Grammar Schools Watch

Poll: Do you support the existence of Grammar schools?
Yay (299)
81.03%
Nay (70)
18.97%
Kapster
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#141
Report 12 years ago
#141
(Original post by Laika)
I'm not at all surprised by the arguments here or the results of the poll. Did anyone stop to consider that certain comprehensives are in the state they are in BECAUSE of the selective process going on leaving them behind with a sub-standard education?
In my borough just 240 in a year go to grammar school. That's about an average of 6 per school. Now how much of a difference can that be considering not all 6will be exceptionally bright? A significant amount of people in my school would have gone to private school had they not passed the 11+


(Original post by Laika)
Unfortunately the issue of education isn't quite as simple as the people who want to work and are intelligent going to grammars and the idiot trouble makers going to comprehensives. It's also closely linked to your parents education and income and the area you live. I'm sorry, but wanting to work hard and being intelligent isn't a god-given right to have a better education than anyone else, and people who go to comprehensives are just as entitled to a good standard of education.
Not always. Yeah it depends on where you live to the extent that you need to live in a catchment area. Parents' education? I'm what the government like to call 'first generation' and I'm not alone in the school; and surely your parents' education will effect your up bringing and so will effect you academic success where ever you go? Isn't it better for society that the hard working and the intelligent get the better education? Besides we've been arguing about grammar schools are only good because of the selection therefore standard of education would be based on who your classmates are.

If everyone recieved the same standard of schooling then we wouldn't have a two tiered system in which certain portions of the population are entitled to a good education and future whilst others are condemned to the poor schools in the 'bad' areas where respectable parents wouldn't dream of sending their hard working, well raised children! If there was no selection then the ability of students would be equally dispersed amongst schools, thus the 'bad' comprehensives would cease to be composed of mostly underacheiving students, and all schools would have an equal spread of ability and standard of education.
Well that's all very well saying that but there are always going to be bad schools. People don't generally want to gamble on their child's education so they try as hard to get them into the best school possible. You've not taken into effect the problems of 'bad areas' where the majority of people living round a school are not prepared to encourage their children to work. The only way that would cease to be composed of mostly underachieving students would be to recruit in people from miles away. Now who on earth would want to do that?
0
reply
Andronicus Comnenus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#142
Report 12 years ago
#142
(Original post by amywalters)
This is unbelievable..

Why not split everything up and say that we shouldnt have sets for maths and english and science? Why have Unis that require AAA, might as well put Unis like LSE down to a DDD as an entry requirement.
If you asked University Lecturers they;d probably agree with you...mine moaned about the fact that A levels are becoming increasingly useless as a measure of a student's suitability to student life.

Personally: I believe the best system would be to divide into two totally different systems. Rather than Grammars and Comprehensives which follow the same curriculum, wouldn't it be better to put all of those who were of an academic persuasion into one school, and to place all of those who have no interest in academic pursuits into technical schools where they can pick up a trade? I believe that was how the system was originally supposed to work, wasn't it?
0
reply
amie
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#143
Report 12 years ago
#143
(Original post by amywalters)
But you cant presume that they wont. Im talking about my personal experience, but i was actually quoting the other girl, not you
I'm aware of that, and actually I think Laika is a guy.

So we can't assume that someone that goes to a grammar will like or dislike it... thus you can't definitely say "you would have a totally different opinion if you had", which was my point in the first place.
0
reply
Laika
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#144
Report 12 years ago
#144
(Original post by amywalters)
This is unbelievable..

Why not split everything up and say that we shouldnt have sets for maths and english and science? Why have Unis that require AAA, might as well put Unis like LSE down to a DDD as an entry requirement.
This is such a stupid thing to say, I've made it quite clear that within schools there should be some degree of seperation so that well attaining pupils can work to their own level, but I don't think the best way to do this is by one exam when you are 11 that leaves everyone else behind and is a social stigma which sticks for life. If everyone went to comprehensives, they would still be able to work to a high level through class streaming, but they would also be have to interact with people outside their own social and class groups and thus wouldn't express ignorant elitist attitudes like yourself. And I wouldn't be so proud of getting into a grammar. I went to a comprehensive under special Ofsted measures it was so bad and I came out with a load of A's and A*s, and 4 A's at A Level. It's not exactly hard, and you're not entitled to a better education than the rest of the population just because you managed to get into a grammar school.

You can not let the divide between grammars and comprehensives be removed because it will lead to many disputes about putting everything on a same level system - one at which is of mixed ability. But its not just about being mixed ability - its about seperating the people who have ability at all, from the people who dont want to do anything with their lives!
Yes, because peope at comprehensives are all failures who don't want to do anything with their lives because they either didn't have the chace or failed one exam at age 11.

Keep the grammars, and the privates, but why not make comprehensives split up - into a higher and a lower comp so that people who have intelligence are recognised.
What's the point of that as it serves exactly the same purpose as having a grammar school anyway.
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#145
Report 12 years ago
#145
(Original post by amywalters)
But you cant presume that they wont. Im talking about my personal experience, but i was actually quoting Laika, not you

But either way, it doesnt matter about liking them or not? How do you know that someone will like a comp school!? It entirely depends upon the student and the schoo in question - its beside the point - one which is unclear that you seem to be making.

I enjoy it, so i'd like to keep them because many people who are in my school enjoy it too, how can you deprive people of that? If people who are in grammar schools dont enjoy it then they can leave. If people who want to go to a grammar school but couldnt get in, can re-apply for sixth form and for the 13+.
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#146
Report 12 years ago
#146
(Original post by Laika)
This is such a stupid thing to say, I've made it quite clear that within schools there should be some degree of seperation so that well attaining pupils can work to their own level, but I don't think the best way to do this is by one exam when you are 11 that leaves everyone else behind and is a social stigma which sticks for life. If everyone went to comprehensives, they would still be able to work to a high level through class streaming, but they would also be have to interact with people outside their own social and class groups and thus wouldn't express ignorant elitist attitudes like yourself. And I wouldn't be so proud of getting into a grammar. I went to a comprehensive under special Ofsted measures it was so bad and I came out with a load of A's and A*s, and 4 A's at A Level. It's not exactly hard, and you're not entitled to a better education than the rest of the population just because you managed to get into a grammar school.


Yes, because peope at comprehensives are all failures who don't want to do anything with their lives because they either didn't have the chace or failed one exam at age 11.


What's the point of that as it serves exactly the same purpose as having a grammar school anyway.
Dont go to one then!
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#147
Report 12 years ago
#147
(Original post by amie)
I'm aware of that, and actually I think Laika is a guy.

So we can't assume that someone that goes to a grammar will like or dislike it... thus you can't definitely say "you would have a totally different opinion if you had", which was my point in the first place.
and that i agree i said in the previous posts that this debate will never be resolved because there isnt a real answer anyway, but people just keep onnn lol
0
reply
amie
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#148
Report 12 years ago
#148
(Original post by amywalters)
But either way, it doesnt matter about liking them or not? How do you know that someone will like a comp school!? It entirely depends upon the student and the schoo in question - its beside the point - one which is unclear that you seem to be making.
My point is, you can't go round making definite statements like "you would have a totally different opinion if you had" because you don't actually know that at all. Nothing to do with liking a grammar school or a comp school, more to do with that part of your argument and its flaw.
0
reply
Бербато&
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#149
Report 12 years ago
#149
Anyone who opposes Grammar Schools is a red, plain and simple. Like that MP in Sarf London who said she opposed them, then sent her son to a Grammar School - hypocrite. As someone said earlier, they represent the middle ground, between chavs and snobs.
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#150
Report 12 years ago
#150
(Original post by Laika)
This is such a stupid thing to say, I've made it quite clear that within schools there should be some degree of seperation so that well attaining pupils can work to their own level, but I don't think the best way to do this is by one exam when you are 11 that leaves everyone else behind and is a social stigma which sticks for life. If everyone went to comprehensives, they would still be able to work to a high level through class streaming, but they would also be have to interact with people outside their own social and class groups and thus wouldn't express ignorant elitist attitudes like yourself. And I wouldn't be so proud of getting into a grammar. I went to a comprehensive under special Ofsted measures it was so bad and I came out with a load of A's and A*s, and 4 A's at A Level. It's not exactly hard, and you're not entitled to a better education than the rest of the population just because you managed to get into a grammar school.


Yes, because peope at comprehensives are all failures who don't want to do anything with their lives because they either didn't have the chace or failed one exam at age 11.

I never ever said that. I'm saying its about seperating the people who are at the comps who are intelligent, from the people who are at the comps but arent really intelligent. So put the intelligent people from the comps and the grammars together, which is what you agreed in the first place!


What's the point of that as it serves exactly the same purpose as having a grammar school anyway.
Exactly, and i want to keep them! So why would i argue against it?!
0
reply
LH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#151
Report 12 years ago
#151
I'm very surprised at the poll, especially considering that the general consensus of political parties is anti-grammars - maybe one party should stick up for them.
0
reply
Laika
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#152
Report 12 years ago
#152
(Original post by Kapster)
Not always. Yeah it depends on where you live to the extent that you need to live in a catchment area. Parents' education? I'm what the government like to call 'first generation' and I'm not alone in the school; and surely your parents' education will effect your up bringing and so will effect you academic success where ever you go?
Well this is exactly my point, if you want to go to a good school you can move to the cachement area which will be a wealthy, middle class neighborhood so those with well earning parents will be able to get their children a good education while kids from poor backgrounds won't have that oppurtunity. And parents who had a good education are going to value that and thus push for their children to get into grmmar schools (which is where they probably went). Kids with poor earning parents won't value education as much and thus they won't be pushed in the same way, through no fault of their own. If everyone went to comprehensives this double standard wouldn't exist, or at least it wouldn't be as clear cut.

Isn't it better for society that the hard working and the intelligent get the better education?
No I think everyone should get an equal standard of education.

Well that's all very well saying that but there are always going to be bad schools. People don't generally want to gamble on their child's education so they try as hard to get them into the best school possible. You've not taken into effect the problems of 'bad areas' where the majority of people living round a school are not prepared to encourage their children to work. The only way that would cease to be composed of mostly underachieving students would be to recruit in people from miles away. Now who on earth would want to do that?
Links back to my first point.
0
reply
amie
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#153
Report 12 years ago
#153
(Original post by amywalters)
and that i agree i said in the previous posts that this debate will never be resolved because there isnt a real answer anyway, but people just keep onnn lol
Was that last post I replied to aimed at me? Now I'm confused!

Anyway, yeah there isn't really an answer here, it's about personal preference.

One thing I do think needs to be addressed is the entrance assessment though, the 11+ is just too unreliable in my opinion. For example, one girl at my grammar school passed the 11+ and went on to get Us and Es in her A-Levels. It just doesn't seem to do it's job very well!
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#154
Report 12 years ago
#154
(Original post by amie)
My point is, you can't go round making definite statements like "you would have a totally different opinion if you had" because you don't actually know that at all. Nothing to do with liking a grammar school or a comp school, more to do with that part of your argument and its flaw.

I was making the point that your friend Laika said .. "Furthermore those who attended grammars wouldn't come out with an elitist, patronising and generalising attitudes towards comprehensives and education in general."

He obviously knows nothing either, so therefore, that argument against us is flawed as well.
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#155
Report 12 years ago
#155
(Original post by amie)
Was that last post I replied to aimed at me? Now I'm confused!

Anyway, yeah there isn't really an answer here, it's about personal preference.

One thing I do think needs to be addressed is the entrance assessment though, the 11+ is just too unreliable in my opinion. For example, one girl at my grammar school passed the 11+ and went on to get Us and Es in her A-Levels. It just doesn't seem to do it's job very well!
Nah it wasnt aimed at you lol.. Its all aimed at Laika, but you are defending him (which is fine) but the things you are suggesting im doing, is what he is doing too.. So therefore all our arguments are flawed.

I go to a specialist science grammar college, so the 11+ needs to be passed significantly in science, maybe thats an idea?
0
reply
amie
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#156
Report 12 years ago
#156
(Original post by amywalters)
I was making the point that your friend Laika said .. "Furthermore those who attended grammars wouldn't come out with an elitist, patronising and generalising attitudes towards comprehensives and education in general."

He obviously knows nothing either, so therefore, that argument against us is flawed as well.
My friend?! Woah, wait a sec. I'm not on either side of this debate really, I just hated my grammar experience and would like to see the entrance assessment changed.

I'm not saying one argument is flawed whereas the other isn't, but that flaw stuck out to me and I wanted to correct it.
0
reply
amywalters
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#157
Report 12 years ago
#157
Way to many convos here at once, im confused, just forget about it lol
0
reply
amie
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#158
Report 12 years ago
#158
(Original post by amywalters)
Nah it wasnt aimed at you lol.. Its all aimed at Laika, but you are defending him (which is fine) but the things you are suggesting im doing, is what he is doing too.. So therefore all our arguments are flawed.

I go to a specialist science grammar college, so the 11+ needs to be passed significantly in science, maybe thats an idea?
Lol, as I said I've not made a conscious decision to 'defend' anyone. Perhaps my correction defended him, I don't know, but it wasn't intended to.

I don't really like the idea of a stronger criteria for science, English or whatever in terms of the 11+ - surely that disadvantages the kids who are gifted in one area but aren't so hot in another? And if that were to happen, you'd have to have a local English grammar, a science grammar, a maths grammar and so on.

Perhaps a solution would be to make the assessment somewhat on-going? I know you can appeal your 11+ result by showing examples of work and whatever, but if you have to do that you're on your back foot already because you underperformed on the exam. Perhaps pieces of schoolwork and so on could be taken into account as well? And also maybe KS2 SATs results? If only one of these factors was taken into account the method would be pretty flawed, but if you base it on an exam and classwork and SATs, you might get a better picture of the candidate as a whole and it wouldn't automatically rule out kids who did badly on that one day.
0
reply
Champagne Breakfast
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#159
Report 12 years ago
#159
(Original post by LH)
I'm very surprised at the poll, especially considering that the general consensus of political parties is anti-grammars - maybe one party should stick up for them.
A lot of people at comprehensives probably can't afford computers. And even if they could, they probably couldn't use them. And even if they could, they'd probably prefer to spend their time attacking old women and stealing sweeties from shops.
0
reply
RK
  • TSR Community Team
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#160
Report 12 years ago
#160
(Original post by Andronicus Comnenus)
If you asked University Lecturers they;d probably agree with you...mine moaned about the fact that A levels are becoming increasingly useless as a measure of a student's suitability to student life.

Personally: I believe the best system would be to divide into two totally different systems. Rather than Grammars and Comprehensives which follow the same curriculum, wouldn't it be better to put all of those who were of an academic persuasion into one school, and to place all of those who have no interest in academic pursuits into technical schools where they can pick up a trade? I believe that was how the system was originally supposed to work, wasn't it?
I've got very mixed opinions on some of things you've said in this thread. But what you've said in this post is quite absurd.

What age would you make people chose between academic subjects and a trade I'm assuming it would be at age 11, an age at which most people have no idea what they want to do when they are older, or at least an age at which their ideas will bare very little resemblance to what they actually end up doing.

This may have been how some system was originally meant to work, I've no idea, but it's not how it works now and it's not how it's meant to work now for good reason that you can't shove people one way or another 5 years or 7 years or more years before they will start work. They don't know what they want to do at age 11, most don't even know at 14. It's probably not even beneficial for this to happen even if they did know. In KS3 there are still loads of general things pupils need to pick up that would mean education would be essentially the same for at least 2 or three years, which ever route they took...so why the need for separation? It would just mean many people found themselves in the wrong sort of school and would need to change over. Moving school is a traumatic experience, leaving friends behind, trying to find new friends when friendship groups are formed. Settling into a whole new system. I'm against any system of school which fundamentally has school changes built into to make up for errors which could be made due the system not being good enough or flexible enough to allow children to do what is best for them at the school they are already at.

Also, having two school systems over the whole country is highly impractical. What about rural area which only have one school now? Would they have two? Or would you expect 700 pupils to be bussed out 20 miles to other distant areas while another 700 are bussed back the 20 miles in to fill the places in the school they would otherwise have gone to? Sounds quite absurd doesn't it? Wouldn't a school system where all the schools are the same and from which each individual pupil can get out what is best for them, whether this is academic or vocational, allowing all pupils to reach their full potential? Even if the direction of this potential changes several times during their school years?

What I've said here can equally be said about a nation wide school system involving Grammars and Comprehensives, not just academic and vocational schools.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
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

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (879)
79.84%
Leave (222)
20.16%

Watched Threads

View All