Grammar Schools

yawn

Regardless of your accusations of "trash" the figures speak for themselves as my previous link proved! :biggrin:

Comprehensives provide the best education for all abilities.

"The page cannot be displayed" proves nothing.

post any magical figures it contains.

Reply 61

watkinc

Grammar schools are full of people from the lower echelons of society. They do not have good facilties and are purely academic. E.g Manchester Grammar. The reason Public schools, Private and Grammar schools are discriminated against is because those from working class and middle class backgrounds feel inferior if they are not members of the seething masses, as they are in society, so start some vile populist movement. The extension of University to everybody has devalued degrees completely and distorted the class structure.

Reply 62

yawn

I don't see how my saying I have experience as a school adminstrator is vague - it is quite obvious what I said.

My point, as stated before and which you are attempting to ignore is that Ms. Kennedy decided, after publication of the Byrne report and the Costelloe report into selection in NI's schools, to end selection in NI from 2008. It was not the decision of either Martin McGuinness (whom you accused in other posts, nor Barry Gardner).

The pro-grammar lobby in this country sought the results of selection in NI to propogate their desire to reinstall widespread selection in this country as they knew if they used areas in this country to back them up they would come up with very different results - having a grammar school in an area impacts negatively on the educational opportunities of those not attending them - fact (look at results of secondary moderns in Kent compared to comprehensives in non selective areas.)

Had the pro-grammar lobby looked at the education system in Scotland they would highlight the fact that Scotland has no selection and yet has the best outcomes for ALL school students, beating NI's selective system hands down!

http://www.deni.gov.uk/pprb/oldweb/feedback/written/InstitutionHE/EdinburghUniv.htm

Read this report if you can bear to!

Try the link again technik - it is working fine!

Reply 63

yawn

Try the link again technik - it is working fine!

not here...

post its wonderful insights.

Reply 64

Sofa King

watkinc

Grammar schools are full of people from the lower echelons of society. They do not have good facilties and are purely academic. E.g Manchester Grammar. The reason Public schools, Private and Grammar schools are discriminated against is because those from working class and middle class backgrounds feel inferior if they are not members of the seething masses, as they are in society, so start some vile populist movement. The extension of University to everybody has devalued degrees completely and distorted the class structure.

So you're saying that people from lower class backgrounds should not go to university becuase they are from a lower class background? :confused:

Reply 65

technik

not here...

post its wonderful insights.

I hope you appreciate all the work you are putting me through! :wink:

"Average attainment in UK:

% of y11 pupils achieving any GCSE or S grades at A*-C, 1-3
Eng. 70, Wales 66, Scot.83, NI 78

% of Y11 pupils achieving 5 GCSE;s or S grades at A*-C, 1-3
Eng. 45, Wales 42, Scotland 54, NI 52

% of 21-23 year olds with 2A level,s 3 Highers or equivalent
Eng. 48, Wales 44, Scotland 57, NI 47

In Scotland there are no selective schools and just 5% of students attend independent schools.

Evidence from our research shows that the change from a selective system to a fully comprehensive system of schooling in Scotland has been extremely successful and can provide a model for reform of secondary education in Northern Ireland."

Source: University of Edinburgh

Reply 66

i've done some reading too...
all seem to be reliably sourced, and its on a gov.uk site, and the stats are from 2000 or later.

scotland
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_166.htm
62% success for boys, 71% for girls

wales
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_156.htm
55% for boys

northern ireland
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_171.htm
tallied it myself. 69% for boys, 78% for girls

harder to get a % from the english figures on that site.

Reply 67

technik

i've done some reading too...
all seem to be reliably sourced, and its on a gov.uk site, and the stats are from 2000 or later.

scotland
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_166.htm
62% success for boys, 71% for girls

wales
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_156.htm
55% for boys

northern ireland
http://www2.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/tables/table_171.htm
tallied it myself. 69% for boys, 78% for girls

harder to get a % from the english figures on that site.

Those statistics are harder to correlate as they don't provide totals of all students expressed as a % of passes - looks like all the spade work has been done already by Edinburgh University Statistical Reseach Department. When you do the totals it changes the percentages, in some cases, quite markedly.

Reply 68

watkinc

Sofa King

So you're saying that people from lower class backgrounds should not go to university becuase they are from a lower class background? :confused:

That is entirely what I am saying. Do you have any objection?

Reply 69

yawn

Those statistics are harder to correlate as they don't provide totals of all students expressed as a % of passes - looks like all the spade work has been done already by Edinburgh University Statistical Reseach Department. When you do the totals it changes the percentages, in some cases, quite markedly.

well ive got your link going in opera.

it seems to state its reference to northern ireland is just an "extrapolation". 1996 is further out of date too.

i'd hardly say it, combined with what i posted, shows any solid reasons for getting rid of grammar schools or removing selection.

Reply 70

Xx Tomásíona - Mháire xX

14

I think they 'discriminate' because you may do many things in a private school but many normal comprehensives and secondary schools do nearly the same also extra-curricular activities are brought into question. Sorry I can't be more positive xoxo

Reply 71

sapphisticated

watkinc

Grammar schools are full of people from the lower echelons of society. They do not have good facilties and are purely academic. E.g Manchester Grammar. The reason Public schools, Private and Grammar schools are discriminated against is because those from working class and middle class backgrounds feel inferior if they are not members of the seething masses, as they are in society, so start some vile populist movement. The extension of University to everybody has devalued degrees completely and distorted the class structure.

Distorted the class structure? Elaborate. Unless you justify this statement, it merely sounds like snobbery.

As for degrees being devalued, I think the question we need to be asking is what is university actually for? To equip the so-called 'intellectual elite' with the skills to walk into the most highly paid jobs? I hardly think so.

Reply 72

Steph!

watkinc

Grammar schools are full of people from the lower echelons of society.

so just how does that work?

Reply 73

sapphisticated

I hardly think so.

thats a main result. a degree usually allows you to earn more.

Reply 74

AT82

University has become devalued but a good degree if anything is probably worth more now than ever with our modern service econemey.

I actually think Grammar Schools are a good idea as longs as the tests are voluntery and not mandatory.

If I had to take an 11+ exam (and failed it) at 11 I doubt I would be at university now, I probably would not have the confidence, but getting 5 C's at my school (a really crap one) gave me a lots of confidence and I realised I can get anything I want within reason. I.e a physics degree is out of my reach but I can still do well.

My uncle is a classic example he went to a secondary modern (the worst type of school) he went to university then did a part time masters, he's now earning £60k a year as a senior management electrical engineer. He got their simply by beleiving in himself.

Reply 75

AT82

My uncle is a classic example he went to a secondary modern (the worst type of school) he went to university then did a part time masters, he's now earning £60k a year as a senior management electrical engineer. He got their simply by beleiving in himself.

Your uncle achieved what he did because he had the ability!

People develop their full academic potential at differing ages. They don't -all of a sudden -at the 'magic' age of 11 demonstrate ability that illustrates they require a different level of education to others.

That is what makes selection at age 11 iniquitous. It fails those who later develop their full potential and instils in those who pass at 11 a false impression of their 'superior' intellectual abilities (as witnessed every year in Kent at school gates on the morning of 11+ results, when those who pass swagger in and say 'we're the best!'. Their immaturity does not allow for modesty.

I believe that Higher Education is the stage at which academic selection should be made as by that time, invariably mostly all people will have reached their full abilities.

Reply 76

technik

well ive got your link going in opera.

it seems to state its reference to northern ireland is just an "extrapolation". 1996 is further out of date too.

i'd hardly say it, combined with what i posted, shows any solid reasons for getting rid of grammar schools or removing selection.

Glad you got the link at last! :rolleyes:

The report was submitted in 2001 - the results used were taken from the exam round of 1996 - the year chosen is not that important as any increases in pass rates would be proportional to each country unless something drastic had happened to alter considerably the pass rate in any given year in a single country.

There are not solid reasons for keeping grammar schools or selection that have been postulated as comparison of 'like with like' have proved that comps do better for the most able.

But this argument goes on ad infinitum as proponents of both systems are entrenched idealistically/morally in their own stance.

Reply 77

richie_p

To attempt to select the best students at 11 years of age is wrong. This is far too young to identify meaningful academic potential. Furthermore, just because you are particularly good at a lower level of study does not mean you can reach higher levels and do well. Mathematics is probably a good example. Up to university including A-Level mathematics, which has become terribly watered down it is possible to be well trained enough to ace most exams. This is seen particularly in scripts from the far east where students are extremely well drilled. However, serious maths does not involve regurgitating out ideas and no one is going to pay you in industry to pass exams. When some students make a jump to having to solve unfamiliar problems or meet higher concepts, they reach a glass ceiling and I don't think previous results predict this, certainly not at 11 years of age. How many people had heard of Thierry Henry as a teenage sensation?

However, Grammar schools and Public Schools do provide a better education and it is a shame that it seems difficult for the same levels to be attained in state run comprehensives (I agree with streaming classes).

Reply 78

Steph!