Grammar Schools - Good idea or bad idea?

Scrap Grammar Schools and the UK's education system will just fall further and further into mediocrity. And your poll doesn't make any sense - the options should be "Good" and "Bad", not "Yes" and "No"

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 2

Maker

20

Grammar schools give the impression of making kids do well by siphoning off the most academic while leaving the rest with a poorer educational experience.

Most people support grammar schools right up to the point they or their kids don't get in.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 3

Aeschylus

17

Talking as someone who, for a period in my life, went to an area where most people did the 11+ , it is IMPOSSIBLE to overemphasize how much pressure is placed on the poor kids who do it. Schools make virtue of the fact they start cramming the kids when they are 9! Parents go to ridiculous lengths. You'd just get people buying their way in with tuition.

And to be fair if you took 20 bright kids, yes you're going to have better results because they're the brightest! Duh!

I really don't think educational segregation should happen at such a young age.

Reply 4

OP

Original post by Maker

Grammar schools give the impression of making kids do well by siphoning off the most academic while leaving the rest with a poorer educational experience.

Most people support grammar schools right up to the point they or their kids don't get in.

But surely the most academic should not have to suffer at the cost of those who struggle? Whilst teachers have to focus on the 'slower' children, it's limiting the potential of the more academic.

Also, excuse me for being stereotypical, but from my experience, the more slower appear to have given up on their education because they struggle with it, and therefore take school as a laugh with their mates, which again limits the potential of the more academic.

Reply 5

cambio wechsel

20

Your poll suggests them as urgently required.

Reply 6

fist of the south star

10

I go to a grammar school and it certainly isn't about more support and better facilities - our school is very ill equipped in particular areas and there have been many issues, no doubt there are some good teachers however by and large the VAST majority of work is self done by students who doss till study leave and cram hard, like the case in most other schools. If there is anything a grammar school who provides it is the overtly competitive atmosphere.

Which in some ways is a positive in producing results but obviously must have some negagtives about it as well. As it stands there are numerous grammar schools around the country which have been producing consistent results over the past 100 years and do provide the environment for those who wish to really push their academics bounds.

Reply 7

OP

Original post by therealOG

So you'd rather everyone had a "poorer educational experience" rather than the most academically able being able to flourish, irrespective of socio-economic status?

The problem doesn't lie with the existence of Grammar Schools, it lies with the quality of the rest of the UK's primary and secondary education.

Completely agree

Reply 8

Original post by Aeschylus

Talking as someone who, for a period in my life, went to an area where most people did the 11+ , it is IMPOSSIBLE to overemphasize how much pressure is placed on the poor kids who do it. Schools make virtue of the fact they start cramming the kids when they are 9! Parents go to ridiculous lengths. You'd just get people buying their way in with tuition.

And to be fair if you took 20 bright kids, yes you're going to have better results because they're the brightest! Duh!

I really don't think educational segregation should happen at such a young age.

Original post by Maker

Grammar schools give the impression of making kids do well by siphoning off the most academic while leaving the rest with a poorer educational experience.

Most people support grammar schools right up to the point they or their kids don't get in.

So you'd rather everyone had a "poorer educational experience" rather than the most academically able being able to flourish, irrespective of socio-economic status?

The problem doesn't lie with the existence of Grammar Schools, it lies with the quality of the rest of the UK's primary and secondary education.

Reply 9

OP

Can I also point out the fact my brother failed to get into the grammar school that I go to, and at his current school he is being FORCED to take a BTEC, whereas at grammar schools that isn't the case.

The BTECs are easier for the less academic, which will boost the grades of comprehensive schools, but I don't see why academic people in comprehensive schools should be forced to take a BTEC when they're capable of taking a GCSE?

Reply 10

notepad

10

Original post by matt_price93

Can I also point out the fact my brother failed to get into the grammar school that I go to, and at his current school he is being FORCED to take a BTEC, whereas at grammar schools that isn't the case.

The BTECs are easier for the less academic, which will boost the grades of comprehensive schools, but I don't see why academic people in comprehensive schools should be forced to take a BTEC when they're capable of taking a GCSE?

This is common practice nowadays :rolleyes:

BTEC are offered so schools receive a 100% pass rate and boost their rankings. Completely selfish, if you ask me.

Reply 11

Original post by matt_price93

Can I also point out the fact my brother failed to get into the grammar school that I go to, and at his current school he is being FORCED to take a BTEC, whereas at grammar schools that isn't the case.

The BTECs are easier for the less academic, which will boost the grades of comprehensive schools, but I don't see why academic people in comprehensive schools should be forced to take a BTEC when they're capable of taking a GCSE?

My father's school didn't do O-levels (they did something else equivalent to BTEC's today), so he taught himself over the 2 years, achieving mostly A's. Maybe your brother should do the same (although it's only 1 BTEC right)?

Reply 12

OP

Original post by therealOG

My father's school didn't do O-levels (they did something else equivalent to BTEC's today), so he taught himself over the 2 years, achieving mostly A's. Maybe your brother should do the same (although it's only 1 BTEC right)?

Yeah fortunately it's only one BTEC. But he is capable of a grammar school education, but he just got unlucky and missed out, which is fair enough I suppose if there are better people than you. But I just think to myself, why should the more academic have to suffer at the cost of those who struggle? This is a perfect example of where grammar schools are ideal.

And wow your dad must have been pretty motivated! Could sure use some of that motivation right now with my revision :biggrin:

Reply 13

cambio wechsel

20

Original post by therealOG

So you'd rather everyone had a "poorer educational experience"...?

is this what happens? N. Yorks has grammar schools and W. Yorks doesn't have, for example. How do exam results compare across? I can't doubt that the kids at specifically the grammar schools do well, but how about aggregatively? Is it the case the counties with grammar schools outperform those that don't have?

No agenda here, I simply don't know.

Grammar schools are a bad idea. They force segregation on society from the age of 11. They place unnecessary pressure on people at the age of 11. In most cases a child's future is determined at the age of 11, not allowing for late developers or for people of have issues/problems around this time. The 11+ exam is also something that those with money can take advantage of, paying for private tuition from an early age whilst those without the money cannot do this, putting their children at a disadvantage.

Whilst there will always be some exceptions to what I've said above (the exceptions being the things pro-grammar school people through around to defeat these points) the above are the general trends you definitely see in places where you have Grammar schools.

They basically promote elitism and segregation and force some parts of society to stay down. I wouldn't support a move back to having more grammar schools.

We need to ensure that all our schools are decent schools and that all pupils can flourish at every single school in the country.

Reply 15

Original post by cambio wechsel

is this what happens? N. Yorks has grammar schools and W. Yorks doesn't have, for example. How do exam results compare across? I can't doubt that the kids at specifically the grammar schools do well, but how about aggregatively? Is it the case the counties with grammar schools outperform those that don't have?

No agenda here, I simply don't know.

I put that in quotation marks as that is what the person I quoted said - it's not necessarily true - there are plenty of very good Comprehensive Schools out there that get good results. The main factor is location though; schools located in poorer areas will tend to get worse results due to the economic and social implications of living in lower income areas. I can't give specific scores, but what I can tell you is that Grammar Schools top the league tables almost exclusively when it comes to state education.

Reply 16

DougieG

10

I went to Grammar school, and it was a bit like going to private school except you didn't pay. Most of the parents were still the wealthiest people in the area and a lot of the students were pretty lazy despite being intelligent. The teaching quality was fairly high but there were some absolutely dreadful teachers so it all balanced out. It was a very good school, though. One of the best in the area.

I'm in favour of grammar schools, but I think they separate ability too early. I'd advocate testing at 13 or 14 instead of 9 or 10, because kids are too young to take that sort of pressure at that young age. In addition, the test should be secret and no practice papers released so that kids with richer parents can't get expensive tutoring to give less able but wealthier kids too much of an advantage.

The lower ability schools should be no less funded and have more emphasis on subjects outside of academics, without preventing those there to be academic if they wish to. If people come out with a plumbing qualification that's better than coming out with 4 Es at A Level.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 17