Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ed.)
    Yes, that's what has happened in the past.

    My point is that modern day grammar schools aren't promoting social mobility to anything like the extent they may have done in the past, and may even act as a barrier to it. In all honesty what grammar schools may or may not have done in the past isn't really that relevant in my opinion - it's a completely different education climate now.

    I certainly think the modern day grammar schools don't fit with the rest of the modern education system and we would do well to do out with the 11 plus from now. It is unfair that parents can essentially buy their way into the better state schools.
    What you say has some truth.
    My kids have middle class parents who can spend money on education, value it, and learn to work the system. But if I hadn't had that opportunity back then this wouldn't be the case. Maybe I would have gone through life cleaning other peoples house, as my mother did; maybe my children would too...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    jismith1989 - "(as your last sentence certainly seems to imply a rule from what precedes, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt)"

    Quite right - a bad sentence. Let me amend it
    "Back then there was social mobility for some of us, the luckier ones"
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joy Division)
    But if you take more A Levels you're likely to get more UCAS points, no?
    Yes, but it's a blot on the copy-book if lots of people are getting Bs instead of As because they are taking too many A-levels. The percentage of A grades is more important to private schools than UCAS points which aren't used in general by top universities anyway.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moghul)
    Yeah, you wouldn't be. :rolleyes:
    What's that supposed to mean?

    I went to a grammar school and then a private school. The grammar school had more 'intelligent' (in terms of being able to pass exams, I'm aware that isn't the only measure of intelligence) people as compared to the private school.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I am in full support of Grammar schools (although my stand point is biased considering that I attended one). I went to a private school when I was younger and then went to a grammar school. Furthermore, my brother went to a state comp, so I am fully aware of each educationally system.

    While the private sector seemed to focus on a form of education that involved presentation and your overall outlook as a person, Grammar school focused solely on exams and unequivocal ability.

    From what I have gathered from the state schooling process, it was disruptive and many students seemed to discourage others from studying or showing a coherent commitment to work. This does not mean that no one was prepared to work hard!

    The common misconceptions about private school are simply tiresome. Although, many do come from privileged backgrounds do not be so ignorant as to think that everyone was born with a silver spoon... etc.

    I would suggest that objectively, it is best to get into a grammar school. If you cannot do so then be prepared to pay! It is however inadvisable to willingly go to a state school.

    It may be, in general, detrimental to your future prospects.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Perseverance_Law)
    I am in full support of Grammar schools (although my stand point is biased considering that I attended one). I went to a private school when I was younger and then went to a grammar school. Furthermore, my brother went to a state comp, so I am fully aware of each educationally system.

    While the private sector seemed to focus on a form of education that involved presentation and your overall outlook as a person, Grammar school focused solely on exams and unequivocal ability.

    From what I have gathered from the state schooling process, it was disruptive and many students seemed to discourage others from studying or showing a coherent commitment to work. This does not mean that no one was prepared to work hard!

    The common misconceptions about private school are simply tiresome. Although, many do come from privileged backgrounds do not be so ignorant as to think that everyone was born with a silver spoon... etc.

    I would suggest that objectively, it is best to get into a grammar school. If you cannot do so then be prepared to pay! It is however inadvisable to willingly go to a state school.

    It may be, in general, detrimental to your future prospects.
    I completely agree with this. :yes: I know my secondary school experience would have been a lot worse if I attended my local comp.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Grammer schools will never come back because it was too expensive to have a 2 tier school system. It was Baroness Thatcher as education secretary in the Heath Government that closed down more grammer schools than the previous Labour government. Thatcher also had over a decade to bring back grammer schools but didn't.

    The problem with using grammer schools to promote social mobility has two problems.

    1. Poorer families can be priced out of the catchment area for grammers even if their kids pass the entrance exam. This can only be remedied if there are enough grammers for everyone that pass the entrance exam.

    2. Poor parents can't afford to have their kids privately tutored to pass the entrance exams while better off parents can.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    Grammer schools will never come back because it was too expensive to have a 2 tier school system. It was Baroness Thatcher as education secretary in the Heath Government that closed down more grammer schools than the previous Labour government. Thatcher also had over a decade to bring back grammer schools but didn't.

    The problem with using grammer schools to promote social mobility has two problems.

    1. Poorer families can be priced out of the catchment area for grammers even if their kids pass the entrance exam. This can only be remedied if there are enough grammers for everyone that pass the entrance exam.

    2. Poor parents can't afford to have their kids privately tutored to pass the entrance exams while better off parents can.
    Well if the grammar system was returned (which it of course will not be), I'd imagine there WOULD be enough grammars.

    Also, if the system was reintroduced, the effect of point 2 would be diminished, since schools would teach for the exam. (And in any case, if tutoring still presented an advantage, it is less than the advantage money has today in the private/state system.)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well that's hardly surprising; grammar schools 'cream off' the top ability cohort.

    Statistics like these don't actually tell us much. What about value added, for example?

    If you're looking for arguments in favour of grammar schools you won't find them here.
    Offline

    13
    Personally, I'm not surprised. If anything it was expected.

    Tbh, I think the grammar school system should be brought back. Why was it ever "scrapped"?

    Can I just ask, is there any political party that are in favour of bringing grammars back?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Personally, I'm not surprised. If anything it was expected.

    Tbh, I think the grammar school system should be brought back. Why was it ever "scrapped"?

    Can I just ask, is there any political party that are in favour of bringing grammars back?
    UKIP perhaps? I'm not sure.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Jonty99)
    UKIP perhaps? I'm not sure.
    Really? I thought it would be the Lib Dems...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Personally, I'm not surprised. If anything it was expected.

    Tbh, I think the grammar school system should be brought back. Why was it ever "scrapped"?

    Can I just ask, is there any political party that are in favour of bringing grammars back?
    Because they are no longer fit for purpose. They don't act as a tool for social mobility; they have become almost entirely middle-class institutions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I went to a Grammar school and am so glad that I did. I'm not one of those people who think I'm better than people who went to comprehensive schools, though. I'm just pleased I had the education I did have because it put me in good stead for later life.

    I do think a lot of it depends on the person you are, though. You can go to a comprehensive school and do amazingly well - it depends on you as an individual and the work you put in whilst you're at school. But I'm pleased I went somewhere which was strict and well disciplined. I couldn't have asked for a better school to have gone to.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sophistress)
    Because they are no longer fit for purpose. They don't act as a tool for social mobility; they have become almost entirely middle-class institutions.
    Do you mean they are now almost entirely middle-class institutions? Or they were before they were scrapped? Because that's an important difference.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • 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.

  • 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

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