[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by jismith1989)
It's a myth that grammar schools increase social mobility: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...ocial-mobility
.

There's been a increase in meritocracy these last 40 years hence not sure how reliable that data is in regards to modern day grammar schools. Grammar schools tend to have better education and those with better education tend to go to better universities and those that went to better universities tend to get better jobs. Back then, there was less meritocracy (although it still exists) than there is now.

[mevidek]

(Original post by paddy__power)
We still have them, but we should get rid of them all. The arguments people progress in favour of them are nonsense but I have had this exact argument so many times on this site and nobody ever listens so what is the point?

I went to one, for some context.

I disagree with you on this one paddy - as my last post shows:

Of course we should - the grammar school system is an absolutely brilliant way to provide an excellent education to the most able students. That said, all - no matter what class or intellect - should receive top-class education. How would we do this? By simply creating more grammar schools in every borough so that each borough has at least 1 of them, and by also forcing grammar schools to accept the top 50% of applicants. Finally, normal comprehensives should be massively improved and aim to be better than the private schools.

One of the things I hate about grammar schools and British society is the idea that poor people can only get far if they get into a grammar school. Comprehensives should produce just as fantastic students, just the attitude should be a little different.

This documentary on the BBC is really interesting and shows just how brilliant grammar schools are.

[Genesis2703]

On the island I live on (Guernsey) there is a grammar school which I went to. We even had to do the 11+ exam in year 6 to see who goes to which school which apparently the mainland threw out a long time ago.

I'm not sure about the harm Grammar schools may cause to the other schools in the area in terms of grades but inside the grammar school itself it is nice

[kanzaz]

(Original post by Pete_Lawton)
There's 4 in Southend... Southend High for Boys, Girls, Westcliff High for Boys, Girls. I went to SHSB where do you go then?

Oh yh 4, my bad, year thirteen at whsb atm.

[Rubbaduckzilla]

yeh i think so

[Tahooper]

My school used to be a grammar school until the 1970's when it was changed to a comprehensive. On our school Wikipedia page it says that at around the same time the current headmaster left the school because he was and I quote "saddened by a collapse of discipline that came about in the transition from grammar to comprehensive".

I'm certainly in favour of more grammar schools. Good on Nigel.

[oli_G]

(Original post by Contrad!ction.)
I'm thinking somewhere near Poole/Bournemouth? Poole Grammar, Parkstone Grammar, Bournemouth School and Bournemouth School for Girls? I think there's a Swanage one too.

I go to Poole High, but I could've got into Parkstone Grammar if I'd made it first choice. I can see that there is a higher standard at grammar schools, gradewise. For example, Oxbridge applicants - I don't think anyone's applied from my school yet I've got friends at Poole/Parkstone Grammar who have got offers from there. I'd say our sixth form's more vocational-based, although we do have the traditional subjects too. But I preferred Poole High right from the start, so that's where I chose to go. Also, I prefer male company, so an all-girls school would not suit me at all.

First time I've seen someone from poole on here

Spoiler:

Show

I'm at PGS btw

[NaomiMadison]

We didn't get rid of them? I live near Latymer, which is a grammar school.

[Lewis :D]

(Original post by roseroserose.)
As far as im aware there's none in Cardiff, just 2/3 privates? I was surprised there was so many left!

There are no grammar schools in Wales at all, they were all abolished.

I personally wish I went to a grammar school.

[Contrad!ction.]

(Original post by oli_G)
First time I've seen someone from poole on here

Spoiler:

Show

I'm at PGS btw

I was about to ask which one

(Gender sign, you numpty)

Poole Grammar? I don't really know too much about it because I've only ever visited Parkstone Grammar - we did recently for the Maths Challenge and a couple of lectures - the girls looked confused because there was a class of five guys and me plus a male teacher walking through their corridors

I'd ask you if you knew some of my friends but they'd be 17/18 and your profile says that you're 16 so...

[ForKicks]

I think we should bring more back! The opportunity of more meritocracy in the state sector is a good thing. The brightest need to be in an environment in which they can thrive and be offered a more challenging array of papers if needed. We didn't get rid of them, but they were hit badly and are now only a fragment of what they once were.

[faber niger]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
There's been a increase in meritocracy these last 40 years hence not sure how reliable that data is in regards to modern day grammar schools. Grammar schools tend to have better education and those with better education tend to go to better universities and those that went to better universities tend to get better jobs. Back then, there was less meritocracy (although it still exists) than there is now.

Has there? What evidence is there for that? If you define the word meritocracy in the satirical way in which it was first coined (by the sociologist, and later Labour peer, Michael Young), that may be so, but I don't see any evidence of real social progress: a child's future income can today be better predicted by his parents' income than at any time in the last 50 years (but, of course, that can be attributed to other factors than the demise of the grammar school system, which, as I say, wasn't a great engine of social mobility).

Also, note that the evidence in the link I originally posted was not based on modern grammar schools -- it was based on the lifepaths of adults who had attended various types of schools, including the traditional grammar schools.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by jismith1989)
Has there? What evidence is there for that? If you define the word meritocracy in the satirical way in which it was first coined (by the sociologist, and later Labour peer, Michael Young), that may be so, but I don't see any evidence of real social progress: a child's future income can today be better predicted by his parents' income than at any time in the last 50 years (but, of course, that can be attributed to other factors than the demise of the grammar school system, which, as I say, wasn't a great engine of social mobility).

The fact that there are more state-schoolers entering top jobs in the city in an example. The increase in state schoolers that attend Oxbridge is another example. The different types of jobs available now. Before the top jobs were finance and law which entrants to was based on aristocracy but now there's a increase in high-paying technological jobs which don't require you to have come from a private school.

[und]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
The fact that there are more state-schoolers entering top jobs in the city in an example. The increase in state schoolers that attend Oxbridge is another example. The different types of jobs available now. Before the top jobs were finance and law which entrants to was based on aristocracy but now there's a increase in high-paying technological jobs which don't require you to have come from a private school.

Have you at all considered the fact that the people who go to Oxbridge and enter top jobs in the city from state schools today, are the same people who would have gone to grammar schools under the old system?

[ForKicks]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
finance and law which entrants to was based on aristocracy but now there's a increase in high-paying technological jobs which don't require you to have come from a private school.

Sorry, since when was that the case? haha. There isn't enough aristocrats to fill places for a start, secondly they were too busy managing estates to get a job in the city!

[Mr Einstein]

I go to one but have never personally felt it was any better than any comp. We still have the same teachers and there are still disruptive people, even really stupid people! The only reason they mostly get better on league tables etc is due to the fact that the pupils are generally cleverer. The only real difference is that because people assume we are all clever when in fact we are not we tend to get more abuse from idiots.

There is a very valid argument that you are much more likely to get into one if you are more wealthy and this is very similar to the private school and oxbridge argument which is that there are tutors available to help with the exams taken, these tutors are tailored for getting people into grammar schools and are not cheap! There are many arguments that dispute this saying that the reason this happens is because cleverer parents are more likely to be wealthy and due to them being clever pass on there genes etc, but these are mostly Nazis.

My view is that I'm indifferent but the government should make it's mind up, do away with them for good or bring them back!

[faber niger]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
The fact that there are more state-schoolers entering top jobs in the city in an example. The increase in state schoolers that attend Oxbridge is another example. The different types of jobs available now. Before the top jobs were finance and law which entrants to was based on aristocracy but now there's a increase in high-paying technological jobs which don't require you to have come from a private school.

Sure, but at the same time, the best private schools have started to become more plutocratic than aristocratic (i.e. there are fewer nice but dim sorts around) and focus much more today on the hard numbers in terms of academic achievement and university entrance (even if it means a less rounded education, i.e. teaching to the exams and handing out extensive revision sheets, as often it does), to the extent that the rich are much more able to ensure that their progeny will succeed -- not by virtue of being aristos, but because they're routinely geared towards ticking many more of the boxes that universities and careers want. There are a fair few former working-class lads (and, of course, they usually are lads) in the City nowadays -- Thatchers' sons, if you like -- but this is just looking at the élite: the average working-class kid is more likely today to earn what his parents earn than to experience any kind of social mobility. (See here or here, for example.) There may, in theory, be new opportunities such as the ones you mention, but most such kids are failed to the extent that they'll never be applicable for them (and these new globalised and/or digital opportunites, of course, further concentrate wealth in the hands of the few technocrats who already have the expertise and/or wealth to capitalise on them). But the secondary moderns failed working-class kids too, so that is not the answer. It should also be noted that there are a lot of wealthy and very middle-class parents who send their offspring to state schools (David Cameron, for example), often selecting the better performing ones, so looking at state-schooled kids in high places is not really the best measure of social mobility. It's a very complex problem, and will never be solved entirely, but there are things that government can do (and we'll have to see, for example, how the "pupil premium" works out).

[fishfan01]

I live in Kent where we do still take the 11+ (if we want) have Grammar schools, and as I go to one, I think it's really great.

The system has changed a lot since the grammar schools they were talking about on the BBC documentary (which I thought was really good) because not everybody takes it, so if parents don't want their children to take it even thought it might help them develop themselves academically, they don't get that chance - I think everybody should take it.

The main problem with grammar schools though, where I live at least, is that if you don't go to the grammar or private school, you're stuck with really really rubbish schools where teaching, discipline and grades are all pretty appalling. This isn't only due to the fact that there are grammar schools, but it contributes to it. It disadvantages people who do not get in, unless the the school they go to is good because the academic calibre of the entire school is lowered from having the top 25% removed and put in another school, so if someone has the capacity and will to do well then they probably won't be given the chance to do as well because they do not teach to such a high standard - I know some of the teachers there and they're told to only get people up to a C grade - once they're there, they've achieved their targets and can do whatever they like.

Also, there are other grammar schools in the country, mainly in big cities, I believe, where you still have to take an entrance exam, but you have to pay too. They seem rather like they don't support the ideology of what a grammar school should be and do - enable people from lower classes to rise and get a better education than they might otherwise.

Having said that, I'd say that at least 2/3 of my school come from middle-class backgrounds, and there are still plenty of people who muck around and don't use their priviliged position to the best advantage. Which actually makes me quite angry - if they don't care they should leave their place for someone who does.

Main point - it puts everyone who doesn't get in at a major disadvantage. For most people at my school, transfering to another would mean a loss of a proper education and would be pretty much hell.

[ByronicHero]

(Original post by mevidek)
I disagree with you on this one paddy - as my last post shows:

Yes you do, and that's fine. I would debate you on it if I thought it would change anything but it won't. You know I think your reasoning here is foolish and have explained to you why previously in one of our PM conversations I believe. We can still be friends

[Fuzzpig]

There's a lot of grammar schools about. From going to Grammar Schools and standard secondary schools, I can say that going to a Grammar school was definitely the best thing I did.