Tories to bring back Grammar schools

[Justin Smith]

But we have them (Comprehensives and Grammar schools) at the same time now...

 

They can`t be true comprehensives can they ? That would be impossible. I can only assume that the schools for kids who don`t pass the 11+ are dishonestly called Comprehensives so as to try and hide (from the gullible parents) that their kids are actually at a Secondary Modern. As I said before, it`s a contradiction in terms to have both types of school system running at the same time.

[Santo]

This is the stupidest comment I've ever read. If all kids are bright enough, they can all go for an entry exam. The entry test is not biased toward anyone, unless not suitable. Get a grip, stop giving yourself excuses. If you leave kids with different learning attitude in a same class, you discriminating against bright kids. Then your comment is unfair. What you suggesting is to bury future talents of some kids with some other kids who may never make any good contribution to society. Get a grip

 

Your post is little better. You seem to confuse non-academic ability with being disruptive. This is a ridiculous view to hold.

 

What is a learning attitude? Being bright does not in any way equate to a positive attitude to learning and school. A bright kid can breeze into a grammar but hate school and be disruptive. Just like a kid who is mathematically ungifted can try his best to learn and be a model student.

 

For someone who claims to have gone to grammar and private school your command of the English language leaves a lot to desired by the way.

[El Cid]

If anyone believes they have evidence of how grammar schools will benefit the large majority of children not selected for such privilege, then please present it here on this thread.

 

Any evidence at all?

 

Perhaps there are countries that are performing well with grammar schools/selection?

[Staunton]

This is the stupidest comment I've ever read. If all kids are bright enough, they can all go for an entry exam. The entry test is not biased toward anyone, unless not suitable. Get a grip, stop giving yourself excuses. If you leave kids with different learning attitude in a same class, you discriminating against bright kids. Then your comment is unfair. What you suggesting is to bury future talents of some kids with some other kids who may never make any good contribution to society. Get a grip

 

Thank you for your comments. I wonder if you have any evidence detailing how the establishment of yet more institutions carefully selecting who they wish to admit will assist the majority of children, those not granted a place at a grammar school?

[Justin Smith]

Sigh. Perhaps you should read what I quoted. I will paste it again..

 

Back in February YouGov asked a question to two different samples. Half were asked if they’d like to bring back grammar schools across the whole of Great Britain – 53% said yes, 20% said no. The other half were asked if they’d like to bring back the system of an exam at 11, with 25% of children who passed going to grammar schools and the other 75% going to secondary moderns. Now 46% of people supported it, 34% of people were opposed.

 

I`ve been thinking about this and I`m actually even more shocked by it than I was before. Quite clearly a significant number of parents have no mathematical ability, or are just assuming their precious little kids will get into a Grammar school when, quite obviously, most don`t. The alternative is that a significant percentage of those polled about Grammar schools haven`t actually got kids (or their kids are already through the schools system so don`t really care. This raises a deep philosophical / democratic question. Should those who are more affected by any particular policy only have the same say in it as those who aren`t ? A similar point was made during a philosophical debate on the EU referendum debate. Younger people will live with the long term consequences of leaving the EU, older voters are less affected (as most have guaranteed income from their pensions) and for a shorter time. Yet not only are younger and older votes counted the same, but, in fact, those under 18 weren`t even allowed to vote.

[tpgoose]

Thank you for your comments. I wonder if you have any evidence detailing how the establishment of yet more institutions carefully selecting who they wish to admit will assist the majority of children, those not granted a place at a grammar school?

 

I will cease to comment in this thread. Pointless, whatever school out there will not affect me or my family.

[El Cid]

I`ve been thinking about this and I`m actually even more shocked by it than I was before.

 

I have been googling, and the first result was that grammar schools perform better

 

I compared 10 schools at random from Leeds and Lincolnshire.

 

If at first you dont succeed

[Justin Smith]

This is the stupidest comment I've ever read. If all kids are bright enough, they can all go for an entry exam. The entry test is not biased toward anyone, unless not suitable. Get a grip, stop giving yourself excuses. If you leave kids with different learning attitude in a same class, you discriminating against bright kids. Then your comment is unfair. What you suggesting is to bury future talents of some kids with some other kids who may never make any good contribution to society. Get a grip

 

Two things you seem to have missed.

 

1 - It doesn`t matter if all the kids who enter an 11+ in any area are clever enough to pass it, only a set percentage will be passed, the rest, a majority, will "fail".

 

2 - Kids with differing academic abilities and attitudes to learning are already separated, it`s called streaming. But the crucial difference is there can be movement between the classes, and, critically, kids can be in different stream for different subjects. No child is officially "a failure" at 11. Eleven for Gawd`s sake. I`m shocked there are so many who seem to think that`s perfectly acceptable. My brother may well have failed the 11+, he wasn`t academically gifted at 11, but he stuck at it, worked very hard, and via resits of both O levels and A levels proceeded via an HND to a degree course, which he passed. I would postulate that would never have happened had he been sidelined into a Secondary Modern. Plus there would have been a very significant negative effect on his self confidence had his brother and sister both passed the 11+ and gone to a Grammar, he failed it and was sent to a Secondary Modern.

Edited September 9, 2016 by Justin Smith

[Santo]

I have been googling, and the first result was that grammar schools perform better

 

I compared 10 schools at random from Leeds and Lincolnshire.

 

If at first you dont succeed

 

That's not the point he's making though. He's asking how do grammar schools benefit those not selected to go to grammar school.

 

Quite simply, they won't.

 

By all means bring back grammar schools but not at the expense of all those not selected.

 

It's beneficial for bright kids not to be held back by the unacademic kids but its also beneficial to the unacademic to learn at their, for want of a better word, slower, pace.

Edited September 9, 2016 by Santo

[InigoMontoya]

But they would be. The majority of the country want the return of grammar schools.

 

 

No. The "majority of the country" does not want the return of secondary modern schools.

 

(Which is the same thing)