El Cid Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 putting bright kids together regardless of background sounds like a good idea to me. That is what happens now, with streaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin-H Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 That is what happens now, with streaming. What about the argument about parents affording tutoring to get their children into top sets? Does that only count when it is in reference to grammar schools? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 What? You don't think it's better that children go to better schools if they're bright, rather children go to better schools because their parents are wealthy and can afford a house near a good school? You'll have to explain this one to me I'm afraid. I know we all want this social utopia of all schools having small classes, great facilities and awesome teachers but life isn't like that - it's never been like that. Whether it needs a specific entrance exam I'm not sure but putting bright kids together regardless of background sounds like a good idea to me. What's wrong with streaming in comprehensive schools? I wonder how many parents have felt upset when all their children took the 11+, but not all passed the exam. Are their other children failures and resigned to the local comprehensive, creating a divide in families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santo Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Because more money is being spent on grammar schools when this money could be better spent on advancing ALL comprehensive education, as a whole, rather than spend more money on those privileged to go to grammar schools at the expense of ALL tax payers. People wonder why comprehensives don't do as well as grammar schools, well there are many reasons for this. However, of course grammar school exam results are going to be better, if you cream off the top 20% of students every year. Under such conditions, how do you expect to have a proper comprehensive system? Do you know for a fact that grammar schools will be funded at the expense of and to the detriment of non-grammars or is it just a 'bloody Tories!' worry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Under the proposals it say.. 'Every new grammar school will be required to establish a "new, high quality non-selective school". They will be required to sponsor an under-performing academy school.' Surely this will improve education across the board. Why are you opposed to that? Good schools already sponsor under-performing academy schools. Does this 'new' grammar school have to be a new building, or are we really just talking about turning a failing 'Tory' academy into a grammar school? ---------- Post added 09-09-2016 at 13:23 ---------- What about the argument about parents affording tutoring to get their children into top sets? Does that only count when it is in reference to grammar schools? Nothing wrong with kids being tutored, if that is what is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Under the proposals it say.. 'Every new grammar school will be required to establish a "new, high quality non-selective school". They will be required to sponsor an under-performing academy school.' Surely this will improve education across the board. Why are you opposed to that? Wealthier parents can move into catchment areas and can afford private tuition to prepare their children for the 11+ exam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santo Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 What's wrong with streaming in comprehensive schools? I wonder how many parents have felt upset when all their children took the 11+, but not all passed the exam. Are their other children failures and resigned to the local comprehensive, creating a divide in families. Errrrrr no. I would imagine it happened a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin-H Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 What's wrong with streaming in comprehensive schools? I wonder how many parents have felt upset when all their children took the 11+, but not all passed the exam. Are their other children failures and resigned to the local comprehensive, creating a divide in families. Why are children branded failures for not being as academic? We need to stop this rhetoric and get a culture that values practical skills and other abilities. (Plus, they can transfer at a later date if they improve) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Wealthier parents can move into catchment areas and can afford private tuition to prepare their children for the 11+ exam. Yes they can. They already do this for all other exams and teaching in general. It is irrelevant to the question of whether grammar schools are a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santo Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Why are children branded failures for not being as academic? We need to stop this rhetoric and get a culture that values practical skills and other abilities. (Plus, they can transfer at a later date if they improve) Completely agree. The rhetoric is the problem not the concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now