Michael Gove and "Elitist" Grammar Schools

This is a hard question and I am never really sure what my opinion is but I find it hard to agree that someone's intelligence and possible future attainment can be succesfully estimated at age 11. I know plenty of people who have achieved highly, despite not being overly academic at 11. The real losers with a grammar school system are those on the cusp - not quite able to get into a grammar school and so get tainted with being less intelligent and are therefore less likely to succeed, even though they may have thrived with the input of other intelligent students and the confidence in ability that many grammar school students possess.

But in my case, I got into Grammar School at a later stage. I agree that the selection process to get into grammar schools is a bit flawed, as I know a few who quite simply don't deserve to go to a Grammar school, however, the actual idea of grammar schools in my opinion is still a great idea.

The idea works for academics, but schools also have DT, PE, Drama, Music, Art etc. as classes, do you also have elite schools for them? I went to a comp where everything was setted, that meant the fact I was good at English and PE resulted in me being able to learn with the best at those subjects, but the people in each class were very different, whilst my inability at art could be reflected in a lower set for that subject where I wasn't holding back those who were talented at it.

Also, even within academic subjects there are variations, someone who is of grammar standard at English may not be so at Maths and vicea versa. I would have been bored out of my mind in set 3 English (of 19) but I was suitably challenged in my set 3 maths lessons. Even ignoring the class thing of tutoring getting people in, grammars seem a very blunt instrument.

Your assumption that grammar schools are only for the academic is understandable, but it is simply NOT THE CASE! At my school, the art department has enhanced the lives of students who got fantastic pieces of art into various Galleries (Even the Tate modern), and the music department has had many students play across the country in venues such as the Royal Albert hall. DT has been undergoing heavy investment, with students now able to excel with tools such as laser cutters etc. Drama has been a major part of the school too, with pantomimes constantly being presented for the benefit of students.

This proves quite evidentially, that grammar schools aren't just "Academic" institutions, but also locations where talent in all disciplines can thrive.

The only people who really benefit from grammar schools are private tutors because snobby, aspiring middle class parents couldn't possibly send their children to a state school, but they're not quite wealthy enough to pay for a private school. Regardless of whether that child is actually intelligent or not.

And you can't determine a child's future from the age of 11, it's very unfair.

I have to say that I strongly disagree with your opinion. I too come from a working class background and this is simply not the case. Grammar schools are perceived as an excellent opportunity which aids in building a strong foundation for your education, so those who do aspire to fulfilling their dreams see having a grammar school education as a pathway to their desired future. The whole point of doing the 11+ exam is to test the child on skills which are useful in all subjects - including subjects like art, drama, etc. (for example, the observational skills required to answer questions in the non-verbal reasoning section of the exam).

Also, choosing to try and get admission into great schools such as a grammar schools DOES NOT mean that you are determining a child's future from a young age, but are helping them to become independent so that they are able to make strong decisions for themselves which will be beneficial for their own future.

I hope I have made you somewhat rethink your opinions on grammar schools.

As has been in the news recently, Michael Gove refused permission for the expansion/construction of a jointly owned grammar school in Sevenoaks, Kent, because "Middle Class Kids" swarmed them, "depriving" less better off children of getting a good education.

Well, as this topic has many opinions, please feel free to vote in the poll as set up:

Now, time for me to start the rant!

I believe that Grammar Schools are NOT ELITIST IN TERMS OF CLASS, and that they do provide a greater scope of opportunity for school children in the areas where they are present. And there are several reasons for this...

1) Grammar schools provide excellent standards of education to everyone irrespective of wealth. I am myself a student of the upper sixth at a Grammar School, and can be considered in most ways to come from a working class background, yet I have quite clearly made huge progress due to the opportunity to succeed that has been presented before me (Getting offers from Russell Group universities is not bad going). My mum is an assistant in a local school and my dad is a factory worker in a local business, so anyone who automatically thinks "Working Class" students are deprived of opportunity need to actually meet some Grammar school students.

2) I believe that the segregation of students at different socio-educational standards is a good thing, as it removes those who don't wish to work from dragging down the standards of those who do, which yet again, I have experienced myself when moving from a Comprehensive to a Grammar School. It means those who are capable of achieving very well, are empowered to take opportunities and relish them rather than being subjected to peer pressure which outcasts them from the majority of the school population. It's a bit like having a bowl of 30 oranges, where half the oranges are ripe, and the other half are mouldy. Keeping the mouldy with the ripe will lead to an overall worse outcome, whilst if you segregate, the ripe will remain ripe and the mouldy could be treated.
Crucially, curriculums can be moulded to a much better extent as in grammar schools, A-levels of lots of disciplines can be offered whilst in comprehensives, B-techs can be available, thus harnessing each child's potential from their socio-educational work ethic.

I look forward to hearing some vibrant opinions in the near future!

I have to say that I strongly disagree with your opinion. I too come from a working class background and this is simply not the case. Grammar schools are perceived as an excellent opportunity which aids in building a strong foundation for your education, so those who do aspire to fulfilling their dreams see having a grammar school education as a pathway to their desired future. The whole point of doing the 11+ exam is to test the child on skills which are useful in all subjects - including subjects like art, drama, etc. (for example, the observational skills required to answer questions in the non-verbal reasoning section of the exam).

Also, choosing to try and get admission into great schools such as a grammar schools DOES NOT mean that you are determining a child's future from a young age, but are helping them to become independent so that they are able to make strong decisions for themselves which will be beneficial for their own future.

I hope I have made you somewhat rethink your opinions on grammar schools.

Absolutely ridiculous. There is not a SINGLE decent argument against grammar schools.