Turn on thread page Beta

    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    Not Ben S, Yawn1. Anyway:

    "Perhaps Harry, your experience of meeting people who have been 'scarred for life' is somewhat limited, seeing as you are at a grammar school. :rolleyes:"

    Is that not patronising?
    Just like to add that I always try to be polite to people such as you and Ben. S, who are polite to me.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    Personally, I do not see this as a legitimate reason to abolish the few remaining grammar schools. Just because everyone can't have a good education, should we prevent anyone from having one.




    Like I said in a previous post, there will still be a huge disparity in ability between people in the same set.
    1) I don't see the correlation between giving up Grammar schools and losing good education.
    The existence of Grammar schools is seriously hindering education for 75% of students. When there is another, equally effective (and proven to be) alternative, then that path should be followed.

    2) As for set disparity;
    I doubt you have the authority to claim this with any reliability. The top stream of my school was excellent. Disparity occurs when there are many competing Grammars in one area, which is a rare occurence.
    In fact my area has one of the highest densities of Grammars, and this does not hinder our school supplying for the most highly able.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    Oh, okay. Fair enough.



    Now I think about it, that is a very good point. Maybe grammar schools should invest in interviewing applicants so that entrance could be determined by diligence as well as talent (although I bet this would be difficult to identify, not to mention costly).
    I would think that is a very good idea too, but like you say it would be hard to identify at the age of 10/11 and also people change.

    I think if they abolished Grammars then the top band of the pupils would increase in the comprhensives meaning that there would be a larger amount of accademic pupils in the School, allowing GCSE results to increase as well as the number of intelligent people. And the more intelligent pupils are the better teaching they will get as intelligent people wouldn't be in the minority. Plus the 'good' teachers from Grammars would teach at Comprehensives. Also those that work hard would be able to climb up the sets and have a equal education to those that at the age of 11 would have been accepted into a Grammar, unlike themselves.

    But right now, rather than abolishing Grammars they should get rid of Independent Schools.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    Personally, I do not see this as a legitimate reason to abolish the few remaining grammar schools. Just because everyone can't have a good education, should we prevent anyone from having one.

    Like I said in a previous post, there will still be a huge disparity in ability between people in the same set.
    1. I feel that it IS a legitimate reason - are you saying that comprehensives don't provide good educations? Or, perhaps, that you like not having to motivate yourself? Your education is what you make of it.

    2. Nope - no such disparity exists (not in my school, anyway - but that's in an area with no grammars). Just because you said so 'in a previous post' does not turn fiction to fact.

    Ben

    (Original post by Ben.S.)
    1. I feel that it IS a legitimate reason - are you saying that comprehensives don't provide good educations? Or, perhaps, that you like not having to motivate yourself? Your education is what you make of it.

    2. Nope - no such disparity exists (not in my school, anyway - but that's in an area with no grammars). Just because you said so 'in a previous post' does not turn fiction to fact.

    Ben
    1. You seemed to be suggesting that grammar schools should be abolished because only certain areas have them. I simply do not agree.

    With the comprehensive system as well, whether you can go to a good school depends on where you live (usually the rich areas have the best comprehensives.

    2. There is considerable disparity between members of the same set at my highly competetive grammar school, so I assumed there would be in comprehensives. Perhaps you attend a larger school with more sets?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    1. You seemed to be suggesting that grammar schools should be abolished because only certain areas have them. I simply do not agree.

    With the comprehensive system as well, whether you can go to a good school depends on where you live (usually the rich areas have the best comprehensives.

    2. There is considerable disparity between members of the same set at my highly competetive grammar school, so I assumed there would be in comprehensives. Perhaps you attend a larger school with more sets?
    1) Going to a good Grammar also depends on where you live. Taking away GS from the equation would result in better Comps.

    2) Certain amounts of disparity can always be tolerated. Soon you will be demanding each child is in his/her own class.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    1. You seemed to be suggesting that grammar schools should be abolished because only certain areas have them. I simply do not agree.
    If you are going to have Grammar Schools (which I don't think we should, anyway), I see it as only fair that there should be equal amounts in areas. Why is fair that two equal children both living in different places, one can attend a Grammar School and the other has to attend their local Comp.?

    (Original post by happysunshine)
    But right now, rather than abolishing Grammars they should get rid of Independent Schools.
    Whilst I do not advocate this, I think that this would be a big step towards a classless society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    Whilst I do not advocate this, I think that this would be a big step towards a classless society.
    Yep. But that'll never happen 'cause most of the people with power in parliment attended one of those schools or like to think of themselves upper class.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    1. You seemed to be suggesting that grammar schools should be abolished because only certain areas have them. I simply do not agree.

    With the comprehensive system as well, whether you can go to a good school depends on where you live (usually the rich areas have the best comprehensives.

    2. There is considerable disparity between members of the same set at my highly competetive grammar school, so I assumed there would be in comprehensives. Perhaps you attend a larger school with more sets?
    1. Well - simply a difference of opinion here.

    2. My comprehensive had sets 1, 2, 3, H and M (apparently, 4 and 5 sound too demoralising). It is inner city - pretty central and next to both affluent and poorer areas.

    Ben

    (Original post by Bigcnee)
    1) Going to a good Grammar also depends on where you live. Taking away GS from the equation would result in better Comps.
    Yeah, I wasn't denying this, I was just saying that it is the case for comps as well as grammars.

    I don't know what effect taking away grammars would have on comps. Maybe you're right.

    (Original post by happysunshine)
    If you are going to have Grammar Schools (which I don't think we should, anyway), I see it as only fair that there should be equal amounts in areas. Why is fair that two equal children both living in different places, one can attend a Grammar School and the other has to attend their local Comp.?
    It's not fair. I don't claim it's fair. Life isn't fair. tbh, I think it's more important to have a system that as many people as possible get as good an education as possible, than having a fair system.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Potter)
    It's not fair. I don't claim it's fair. Life isn't fair. tbh, I think it's more important to have a system that as many people as possible get as good an education as possible, than having a fair system.
    More people attend comprehensive schools - the grammar populace pales into insignificance by comparision. I completely agree with what you've written - but it doesn't do your argument any favours.

    Ben
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i don't know about others but if i was a teacher i'd rather be at a school that had a nicer atmosphere then the brighter students. Also i'd rather have better facillities (sp?) which Grammar schools do not get. How unfair is it when we are not given the chance to do a GCSE practical properly because the school can't afford it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    If you are going to have Grammar Schools (which I don't think we should, anyway), I see it as only fair that there should be equal amounts in areas. Why is fair that two equal children both living in different places, one can attend a Grammar School and the other has to attend their local Comp.?
    Well it isn't fair, but there is no practical way, because different LEAs abolished or kept their grammers as they saw fit. I got into St. Olaves (grammer) but didnt go there as i didn't think that the atmosphere would suit me. Too much pressure and hard work, my friends who went there are always stressed by their work and hte pressure. Im only stressed when i have a deadline in 3 hours.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by azzon)
    i don't know about others but if i was a teacher i'd rather be at a school that had a nicer atmosphere then the brighter students. Also i'd rather have better facillities (sp?) which Grammar schools do not get. How unfair is it when we are not given the chance to do a GCSE practical properly because the school can't afford it.
    Grammar Schools have better facilities as their students respect their school as you can tell by the tatty Comprehensive Schools.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    Grammar Schools have better facilities as their students respect their school as you can tell by the tatty Comprehensive Schools.
    Thats rubbish. In my area the schools are falling apart. Its not great having the floor fall trough while your in drama only to make up annoy some angry badgers that have set up camp underneath so that your not allowed near to the block again.
    Half the school was given away to my school by a local college because they did not deem in good enough for people to be taught there but we have to accept it because there is no alternative
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by azzon)
    Thats rubbish. In my area the schools are falling apart. Its not great having the floor fall trough while your in drama only to make up annoy some angry badgers that have set up camp underneath so that your not allowed near to the block again.
    Half the school was given away to my school by a local college because they did not deem in good enough for people to be taught there but we have to accept it because there is no alternative
    Oh well you'll just have to put up with it I'm afraid! I do!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    Oh well you'll just have to put up with it I'm afraid! I do!
    I shouldn't have to, and if your going to take that view you might as well say that people in comps with a worse education will just have to put up with it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by azzon)
    I shouldn't have to, and if your going to take that view you might as well say that people in comps with a worse education will just have to put up with it
    But then I shouldn't have to put up with my school being tatty either. I see it pretty fair that your school is tatty and my school is tatty. But what I don't see is fair is that Grammar Schools usually have a better education that Comprehensive students.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 22, 2003
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.