"Pupils shine brightest at grammar schools"

Watch
This discussion is closed.
azzon
Badges: 0
#201
Report 16 years ago
#201
(Original post by happysunshine)
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.
Did you take the 11 plus or were you not able to or chose not to?
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#202
Report 16 years ago
#202
OK, nobody is ever going to agree on this issue, are they? Everyone is bound to stick to their guns because they believe in their point of view utterly and completely. So it would be pointless my even mentioning my point of view because people either agree with me already or are never going to agree.

But I'm going to add my bit anyway

Look, I went to two state primaries and then to a selective, private (shock horror! - yes, I know that means I'm labelled a 'rich *****' for the rest of my life despite the fact that I was there on a scholarship) secondary school. At primary school I was BORED. I know that any primary/preparatory school is unlikely to be the most stimulating environment for a bright kid but I was seriously, seriously bored. There was no effort made to make my life more interesting; I was forced to wait for the other kids and in fact, my brother and I were both made to feel bad for finishing work earlier than others. I went to two primaries, one of which was better than the other, admittedly, but I still stagnated. AS SOON as I went to this secondary, private, school, I was stretched for the first time in my life. And yes, sad though it may be, I loved it. And it did wonders for me. I achieved some damn good GCSEs and A levels, though I say it myself, and I'm now studying at Cambridge on a course for which places are fiercely competed. If I had gone to the local comprehensive I might very well not be here now. I watched it happen to some of my friends from primary school: they had potential and they never came close to it.

I am not saying that all comprehensives are bad. Some of them are very good. What I am saying is that the sort of mentality of 'all kids are equal so shove them into school together' is fundamentally flawed. All kids are NOT intellectually equal. I am sorry, but this is a fact. Just as it's a fact that if I had been thrown into an apprenticeship I would have struggled horribly because when it comes to practical things I am, quite frankly, the crappest of the crap. (Begs the question - why am I doing a scientific course full of practical lab work? - but I'll ignore that and pretend my practical marks don't exist!) If you throw all the children together then the less bright ones WILL, inevitably, hold back the brightest: the teachers will be concentrating on bringing the slower ones up to standard. After all, they have those government quotas of C grades, don't they?

So to the people who rail against the existence of private schools I say: people shouldn't have a choice? No, I know that you have less choice if you come from a poor background, but bear in mind that if you ARE gifted most public/private schools offer substantial scholarships. And I maintain that if people want to send their kids to a private school and not increase the numbers in state school classes, and further overburden the desperately small number of teachers, then they should be allowed to.

And to those who shout down grammar schools - you cannot be moaning about anything other than intellectual elitism here. Social elitism is one thing. It ain't nice. But intellectual elitism - surely we have to have that?! Where else do we get our scientists and academics? How else does this country make progress?? The worst thing about recent attitudes to education is that people seem to think that everyone needs to have academic success. They don't. What we need more of, in actual fact, is plumbers and carpenters and other craftsmen and women - but the children who would be naturally superb at these kinds of jobs are made to feel stupid if they don't have GCSEs and A levels and a degree, and so are forced into education they don't need and certainly don't enjoy. If you don't believe me, open your eyes and look around. Yes, everyone needs a basic level of education. But the grammars and selective schools exist to stretch the most academically able so that they can and WILL go on to achieve their academic potential and perhaps discover a cure for cancer or something. If you're as bored as I was, school and education is not interesting and not fun, and you don't want to do it any more.

I have waddled off topic here a bit I think - sorry about the rant! I know it won't make any difference whatsoever but it's made me feel a bit better because I've wanted to say a lot of this stuff for a while... And apologies if I've just repeated what other people have said but I haven't read through all of this thread - it's quite long!

No offence intended to anyone
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#203
Report 16 years ago
#203
Hello MadNatSci. As you know, I'm on the same course as you and I went to a comprehensive school. Do you really feel that you wouldn't have performed as well at a non-selective state school? Maybe there aren't any good ones where you live (maybe due to selective polarisation)? You needed others to stretch you? How on earth are you finding Cambridge!?! (I know you're probably loving it - I just thought I'd say that anyway). My problem with selective schools is the lack of provision - not intellectual elitism or ability polarisation (these thngs happen within comprehensive schools, anyway - and slower people are not taught in the same classes as the bright). We can get scientists and academics from comprehensive schools, you know - quite a significant proportion! You and I are in the same boat, now, anyway - so, in the end, it made no difference. What I'm griping about is that there are so few of these selective state schools that they may as well not exist at all.

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#204
Report 16 years ago
#204
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Hello MadNatSci. As you know, I'm on the same course as you and I went to a comprehensive school. Do you really feel that you wouldn't have performed as well at a non-selective state school? Maybe there aren't any good ones where you live (maybe due to selective polarisation)? You needed others to stretch you? How on earth are you finding Cambridge!?! (I know you're probably loving it - I just thought I'd say that anyway). My problem with selective schools is the lack of provision - not intellectual elitism or ability polarisation (these thngs happen within comprehensive schools, anyway - and slower people are not taught in the same classes as the bright). We can get scientists and academics from comprehensive schools, you know - quite a significant proportion! You and I are in the same boat, now, anyway - so, in the end, it made no difference. What I'm griping about is that there are so few of these selective state schools that they may as well not exist at all.

Ben

Sorry, my last post sounded a bit grouchy... guess it's all those years of listening to people knocking my school for being selective

OK. I probably would still be here if I'm honest, because I had the drive. But at the local comprehensive, to which I would have gone, the atmosphere was such that I would have had a MISERABLE time of it. Trust me. Your local comp is probably a good one: mine emphatically wasn't! Yes, I am loving Cambridge precisely because I am stretched (OK, over-stretched at times...) What do you mean by 'you needed others to stretch you?'? The kids didn't. The teachers did. But not at my state schools: they were focussed on bringing up the slower kids and didn't worry about us because we would do OK anyway..

Your point about the lack of provision of grammars I agree with. These schools should be far more widely available. So why did they shut so many of them down?
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#205
Report 16 years ago
#205
(Original post by MadNatSci)
Sorry, my last post sounded a bit grouchy... guess it's all those years of listening to people knocking my school for being selective

OK. I probably would still be here if I'm honest, because I had the drive. But at the local comprehensive, to which I would have gone, the atmosphere was such that I would have had a MISERABLE time of it. Trust me. Your local comp is probably a good one: mine emphatically wasn't! Yes, I am loving Cambridge precisely because I am stretched (OK, over-stretched at times...) What do you mean by 'you needed others to stretch you?'? The kids didn't. The teachers did. But not at my state schools: they were focussed on bringing up the slower kids and didn't worry about us because we would do OK anyway..

Your point about the lack of provision of grammars I agree with. These schools should be far more widely available. So why did they shut so many of them down?
I have no idea why they shut so many down, If there was one for every comprehensive, then it would be perfect. My other comment was a bit stupid - I didn't mean any offence. I'm plodding through the great big Alberts et al cells book at the minute - it's quite daunting!

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#206
Report 16 years ago
#206
(Original post by Ben.S.)
I have no idea why they shut so many down, If there was one for every comprehensive, then it would be perfect. My other comment was a bit stupid - I didn't mean any offence. I'm plodding through the great big Alberts et al cells book at the minute - it's quite daunting!

Ben

No offence taken, I apologise if I caused any to you or others with the great long rant up there!

Alberts... urrgh... I haven't dared touch it yet because it would be too depressing! I'm assuming you have exams in January too? Good luck with em (and Alberts)
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#207
Report 16 years ago
#207
(Original post by MadNatSci)
No offence taken, I apologise if I caused any to you or others with the great long rant up there!

Alberts... urrgh... I haven't dared touch it yet because it would be too depressing! I'm assuming you have exams in January too? Good luck with em (and Alberts)
Nope. No exams to ruin Christmas. Just an extended essay on cells - with 96 pages of reading!!! It's on flipping genetics as well - so I don't even know what I'm talking about!

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#208
Report 16 years ago
#208
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Nope. No exams to ruin Christmas. Just an extended essay on cells - with 96 pages of reading!!! It's on flipping genetics as well - so I don't even know what I'm talking about!

Ben

You're at Christ's and you don't have an exam?? I thought Christ's was supposed to be the hardest work! And Sidney was supposed to be more laid back (hmm, yes it seems there is a limit to how much I enjoy being stretched...)
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#209
Report 16 years ago
#209
(Original post by MadNatSci)
You're at Christ's and you don't have an exam?? I thought Christ's was supposed to be the hardest work! And Sidney was supposed to be more laid back (hmm, yes it seems there is a limit to how much I enjoy being stretched...)
I'd MUCH prefer exams! I got loads of questions from my cells supervisor. I'm supposed to write half a page for each. One I'm struggling to get the lenght for is 'why is ATP needed to convert glucose to glucose-6-phosphate?'. Any ideas?

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#210
Report 16 years ago
#210
(Original post by Ben.S.)
I'd MUCH prefer exams! I got loads of questions from my cells supervisor. I'm supposed to write half a page for each. One I'm struggling to get the lenght for is 'why is ATP needed to convert glucose to glucose-6-phosphate?'. Any ideas?

Ben

Ummmm. Buggrit, this is Martin's stuff ---> haven't got a clue!! Lemme think. I think I'd need to look at the molecular formulae - presumably it's something to do with the groups that are being removed/added? Hmm. Let me know if you figure it out and I'll do likewise
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#211
Report 16 years ago
#211
(Original post by MadNatSci)
Ummmm. Buggrit, this is Martin's stuff ---> haven't got a clue!! Lemme think. I think I'd need to look at the molecular formulae - presumably it's something to do with the groups that are being removed/added? Hmm. Let me know if you figure it out and I'll do likewise
Well - I've written an answer based on phosphorylation potentials and the fact that ATP is just above glucose-6-phosphate so it's quite efficient - plus the fact that it's endergonic and needs phosphate from somewhere. It's about that long, though!!!

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#212
Report 16 years ago
#212
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Well - I've written an answer based on phosphorylation potentials and the fact that ATP is just above glucose-6-phosphate so it's quite efficient - plus the fact that it's endergonic and needs phosphate from somewhere. It's about that long, though!!!

Ben

Ah.




(Will let you know if I think of anything, but need to get a handle on the stuff properly first - good luck with it)
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#213
Report 16 years ago
#213
(Original post by MadNatSci)
Ah.




(Will let you know if I think of anything, but need to get a handle on the stuff properly first - good luck with it)
Thank you. May as well give out rep before midnight.

Ben
0
MadNatSci
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#214
Report 16 years ago
#214
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Thank you. May as well give out rep before midnight.

Ben

You sweetie, thanks!! Have some back
0
Toyosi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#215
Report 16 years ago
#215
(Original post by MadNatSci)
OK, nobody is ever going to agree on this issue, are they? Everyone is bound to stick to their guns because they believe in their point of view utterly and completely. So it would be pointless my even mentioning my point of view because people either agree with me already or are never going to agree.

But I'm going to add my bit anyway

Look, I went to two state primaries and then to a selective, private (shock horror! - yes, I know that means I'm labelled a 'rich *****' for the rest of my life despite the fact that I was there on a scholarship) secondary school. At primary school I was BORED. I know that any primary/preparatory school is unlikely to be the most stimulating environment for a bright kid but I was seriously, seriously bored. There was no effort made to make my life more interesting; I was forced to wait for the other kids and in fact, my brother and I were both made to feel bad for finishing work earlier than others. I went to two primaries, one of which was better than the other, admittedly, but I still stagnated. AS SOON as I went to this secondary, private, school, I was stretched for the first time in my life. And yes, sad though it may be, I loved it. And it did wonders for me. I achieved some damn good GCSEs and A levels, though I say it myself, and I'm now studying at Cambridge on a course for which places are fiercely competed. If I had gone to the local comprehensive I might very well not be here now. I watched it happen to some of my friends from primary school: they had potential and they never came close to it.

I am not saying that all comprehensives are bad. Some of them are very good. What I am saying is that the sort of mentality of 'all kids are equal so shove them into school together' is fundamentally flawed. All kids are NOT intellectually equal. I am sorry, but this is a fact. Just as it's a fact that if I had been thrown into an apprenticeship I would have struggled horribly because when it comes to practical things I am, quite frankly, the crappest of the crap. (Begs the question - why am I doing a scientific course full of practical lab work? - but I'll ignore that and pretend my practical marks don't exist!) If you throw all the children together then the less bright ones WILL, inevitably, hold back the brightest: the teachers will be concentrating on bringing the slower ones up to standard. After all, they have those government quotas of C grades, don't they?

So to the people who rail against the existence of private schools I say: people shouldn't have a choice? No, I know that you have less choice if you come from a poor background, but bear in mind that if you ARE gifted most public/private schools offer substantial scholarships. And I maintain that if people want to send their kids to a private school and not increase the numbers in state school classes, and further overburden the desperately small number of teachers, then they should be allowed to.

And to those who shout down grammar schools - you cannot be moaning about anything other than intellectual elitism here. Social elitism is one thing. It ain't nice. But intellectual elitism - surely we have to have that?! Where else do we get our scientists and academics? How else does this country make progress?? The worst thing about recent attitudes to education is that people seem to think that everyone needs to have academic success. They don't. What we need more of, in actual fact, is plumbers and carpenters and other craftsmen and women - but the children who would be naturally superb at these kinds of jobs are made to feel stupid if they don't have GCSEs and A levels and a degree, and so are forced into education they don't need and certainly don't enjoy. If you don't believe me, open your eyes and look around. Yes, everyone needs a basic level of education. But the grammars and selective schools exist to stretch the most academically able so that they can and WILL go on to achieve their academic potential and perhaps discover a cure for cancer or something. If you're as bored as I was, school and education is not interesting and not fun, and you don't want to do it any more.

I have waddled off topic here a bit I think - sorry about the rant! I know it won't make any difference whatsoever but it's made me feel a bit better because I've wanted to say a lot of this stuff for a while... And apologies if I've just repeated what other people have said but I haven't read through all of this thread - it's quite long!

No offence intended to anyone
0
Toyosi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#216
Report 16 years ago
#216
hmm, just wrote a thing and it didn't show up, oh well, to summarise seeing as my computers being a knob

People should be able to go to grammar schools cause sticking people of very different abilities into the same class isn't good for anyone

And

Uni's should take into account what school you went to because i really think its unfair to judge people the same when some are clearly advantaged
0
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#217
Report 16 years ago
#217
(Original post by Toyosi)
hmm, just wrote a thing and it didn't show up, oh well, to summarise seeing as my computers being a knob

People should be able to go to grammar schools cause sticking people of very different abilities into the same class isn't good for anyone

And

Uni's should take into account what school you went to because i really think its unfair to judge people the same when some are clearly advantaged
yes but what happens if you are given a bursary i.e. sponsorship by the grammar school to go to their school for free because you cant afford it? Will we disaadvantage them as well?
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#218
Report 16 years ago
#218
(Original post by Toyosi)
People should be able to go to grammar schools cause sticking people of very different abilities into the same class isn't good for anyone
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOLS ARE STREAMED YOU FOOL.

Sorry for the bluntness of this post, but I find that people who give an opinion on the matter, who blatently don't know the basics about Comprehensive schooling, shouldn't give an opinion.
0
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#219
Report 16 years ago
#219
(Original post by Bigcnee)
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOLS ARE STREAMED YOU FOOL.
enlighten me
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#220
Report 16 years ago
#220
(Original post by happysunshine)
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.
I think we are all seeing just how divisive Grammars can be. I'm not denying their strong points, but I can't sit around and see the education of the majority ruined by such a system.
People say Comps are crap. The only reason many are crap, is the existence of Grammars in the local area. This means that many students have to suffer for the few who go to a GS. This is fundementally/ morally wrong. Especially considering the performance of most Comps without a Grammar in the local area.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling ahead of results day?

Very Confident (15)
8.29%
Confident (24)
13.26%
Indifferent (31)
17.13%
Unsure (50)
27.62%
Worried (61)
33.7%

Watched Threads

View All