"Pupils shine brightest at grammar schools"

Watch
This discussion is closed.
theone
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#161
Report 16 years ago
#161
Some of us never got a chance to apply for a grammar school

Although I think i'd have been better if I had gone to one, that's jsut my opinion, there are many more opportunities available at grammar schools imho.
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#162
Report 16 years ago
#162
(Original post by Bigcnee)
Is it any surprise that these flaws in the report were "shown up". It showed British education to be a shambles, which it duly is.
On the contrary, Parliament decreed:

"The international student assessment survey—PISA—which shows that of 32 countries, the UK ranks seventh in reading, eighth in maths and fourth in science. That is an incredible result given the widespread concern about education in Britain. Surely, he will say, that proves that all is well with our education system. "

It is after this that the mertis of PISA are discussed and major flaws are found. One MP said:

"It is particularly incredible because in the previous year a far more authoritative study—the third international maths and science study, conducted by the respected International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement—put the UK 20th out of 41 countries, just two places ahead of Lithuania. The IAEEA has been conducting such surveys since 1970. "
0
azzon
Badges: 0
#163
Report 16 years ago
#163
What you seem to forget is although Grammar School may get better teachers they loose out on other things because the Goverment thinks that smarter people should get less money.

Also why should a smart kid be held back because the person next t him doesnt want to work
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#164
Report 16 years ago
#164
(Original post by Harry Potter)
That is rubbish. I know plenty of people outside grammar schools and not one gives a damn that they weren't accepted to one. I think you're overestimating the importance the majority of people place on being considered intelligent. Do half the population regard themselves as inferior because they got less than average o-level results? There are more important things in life than being 'educated' or 'sucessful' in the eyes of society.

I think, perhaps, you have yourself a bit confused. You're thinking of independant schools. Not one pupil I know at my school is arrogant about they're education or regards themselves in any way as superior to those who received an education at a comp. If anything, they are embaressed to mention it in general conversation - because it's an all-boys school, or 'posh', or because they think they'll be labelled a 'geek'.

I haven't noticed this phenomenon when talking to my parents either :confused: :confused: :confused:
1) I think you may be underestimating the long term effects of rejection at a young age. I don't know many people that would openly admit being upset at being rejected by a Grammar. It is something one is more likely to conceal.

2) People do get very touchy and defensive over their education. This is one of the most surprising aspects about adults, that I picked up when I was younger.

3) I wouldn't patronise Ben S. as I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about. There are many people that openly brag about their Grammar education, mainly down to ignorance and lack of knowledge of the education system.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#165
Report 16 years ago
#165
(Original post by azzon)
What you seem to forget is although Grammar School may get better teachers they loose out on other things because the Goverment thinks that smarter people should get less money.

Also why should a smart kid be held back because the person next t him doesnt want to work

Lazy and distracted pupils transcend all forms of education.
However, if you are referring to a "stupid", lazy child being sat next to a highly intelligent, motivated child, then I would say that Comps. are streamed (for the millionth time) and this is no more likely to occur than at a Grammar.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#166
Report 16 years ago
#166
(Original post by theone)
Some of us never got a chance to apply for a grammar school

Although I think i'd have been better if I had gone to one, that's jsut my opinion, there are many more opportunities available at grammar schools imho.
The grass is always greener....
0
Sire
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#167
Report 16 years ago
#167
(Original post by Bigcnee)
The grass is always greener....
Check your cp Bigcnee
0
happysunshine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#168
Report 16 years ago
#168
(Original post by azzon)
What you seem to forget is although Grammar School may get better teachers they loose out on other things because the Goverment thinks that smarter people should get less money.

Also why should a smart kid be held back because the person next t him doesnt want to work
Yeah but let's be realistic. I agree that the smart kid shouldn't be held back by the person that doesn't want to work, but you really can't spend all educational money on the smart kids. If you give the people next to the smart kid an even worse education then we as a society will have to pay as afterall the main reason for education is to get people the best jobs which contribute to the nation.

What people seem to forget here is that some people who are not naturally clever work ever so hard yet a branded 'thick' and 'time wasters'. By having these grammars these people loose out as they can't get the best education as not being intelligent enough.
0
theone
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#169
Report 16 years ago
#169
(Original post by Bigcnee)
The grass is always greener....
I agree with that, but my school is extremely small (c. 300 pupils in total, over 100 foreign) and I feel I would have prefered a larger, more academically based school.
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#170
Report 16 years ago
#170
(Original post by theone)
I agree with that, but my school is extremely small (c. 300 pupils in total, over 100 foreign) and I feel I would have prefered a larger, more academically based school.
My (old) school currently has about 2500 pupils (I think - 350 in each of 7 years). It had an excellent atmosphere and a fair few idiots (the exact word varies, depending on which part of the country you're from). I don't know quite what you mean by 'academically based' - it's a school (though I think I know what you are getting at)! 300 pupils makes for a tiny school and, I suppose, not much variety in teachers - though that shouldn't matter if they're good.

Ben
0
Harry Potter
Badges:
#171
Report 16 years ago
#171
(Original post by Bigcnee)
3) I wouldn't patronise Ben S. as I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about.
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?

(Original post by Bigcnee)
There are many people that openly brag about their Grammar education, mainly down to ignorance and lack of knowledge of the education system
Maybe this is more common in older people. But then, many older people are openly racist. Today, from what I've seen, grammar school pupils are just normal people and don't think of themselves as being anything other than normal.

I would have thought that people who went to comprehensive schools have more to brag about since they acheived the same sucess with limited resources.

(Original post by happysunshine)
Yeah but let's be realistic. I agree that the smart kid shouldn't be held back by the person that doesn't want to work, but you really can't spend all educational money on the smart kids. If you give the people next to the smart kid an even worse education then we as a society will have to pay as afterall the main reason for education is to get people the best jobs which contribute to the nation.

What people seem to forget here is that some people who are not naturally clever work ever so hard yet a branded 'thick' and 'time wasters'. By having these grammars these people loose out as they can't get the best education as not being intelligent enough.
1. I don't see how you are spending "all educational money" on smart kids by having grammar schools. If we didn't have grammar schools there would have to be more comprehensive schools. Grammar schools aren't better because they get more money (they actually get less), but because the pupils generally all want to do well (I wouldn't say they want to work, though ) and do not disrupt lessons so much.

2. I also don't see how less intelligent people get a worse education because the more intelligent pupils go to grammar schools. Yes, the comprehensive schools get lower average results, but this is because they do not have as intelligent pupils. Less talented pupils should get a better education as the people around them are on the same sort of level and the lessons can be tailered accordingly. Teachers don't have to waste time making special accomadations for exceptionally smart students.
0
theone
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#172
Report 16 years ago
#172
(Original post by Ben.S.)
My (old) school currently has about 2500 pupils (I think - 350 in each of 7 years). It had an excellent atmosphere and a fair few idiots (the exact word varies, depending on which part of the country you're from). I don't know quite what you mean by 'academically based' - it's a school (though I think I know what you are getting at)! 300 pupils makes for a tiny school and, I suppose, not much variety in teachers - though that shouldn't matter if they're good.

Ben
My point is that they're more focused towards getting good grades and challenging pupils, rather than the bare-essential teaching that certain teachers that I know provide...
0
happysunshine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#173
Report 16 years ago
#173
(Original post by Harry Potter)

1. I don't see how you are spending "all educational money" on smart kids by having grammar schools. If we didn't have grammar schools there would have to be more comprehensive schools. Grammar schools aren't better because they get more money (they actually get less), but because the pupils generally all want to do well (I wouldn't say they want to work, though ) and do not disrupt lessons so much.

2. I also don't see how less intelligent people get a worse education because the more intelligent pupils go to grammar schools. Yes, the comprehensive schools get lower average results, but this is because they do not have as intelligent pupils. Less talented pupils should get a better education as the people around them are on the same sort of level and the lessons can be tailered accordingly. Teachers don't have to waste time making special accomadations for exceptionally smart students.
1. In no way was I suggesting that this should happen, infact I was meaning the opposite. I just thought the post I was replying to was suggesting this as it said that Grammar kids loose out because they get less money. Maybe I was interpretating it wrong

2. In reply to that, I see it as unfair that all Grammar Schools go on natural ability and those with the higher do get a better education than those with a lower who wish to work. The thing is the people around the lower ability pupils don't get an equal education as these mess around.
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#174
Report 16 years ago
#174
(Original post by Harry Potter)
I also don't see how less intelligent people get a worse education because the more intelligent pupils go to grammar schools. Yes, the comprehensive schools get lower average results, but this is because they do not have as intelligent pupils. Less talented pupils should get a better education as the people around them are on the same sort of level and the lessons can be tailered accordingly. Teachers don't have to waste time making special accomadations for exceptionally smart students.
Inadequate provision of grammar schools means that the most intelligent people don't/can't always attend them - they either go to independent schools or comprehensives. I don't agree with the existence of a smattering of state funded 'better schools'. In my opinion, all state schools should (ideally - I can see how this is not going to happen, for social reasons) be comprehensive, not selective. Lessons are tailored to ability in ALL schools (at least for GCSE, where the exams form a 2/3 tier system) - that's one of the many skills teachers posses.

Ben
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#175
Report 16 years ago
#175
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Inadequate provision of grammar schools means that the most intelligent people don't/can't always attend them - they either go to independent schools or comprehensives. I don't agree with the existence of a smattering of state funded 'better schools'. In my opinion, all state schools should (ideally - I can see how this is not going to happen, for social reasons) be comprehensive, not selective. Lessons are tailored to ability in ALL schools (at least for GCSE, where the exams form a 2/3 tier system) - that's one of the many skills teachers posses.

Ben
I agree entirely.
0
Harry Potter
Badges:
#176
Report 16 years ago
#176
(Original post by happysunshine)
1. In no way was I suggesting that this should happen, infact I was meaning the opposite. I just thought the post I was replying to was suggesting this as it said that Grammar kids loose out because they get less money. Maybe I was interpretating it wrong
Oh, okay. Fair enough.

(Original post by happysunshine)
2. In reply to that, I see it as unfair that all Grammar Schools go on natural ability and those with the higher do get a better education than those with a lower who wish to work. The thing is the people around the lower ability pupils don't get an equal education as these mess around.
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).
0
Ben.S.
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#177
Report 16 years ago
#177
(Original post by theone)
My point is that they're more focused towards getting good grades and challenging pupils, rather than the bare-essential teaching that certain teachers that I know provide...
Well - there's nothing stopping you challenging yourself. Education does not stop outside of a classroom. Read a book or two. Completely hypocritical, I know, but still...

Ben
0
theone
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#178
Report 16 years ago
#178
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Well - there's nothing stopping you challenging yourself. Education does not stop outside of a classroom. Read a book or two. Completely hypocritical, I know, but still...

Ben
I know, but that sort of self motivation doesn't tend to come when you're only 12-14 unless you're 'pushed' in that direction.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#179
Report 16 years ago
#179
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Well - there's nothing stopping you challenging yourself. Education does not stop outside of a classroom. Read a book or two. Completely hypocritical, I know, but still...

Ben
True. You do not get forcefed at Uni.
0
Harry Potter
Badges:
#180
Report 16 years ago
#180
(Original post by Ben.S.)
Inadequate provision of grammar schools means that the most intelligent people don't/can't always attend them - they either go to independent schools or comprehensives. I don't agree with the existence of a smattering of state funded 'better schools'.
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.


(Original post by Ben.S.)
Lessons are tailored to ability in ALL schools (at least for GCSE, where the exams form a 2/3 tier system) - that's one of the many skills teachers posses.
Like I said in a previous post, there will still be a huge disparity in ability between people in the same set.
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 (39)
8.18%
Confident (65)
13.63%
Indifferent (66)
13.84%
Unsure (119)
24.95%
Worried (188)
39.41%

Watched Threads

View All