Tories to bring back Grammar schools

[unbeliever]

It is interesting that those who champion privilege in any shape or form, and who oppose equality, so often argue that their stance is somehow ideology-neutral, whilst those they oppose are being 'political' or motivated by ideological considerations.

 

There's politics in play on both sides, but those who speak of equality and accuse without evidence their opponents of championing privilege, have spent decades pushing our system away from the most successful model internationally.

[Staunton]

There's politics in play on both sides, but those who speak of equality and accuse without evidence their opponents of championing privilege, have spent decades pushing our system away from the most successful model internationally.

 

Perhaps unbeliever could explain how grammar schools benefit the majority of children, those rejected by a selective system.

[unbeliever]

Perhaps unbeliever could explain how grammar schools benefit the majority of children, those rejected by a selective system.

 

I think this has been covered, but sure.

Teach each child according to their gifts. Don't pretend that all children have the same faculty for all learning. If this is facilitated by placing the more academically inclined children into different schools so that the schools can specialise and tailor themselves to their pupils what's the problem?

[Staunton]

I think this has been covered, but sure.

Teach each child according to their gifts. Don't pretend that all children have the same faculty for all learning. If this is facilitated by placing the more academically inclined children into different schools so that the schools can specialise and tailor themselves to their pupils what's the problem?

 

I was hoping that unbeliever might explain how grammar schools benefit the majority of children, those rejected by a selective system.

[unbeliever]

I was hoping that unbeliever might explain how grammar schools benefit the majority of children, those rejected by a selective system.

 

I think you've got your rhetoric stuck in a loop there. Try giving it a firm tap.

[syne]

I was hoping that unbeliever might explain how grammar schools benefit the majority of children, those rejected by a selective system.

 

It's a daft and misleading question, akin to

 

How does sending Tim peak to the iss benefit Doris who works in starbucks

[Santo]

Sorry not sure what point you`re making here. Are you saying it`s fine to unnecessarily damage a kids self esteem to teach him a lesson about life ? And then sideline him into the probability of low academic attainment ? You have not commented on the rest of my post where I mentioned my brother worked hard and eventually got a degree. I`m not saying that wouldn`t be possible at a Secondary Modern, but you and I know it`d be even harder, and therefore less likely.

 

---------- Post added 10-09-2016 at 09:36 ----------

 

 

That`s political double speak, I`m surprised you`ve fallen for it.

I have to say my opinion of politicians, never high I must admit, has fallen to all time low. The Referendum campaign was bad enough, but this Grammar policy is just sending it into the stratosphere. Rather worryingly my opinion of the electorate is also plumbing new depths, they believe what they want to believe and think a quick fix is going to work for the country and them. As regards Grammar schools, the fact any majority of parents who are in favour of Grammar schools* shows mainly that they lack brainpower. Maybe we should bring back Grammar schools ! Only joking of course.

 

* Bearing in mind most of their kids won`t even got to a Grammar school, they`ll get fobbed off with a Secondary Modern or what ever the double speak lying low life politicians insist on calling them.

 

---------- Post added 10-09-2016 at 09:42 ----------

 

 

A non selective free school that takes pupils that don`t get into Grammar school. Isn`t that, what was, a Secondary Modern ?

What I really don`t understand about all this is how come so many people aren`t seeing the absolute obvious. There are only two explanations :

 

1- They`re only seeing what they want to see. Rather like all these parents who say they`re in favour of Grammar schools confidently expecting their little treasure to be clever enough to pass the 11+ (when most kids won`t pass it).

 

2 - They`re thick, though I`m assuming this isn`t the case with our esteemed SF contributors, thus it must be the first.

 

The point I'm making is written in the post.

 

I didn't comment on your brother because well, so what? Boy that didn't go to grammar school got a degree. Come to one of our Xmas family gatherings. I'll point out a couple in my family that did the same. And if you think sending a child to a school with peers of equal ability is unnecessarily damaging then too bad. I don't think it is. I've never said anything about sidelining them have I? That's your own opinion of what it equates to. I disagree.

 

I haven't fallen for any double speak either.

Edited September 10, 2016 by Santo

[Staunton]

I am assuming that those who welcome expansion of a selective system see some advantage to those children who gain entry to a grammar school.

[syne]

What way are you using advantage to mean?

[Santo]

I am assuming that those who welcome expansion of a selective system see some advantage to those children who gain entry to a grammar school.

 

Errrrr yes.