.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Davyboy, I passed the 11+ in 1947, and got to King Ted's.

There was a mix of all levels, some getting free school meals because their parents were poor, some being dropped pff from high class cars.

The headmasters, AW Barton and then Clapton, emphasised that we were all equal as "Edwardians", and family wealth didn't make you any better.

The idea behind the comprehensives was that they would ensure social equality; if you lived in a posh area, you went to a posh school with posh kids; if you lived in a poor area, you stayed among your own poor class.

The Labour Party leader people were proud of sending their children to a comprehensive -- aye, a special comprehensive for Labour!

 

Here in Australia, 4 children of ours went to private schools - one dropped out of there and got to uni from the State High School.

3 grandchildren went to Catholic schools, 3 to Anglican schools (because the state school for that area was a mess), the others through the State system, and all have done well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The headmasters, AW Barton and then Clapton, emphasised that we were all equal as "Edwardians".

 

Eh! What did he mean by that? Edwardians weren't on the throne in 1947.:huh:

 

Also, there was a great elite during this period so there was hardly equality among the masses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh! What did he mean by that? Edwardians weren't on the throne in 1947.:huh:

 

Also, there was a great elite during this period so there was hardly equality among the masses.

 

Think it might have been because jfish went to King Edward school... hence all Edwardians from his alma mater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the grammar school offers selective entry though then you don't have to necessarily live in the catchment area. I managed to win a place at a grammar school and get out of what you call a "sink estate" and then on to Uni, if that's not acceptable social mobility then I don't know what is.

 

So you mean like a pre university provision for the rich? Everyone knows the tories don't like social mobility unless you've got a fair bit of dosh in the first place, just look at most of their social policies over the years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you mean like a pre university provision for the rich? Everyone knows the tories don't like social mobility unless you've got a fair bit of dosh in the first place, just look at most of their social policies over the years

 

There are always those who strive to better themselves whatever background they come from or whatever political party is in power.

It is unfair not to give credit to these people.

Surely the Labour party want people to be well educated and have successful careers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.