Poll: Do you support the reintroduction of Grammar Schools?

The Conservative party officially does not support their reintroduction, do you?

This is a really open ended question, there are lots of ways: by looking at how good comprehensive works, and learning from this, as I suggested in an earlier post. Stream lining the amount of red tape, so teachers can do their jobs more effectively. Greater investment, but it is clearly not going to happen in the current economic climate.

My point is, Grammar schools will take some of that improvement away from comprehensives. They lose the majority of the top 20% of students for a start. I just don't see the need for Grammars when state schools can clearly provide the same standard of education.

This is a really open ended question, there are lots of ways: by looking at how good comprehensive works, and learning from this, as I suggested in an earlier post. Stream lining the amount of red tape, so teachers can do their jobs more effectively. Greater investment, but it is clearly not going to happen in the current economic climate.

My point is, Grammar schools will take some of that improvement away from comprehensives. They lose the majority of the top 20% of students for a start. I just don't see the need for Grammars when state schools can clearly provide the same standard of education.

Just because the best route forwards is not entirely clear, does not mean we should start moving in the wrong direction entirely.

Grammers are a waste of time. All they do is allow better off parents to buy houses in its catchment area and tutor their kids to pass the entrance exam.

It fixes social classes rather than promote social mobility.

The change for me from a Comp. for GCSE and Grammar school for Sixth Form was huge. The attitude of the students was so different and people actually wanted to learn, the disruptions to lessons due to bad behaviour were non-existant. This is also due to the school being more strict.

Why can't we just have large schools with a wide range of subjects and effective streaming? And do it on a year by year, pupil by pupil basis. Expecting Grammar schools to solve young people's complex educational and developmental requirements, with their utterly arbitrary binary division of pupils aged 11, is like attempting open heart surgery with a meat cleaver.

This is exactly the arguement that will cause rolling grey-outs in the UK when our aging and unreplaced nuclear reactors are finally offlined.

An imperfect solution is vastly better than no solution at all.

In reality, what makes a Grammar school better than a comprehensive school?

As you imply, its not rocket science to figure out that the kind of parents who tutor their kids to pass their 11+ will generally also be more likely to tutor them to do well in their GCSEs and A-levels.

The nuclear power debate is a different thread, in this thread we're talking about the merits of the grammar school/secondary modern binary divide.

Thanks for the contribution, anyway.

1 - Part of that is explained by the move to sixth form (which is not compulsary, so you will lose a lot of the people who just don't want to be there).

2 - As you said, it is also partly down to how strict it was.

So really, it wasn't just the fact it was a Grammar school was it?
T

The current modern comprehensive model is failing horribly. Standards of literacy and numeracy are falling faster than standards can be dropped to make them appear otherwise. Bullying is as bad or worse than it has ever been (and this is NOT an unrelated problem).

You shoot down a proven solution, without providing anything more than nebulous handwaving as an alternative.

Hint: its because the problem is not just inequal resources, its the actual -cultural- atmosphere at sink comprehensives - anti-elitist, anti-intellectual and above all else anti-learning.

1) I also attended a comp sixth form before I went to the Grammar School. The attitude of the pupils was largely the same. I also mentioned that this attitude of wanting to learn is shown throughout the entire school, whereas at my old school it was only a minority that wanted to learn. We were largely hindered by the majority of students who couldn't give a crap. The GCSE pass rate for my year was well below 30%, which pretty much sums up the extent of the collective 'want' to be there.

2) The Grammar school was able to be strict because the pupils want to be there. The pupils will listen to the teachers and behave. At the other school, many of the pupils didn't want to be there, so didn't give a crap about the strictness of the school.

I do support it, I've experienced private,comprehensive and grammar and for my experience at grammar school was by far the best. It does need some serious reforms to the entry system though.

Such a simplistic view. You really think "sets" and "streaming" work in reality?

They do still exist - I go to one. But, on the whole, yes I think they should be re-introduced. They allow those who are willing to work hard to achieve their potential, whereas comprehensive schools are a pain for those who want to succeed but are hindered by others who can't be bothered.