Why do the Left hate Grammar schools so much..

I went to a grammar school and believe that it was the best thing for me. There are no grammar schools where I currently live and although my daughter's school is good, I feel that she is being held back in some subjects and would thrive in a grammar.
 
HomerJSimpson said:
Why not set about repairing and improving what we already have rather than role out a new two tiered education system. Children develop at different ages and a failed 11+ doesn't mean that child couldn't go on and be a future high flyer with a university education ahead. Some may get through the 11+ and absolutely sink without trace in the ruthlessness of a grammar education and be better off in the more "mainstream" system and as a result perhaps never achieve what they are capable of in terms of qualifications as the grammar education passes them by
Click to expand...

There's always an exception that proves the rule!

Way back when comprehensive schools first came in the top kids were streamed in the top class until some bright spark decided that was selection too, so your bright comprehensive child was then streamed with a child who may be disruptive, bored illiterate etc so that your clever child could help bring them on - usual result I suspect, they suffer and do worse too!
 
My apologies.
After further research, it was not queen T who instigated comprehensivisation.:o
But it is true that more grammars closed under her tenancy as ed sec than any others.
And i won't mention the milk........ oh, sorry.:whistle:

Now thats me out. I promise. :cheers:
 
I don't get why anyone would not want grammar and selective schools.

My son passed the 11+ and went into a grammar school. All of the kids there are gifted and they push each other along. 100% boys get grades A*- C GCSE

We are not a low income family but are not rich either, just an average 2+2 family.

If my son was not afforded the opportunity he would not have 6 A* and 5 A's through a normal comprehensive I'm pretty sure of that.

20% of the boys from his school go to Oxbridge and he has a shot now at making that a reality now in 2 years time.
 
Hacker Khan has raised the subject of 'the pushy middle classes' the trouble with that term is that it is out of date.. The middle classes now do not have a unearned income or stuff like the 50s, they are the sons and daughters of the working class a generation ago. They know what it is to work hard to get where they want to be and they know what it takes to stay there so they want the same for their children. What I dont understand is how anybody could possibly not be a pushy parent!! Its the pushy parents taking their offspring to the swimming baths at 5 in the morning or spending the whole weekend taking their kids to football games 2 hours drive away etc etc.. If you dont want the best for your children and am not willing to bust a gut to give it then that is far far worse than being pushy!
 
sawtooth said:
I don't get why anyone would not want grammar and selective schools.

My son passed the 11+ and went into a grammar school. All of the kids there are gifted and they push each other along. 100% boys get grades A*- C GCSE

We are not a low income family but are not rich either, just an average 2+2 family.

If my son was not afforded the opportunity he would not have 6 A* and 5 A's through a normal comprehensive I'm pretty sure of that.

20% of the boys from his school go to Oxbridge and he has a shot now at making that a reality now in 2 years time.
Click to expand...

Because their kids can't have the same? They seem to have this (misguided) view that outcomes would be the same for everyone and the brightest kids should not be treated specially and they'd rather see your son underperform in a comprehensive than flourish in a grammar

I'm 100% in favour of selection and would, of course, hope it's available to all and that every school is made to perform for their kids
 
Last edited:
sawtooth said:
I don't get why anyone would not want grammar and selective schools.

My son passed the 11+ and went into a grammar school. All of the kids there are gifted and they push each other along. 100% boys get grades A*- C GCSE

We are not a low income family but are not rich either, just an average 2+2 family.

If my son was not afforded the opportunity he would not have 6 A* and 5 A's through a normal comprehensive I'm pretty sure of that.

20% of the boys from his school go to Oxbridge and he has a shot now at making that a reality now in 2 years time.
Click to expand...


Stating the success of a grammar is not a fair comparison. It is equivalent of saying most golfers h/cap 5 or less, can shoot below 80 regularly. By definition grammar schools take the cream, so no wonder 100% get A* - C at your sons grammar. My kids go to a strong comprehensive. He has just gone through his GCSE's and a number of kids there got A* across the board. Entirely possible for any school if attitude of the teachers, head, kids and parents is spot on. Comps can and do succeed.

Back to the OP, I am not ignorant of the system. I grew up in an area that had a number of grammar schools and now live in an area where grammars are dissappearing quite rapidly. If you want to pay, go for it but I don't want to pay for your desire to be exclusive.

I think this will struggle to go through. For every new grammar school built, or standard school adapted, then you need to have another duplicate school to take the non grammar kids. The town where I live has one main school. You would need to find another plot of land, build the school, have playing fields etc. Totally impractical. It may work in certain locations but across the board, I don't see it.
 
sawtooth said:
I don't get why anyone would not want grammar and selective schools.

My son passed the 11+ and went into a grammar school. All of the kids there are gifted and they push each other along. 100% boys get grades A*- C GCSE

We are not a low income family but are not rich either, just an average 2+2 family.

If my son was not afforded the opportunity he would not have 6 A* and 5 A's through a normal comprehensive I'm pretty sure of that.

20% of the boys from his school go to Oxbridge and he has a shot now at making that a reality now in 2 years time.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that YOUR son is doing well. What happened to his friends from junior school that didn't get selected? Are they struggling in a school with less gifted teachers perhaps? Never mind as long as your kid was afforded the opportunity eh?
 
Ok, my one and only comment on this thread....

I have no issue with selection. However, I would prefer there to be a mechanism that recognises the different development speeds of the individual.

The issue I have with separate schools is that the division is final. We are telling our 11 year olds that their future depends on their performance at 11!! It doesn't recognise the fact that their could be as much as 11 months developmental difference. Almost 20% difference in school age development.

I would much prefer there to be a considered investment in the current school system. Allow pupils time to develop. Push the brighter pupils in smaller groups. At the same time, pull the pupils that may be struggling. Give them the opportunity to progress at a different rate without telling them that they're second rate before they've even had chance to develop.
 
bluewolf said:
Ok, my one and only comment on this thread....

I have no issue with selection. However, I would prefer there to be a mechanism that recognises the different development speeds of the individual.

The issue I have with separate schools is that the division is final. We are telling our 11 year olds that their future depends on their performance at 11!! It doesn't recognise the fact that their could be as much as 11 months developmental difference. Almost 20% difference in school age development.

I would much prefer there to be a considered investment in the current school system. Allow pupils time to develop. Push the brighter pupils in smaller groups. At the same time, pull the pupils that may be struggling. Give them the opportunity to progress at a different rate without telling them that they're second rate before they've even had chance to develop.
Click to expand...

It used to be that at 13 later developers could move to a grammar if they wanted
 
Ross61 said:
Glad to hear that YOUR son is doing well. What happened to his friends from junior school that didn't get selected? Are they struggling in a school with less gifted teachers perhaps? Never mind as long as your kid was afforded the opportunity eh?
Click to expand...

He was afforded the same opportunity as EVERY kid. If the kid makes it then great but if not then so be it. The latter still had the same opportunity and that is the fairness in the system.

My son didn't expect to get in sitting an exam that 600 other kids went to and only 110 places.

I would have been pleased either way ( getting him in or not ) as I accept how the system works. The comp where we live is also very good and I am sure he would have done very well - just not quite as well that's all.
 
chrisd said:
It used to be that at 13 later developers could move to a grammar if they wanted
Click to expand...
Do we really think that there'll be spaces at a Grammar school for late developers? Only if they move the lesser performing pupils out. Times have changed. Parents push to get their kids into the "right" schools. I'm sure there'll be a waiting list that precludes even the best performing students from changing.
 
bluewolf said:
Do we really think that there'll be spaces at a Grammar school for late developers? Only if they move the lesser performing pupils out. Times have changed. Parents push to get their kids into the "right" schools. I'm sure there'll be a waiting list that precludes even the best performing students from changing.
Click to expand...

It was no different 40 odd years ago. I remember a girl in my village that her school said she should be in a Grammar but try as hard as her parents did there were no places offered by any school.
 
bluewolf said:
Do we really think that there'll be spaces at a Grammar school for late developers? Only if they move the lesser performing pupils out. Times have changed. Parents push to get their kids into the "right" schools. I'm sure there'll be a waiting list that precludes even the best performing students from changing.
Click to expand...


Most kids wouldn't leave their friends to change schools as far as I recall but there was the chance if they wanted it
 
I think that the downside of this for the majority will be worse than the benefits that accrue to the kids that are selected.

In an ideal world, the schools which are not grammar will have excellent technical teaching facilities and really provide opportunities for those who are not academically inclined to make the most of their skills.

In reality, they will most likely be dreadful sink institutions with the least able teachers, most disruptive pupils etc etc etc. Nothing that has ever happened in our education system over that last 50 years suggests anything else.

Surely the best compromise is to provide extra funding to enable existing comps to provide a better academic teaching environment for their brightest kids.

It'll all end in tears. And the rich and most able will be fine. Those who are poor and disadvantaged will be even more screwed over than at present.
 
My issue with the Grammar school system is that the 11+ ( or 12+ as it was when k took it) doesn't take into account the pupils suitability to the school.
It takes a score that you get in an exam and extrapolates where you would be best suited.
Well it failed with me
I waltzed through the 12+, one of only 2 in my school that did.
I went to RGS High Wycombe - then one of the best in the country.
But I simply wasn't intellectually suited to it and floundered badly.
I came out with exactly the same number of O levels that Fragger got from the local Comprehensive...
There were other schools in the area that would have suited me better but I went to RGS and hated almost every minute.
Most of my peers went to top Universities and are probably involved with intellectual think tanks or similar.
Ask them to change a light bulb, car wheel or similar and they wouldn't have a clue.
There is a place for Grammar schools and theres a certain type who will succeed if they go to one.
But just because you get a particular score in a test doesn't mean it's you.
 
chrisd said:
Most kids wouldn't leave their friends to change schools as far as I recall but there was the chance if they wanted it
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure there won't be in the future.

I'm an ex Grammar school kid. I still remember the stigma attached to being a pupil at the "wrong" school.

We've moved on. Why is there such a fascination with looking back with rose tinted glasses at the moment. It seems to be all we do recently. Are things really that bad now that we look to the 50's - 80's for inspiration? Maybe I just remember it differently.
 
Shouldn't everyone have the chance to be taught by the "best teachers" as opposed to a select view ?

Why narrow everything down ?

Everyone imo should go to the same type schools and then be taught by the same teachers - adding selectivity into imo just widens already gaps within our society.

Kids develop at different ages - some of the smartest kids could easily develop later in their years

For me always have the better teachers available to as many as possible to give everyone the same education

Right now I'm struggling to see what problem the suggestion is trying to solve
 
bluewolf said:
I'm pretty sure there won't be in the future.

I'm an ex Grammar school kid. I still remember the stigma attached to being a pupil at the "wrong" school.

We've moved on. Why is there such a fascination with looking back with rose tinted glasses at the moment. It seems to be all we do recently. Are things really that bad now that we look to the 50's - 80's for inspiration? Maybe I just remember it differently.
Click to expand...

We have grammar schools where I live now and imo they really do work still
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top