Tories to bring back Grammar schools

[biotechpete]

Not really, what I'm saying is that to rely on a state that is clearly not a true communist style state but a pseudo democratic one and then complain about it is patently stupid.

The're your kids, take responsibility, actual responsibility where you do something about their education other than whine.

 

What policy?

 

So do you not think it benefits us all for the government to offer free education? If it's totally the parents responsibility then do you think parents should pay? Kids should only get the education their parents can buy or teach themselves?

[syne]

No, it absolutely is a huge benefit and a massive thank you is owed to those who centuries ago instigated the shift away from education by the church to the common man.

I agree wholeheartedly with the enforcement of law that your child must be educated.

 

I'm not advocating it be the sole responsibility of a parent to do it alone,

Just it's not entirely the responsibility of the state.

If someone is going to complain that it's not fair because some get a better education than others and not accept the fact we are not all the same, it's daft.

The uniformity of educational delivery that some people seem to desire is practically unachievable, there are way too many variables

By passing the educational Buck solely to the state you pretty much lose all whinging privileges regarding education of your kids.

[biotechpete]

No, it absolutely is a huge benefit and a massive thank you is owed to those who centuries ago instigated the shift away from education by the church to the common man.

I agree wholeheartedly with the enforcement of law that your child must be educated.

 

I'm not advocating it be the sole responsibility of a parent to do it alone,

Just it's not entirely the responsibility of the state.

If someone is going to complain that it's not fair because some get a better education than others and not accept the fact we are not all the same, it's daft.

The uniformity of educational delivery that some people seem to desire is practically unachievable, there are way too many variables

By passing the educational Buck solely to the state you pretty much lose all whinging privileges regarding education of your kids.

 

My guess is that those who take absolutely no responsibility would be the least likely to moan, as presumably they would attach no value to education.

[Justin Smith]

I`m a little surprised so little is being commented upon the three other aspects of the possible move to Grammar schools :

 

1 - The Tories have no electoral mandate for this. As I said in the opener I find it strange that May has tried to introduce this Grammar thing now with no mandate and a slim majority. If she`d been smarter she`d call a General election and put it in their manifesto. The Tories would almost certainly win with an increased majority due to the unelectable state of the Labour party and the LibDems still haven`t recovered from their mauling last time. If she waits say six months (when the terms for Brexit become clearer) she`d have a legitimate excuse for calling a GE.

Am I right in saying the Lords can throw out or infinitely delay, legislation which has no electoral mandate ? That was the implication of an article on R4 news yesterday.

 

2 - The cataclysmic effect on house prices. I put a thread about this particular subject on the Property section, and that`s a section where people chew the fact over potential movements in house prices of a few grand yet nobody has replied to it in three days ! Are house owners around top Comprehensives (not me I hasten to add) just sleep walking on this ?

 

3 - The effect on road congestion. This has been touched on to be fair.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Justin Smith

[unbeliever]

Exactamundo! The more educated you are the more likely you'll be to promote educational importance to your kids,

The richer you are the higher the chance you'll have them tutored I'd say is also probably true.

It's not a great stretch of the imagination to conceive how an area around a grammar school would become more affluent over time,

 

That's not what I said. I said ability is partially inherited.

[samssong]

The new debate as to whether we should go back to Grammer School education brings into context the question that people who can afford it move to good school catchment areas so as their children can take advantage of the good schools that are invariably in those areas.

 

As one who was educated:rolleyes: under the secondary modern system a system that placed kids into grade A, B, or C classes I now realise that those in the A section where the ones being groomed to pass the eleven plus so the discrimination as to selection still happened all those years ago.

 

Education is still selective due to living areas as well as,private or religion based schools and always has been.

[unbeliever]

You realise that this is certain to get merged with the grammar school thread.

[biotechpete]

I`m a little surprised so little is being commented upon the three other aspects of the possible move to Grammar schools :

 

1 - The Tories have no electoral mandate for this. As I said in the opener I find it strange that May has tried to introduce this Grammar thing now with no mandate and a slim majority. If she`d been smarter she`d call a General election and put it in their manifesto. The Tories would almost certainly win with an increased majority due to the unelectable state of the Labour party and the LibDems still haven`t recovered from their mauling last time. If she waits say six months (when the terms for Brexit become clearer) she`d have a legitimate excuse for calling a GE.

Am I right in saying the Lords can throw out or infinitely delay, legislation which has no electoral mandate ? That was the implication of an article on R4 news yesterday.

 

2 - The cataclysmic effect on house prices. I put a thread about this particular subject on the Property section, and that`s a section where people chew the fact over potential movements in house prices of a few grand yet nobody has replied to it in three days ! Are house owners around top Comprehensives (not me I hasten to add) just sleep walking on this ?

 

3 - The effect on road congestion. This has been touched on to be fair.

 

1 - A policy doesn't necessarily have to be in a manifesto to be implemented. Blair did it all the time.

 

2 - The house price adjustment, if any, will likely be gradual. Those already in the catchments will presumably be happy with the investment they've made. The school population won't change overnight.

 

3 - That assumes that overall movement increases which is might not necessarily. It might cause congestion in Sheffield, but I doubt there would be much call for grammar schools in Sheffield anyway.

[unbeliever]

When the comprehensive system was introduced there was to be no streaming, as it makes no sense at all to abolish grammar schools and implement streaming as they're all part of the same idea.

The point was to prove, one and for all that all children are essential the same when they are born, and any difference in the skills, abilities or success that they acquire was down to the unfairness in society. Equality of educational provision would therefore inescapably lead to equality of outcome. All children, if treated identically by the education system would perform identically in assessments.

And so the grand comprehensive experiment began. It was clear almost immediately to those who had bought the daft notion on which it was founded that the whole idea was a load of Dingos' kidneys, but instead of admitting this, they introduced extensive streaming in the comprehensives (but kept calling them comprehensives to cover themselves) and it's been trundling along like that ever since.

Of course we don't talk about it now, but the real reason for taking all the grammars and secondary moderns and rebadging them as "comprehensives" was that it meant that all the secondary modern teachers in the NUT were suddenly entitled to the same pay and conditions as their grammar colleagues in the NAS. So it removed the 2-tiers from the teaching profession at the expense of messing around with kids education for daft idealogical reasons long since discredited.

 

So the only real questions that remains are these: Does taking the top streams/sets from the current comprehensives and placing them in a different school help those kids? If so is it helpful or neutral to the kids in the lower streams/sets. If the answer to these questions is yes, then what else is there to talk about?

[Robin-H]

I`m a little surprised so little is being commented upon the three other aspects of the possible move to Grammar schools :

 

1 - The Tories have no electoral mandate for this. As I said in the opener I find it strange that May has tried to introduce this Grammar thing now with no mandate and a slim majority. If she`d been smarter she`d call a General election and put it in their manifesto. The Tories would almost certainly win with an increased majority due to the unelectable state of the Labour party and the LibDems still haven`t recovered from their mauling last time. If she waits say six months (when the terms for Brexit become clearer) she`d have a legitimate excuse for calling a GE.

Am I right in saying the Lords can throw out or infinitely delay, legislation which has no electoral mandate ? That was the implication of an article on R4 news yesterday.

 

Have you actually read the 2015 Conservative Manifesto? They said they wanted to ..."continue to allow all good schools to expand, whether they are maintained schools, academies, free schools or grammar schools"

 

Whilst I accept that this doesn't say that the Conservative would be opening new grammar schools, it does show that the Conservatives are in favour of grammar schools and would be happy to see them expand. It should not therefore come as a shock.