Grammar schools to return

Scroll to see replies

Mixed feelings. I feel that more should be done to improve the overall quality of state comprehensives. There's not a single grammar school in my city, so I went to a state comp. The variety in the ability of students is shocking. Even the students who were somewhat intelligent didn't believe they could achieve anything worthwhile or go on to university. It's this culture of lower class students not believing in themselves that saddens me. Even worse when teachers don't expect anything of their students. My school would take us to De Montford university to motivate us. If it wasn't for one of my teachers I never would have even heard of Russell group let alone plan on applying to Oxbridge. Social Mobility isn't about separating clever kids from less intelligent ones. It's about creating a culture where children,despite of social backgrounds, feel able to achieve their academic aims.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 141

umar39

Original post by ameehannah

I live in Northern Ireland where there are still grammar schools. I go to a grammar school and I think bringing them back for England would be good. I think it's better for more gifted students tbh

The admission system for Grammar Schools does seem quite flawed though. For my school, the admission was very hard and with more than 1200 for a 96 year group it was exceptionally hard to get in. Yet, there are pupils who have no interest regarding their education who are in the school! It seems like such a waste having these pupils when there are pupils who are more hardworking and dedicated.

Reply 142

teenhorrorstory

Original post by Ezme39

What about when wealthy children are coached for the admissions tests? Or poorer kids can't afford to travel to a grammar school?
I was the highest achiever at my state school, and had been bullied for five years for being clever- but I would much rather that than have been in such a streamlined system. It seems a bit like an 'I'm alright' approach.
Doesn't it also emphasise how academics is the only measure of intelligence? I mean, if someone is talented in the arts, they may be less gifted in English/ maths, and thus go to a 'less intelligent' school - simply because a particular grammar school values different skills?

This. My cousin's parents are very wealthy, and from the age of 7 her mum had been coaching her for the 11+. She'd spend excessive amounts on books, weekly tuition etc.. The pressure she put on her daughter was insane. When my cousin was sick of studying, she'd tell her "Do you want to end up at [name of local state school]? People assume grammar schools attract children from working class backgrounds largely, but in reality they're full of middle/upper class kids.

Reply 143

catinsomehat

Original post by john2054

i went to derby and got a 2.1 in sociology with theatre. That's quite a weak degree isn't it?

No, a 2:1 that sounds good to me. It all depends on what you're going to do with it now :smile:

You would have gotten the same result if you'd gone to a grammar school though, they wouldn't have held a magic wand out and bestowed a lot of knowledge directly into your brain :biggrin:

Believe it or not but people who go to what are considered top universities tend to be bad programmers. I can attest to this and so can my current employer, just because a university is high up in the rankings doesn't mean anything. Sit them down and ask them to write a simple algorithm or to program something simple and they'll look at you like your head just spun around. What matters is people who learn and do things outside of their course to better themselves and actually learn what they need to know about what they're going to be doing afterwards (universities won't actually teach you what you need to know in the real world for most courses - it's all crap, this applies to grammar schools too, it's all about self-learning...unfortunately most people don't seem to grasp this. The people who will get ahead will get ahead anyway).

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 144

umar39

Original post by mercuryman

What is a grammar school?

A school that requires candidates to sit an admissions test (11+).

Reply 145

mercuryman

Original post by umar39

A school that requires candidates to sit an admissions test (11+).

Is that it?
What makes it so different compared to a normal school

Reply 146

catinsomehat

Original post by mercuryman

Is that it?
What makes it so different compared to a normal school

Nothing really, it just puts lots of kids together who are intelligent. This takes away those kids from other schools and brings their test results down.
People are upset about this :biggrin:

People can also apply for other years too to get into grammar schools, like 13, and so on.

Reply 147

ben.anderson

I would never of been intelligent enough to go to a grammar school. However I completely agree with them, gives people a chance from lower class backgrounds to have a chance with a prestigious education. There should also be more technical colleges. One size does not fit all when it comes to education. All this rubbish about its "backwards" and "unfair". Well, when you come out of the magical world of Uni and go and get a proper job, its not all going to be "nice" and "fair".

Reply 148

umar39

Original post by mercuryman

Is that it?
What makes it so different compared to a normal school

This is from personal experience but
the teaching is of high quality, we are stretched to further levels to achieve academic excellence
we promote extra-curricular and sporting activities so much (maybe too much)
we have old traditions that make grammar schools a fun place to live and learn at :biggrin:

the students are usually very self motivated and aspiring
the teachers are very enthusiastic about their subject and want the students to learn more

This is less of a comparison between comprehensive and grammar but more of what a grammar school can offer

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 149

username2230787

Original post by umar39

^^^^^ tbh the only bad thing i have to say about it is that sometimes it is too traditional in the sense of lacrosse etc when i've always wanted to do stuff like football etc but those are 'boys' sports but aside from rather trivial stuff like that everything else is great for the most part (in terms of education)

Reply 150

ameehannah

Original post by umar39

Yeah I do see your viewpoint as my school is the same there was quite a number in my year group who arguably did not deserve to be there Because they wasted the quality education that was available

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 151

umar39

Original post by Salamandastron

Cricket season is the worst though!
All the dads wearing their whites onto the pavilion :laugh:

Spoiler

Reply 152

Little Popcorns

Original post by niteninja1

The thing is compared to other countries our school standards are slipping and why should intelligent students be held back by less able students. For instance if their were more grammar schools my local one wouldn't be quite so harsh on requirements to get in.

And therefore your so called standards would drop... Then what? Rubbish performing grammar school?

You have to face the fact that these institutions take on kids who for the most part are a privileged bunch, bar the very tiny minority of tocken gesture scholarship students. Funny thing is that these privileged kids that represent the majoirty intake, quite often do well in any school... Which begs the question what's anyone going to do about the real hard work that needs to be done not reopening grammar schools but helping deprived and low socioeconomic school children?

Sorry my mistake carry on making no steps forward and 10 back.

Reply 153

SHABANA

How about the government provides comprehensive schools with more funding, so they can employ more staff (teachers as well as support staff) and thus have smaller class sizes which would enable the teachers to spend the desired amount of time stretching the A/A* students as well as supporting students who are struggling to secure a C grade. This would certainly work out cheaper than brand new grammar schools?

I can't see how more grammar schools will lead to social mobility particularly as they will need entrance exams which means that wealthier parents can coach their children by providing tutors etc.

Lots of people saying how it is good for very 'high attaining' (at age 11) students, but what will this do for students who didn't quite make the cut at age 11? Surely it will demotivate and more grammars can lead to stigma being attached if you did not attend it - something which perhaps universities may look at. I have plenty of students who exceed their targets in year 11 and achieve an A or A*, yet based on their KS3 SATS they probably would not have got in to a grammar.
Also what would this do for teachers - would more teachers choose to work in a grammar where there will be 'brighter' students? Will this make people assume that teachers who are teaching in a comprehensive are somehow less good at teaching?

The whole idea is going to result in a mess. I don't understand how the government can find funding for such things whilst we have a teacher recruitment crisis.

Reply 154

SomeWelshGuy123

The thing is, is that even if a child is intelligent, more often than not they are blocked from attending grammar schools due to their social economic background, and historically grammar schools have accepted upper class people who performed poorly on tests etc in purely based on their family's wealth and status. I personally would like to see better funding for comprehensives, one school in particular comes to mind that is near where I live, its budget for students aged 16-18 is £100 for the next educational year, and the facilities are those temporary sheet metal buildings erected in the 60's and were supposed to be there for ten years maximum while they build other schools, no other school was built and it still stands there.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 155

swanderfeild

Original post by teenhorrorstory

That's slightly different issue though, and mixing wealth advantage with grammar school is really lumping two distinct issues together. Grammar schools with selection system that works are good - they have group of students who are academically inclined thus can advance through content at a much quicker rate and perhaps more importantly provides a culture where academic achievement is rewarded and wanted by students.

Yes people with wealth can game the selection system, but that's a separate issue altogether and even without grammar schools that issue is there anyways - students can be coached through their A levels to get into top universities, several university admission can be 'gamed' through alumni connection/ donation, better experience can be afforded by people with more wealthy parents due to connection as well as ability to afford unpaid work experience etc. It'd make sense to address this issue separately from grammar school issue, to which the advantage provided by wealthy parents is tangentially related. Perhaps expand education budget so all students (or students with family below x income) have one-to-one teaching time, or implement system whereby everyone gets x amount from government for unpaid work experience etc. Essentially gaming grammar school selection process is not really a grammar school problem, it's a wider problem about equality of opportunity, and that should be addressed separately.

Reply 156

Helloworld_95

Good, although they really need to introduce some kind of financial background component into admission as a lot of the kids who get into grammar schools are there so their parents can save money over putting them in a private school or because their parents had the money to pay for tutoring. We should introduce income dependent fees, vary score requirements with income or provide bursaries for low income parents to pay for tutoring. Preferably not the last one.

Reply 157

niteninja1

Original post by mercuryman

What is a grammar school?

It is a secondary education school that only excepts student who pass a test at either 11 or 13 and is because of this is generally considered to have a higher standard of students.

The Blair government banned new ones from being opened.

Reply 158

niteninja1

To all the people arguing having a separate school for intelligent students is wrong. Is it wrong that "special" needs students usually go to a separate school