Is David Cameron wrong about /Grammar Schools ?

Question

In my opinion he is totally wrong .
What is your opinion?

Answer 1

From living in an area which still has the grammer school system, I am not anti them but anti the amount of money and resources per child they get compared to the secondary modern schools. The Junior schools are not supposed to prepare children for the 11+ but most do. In spite of this most of the kids that pass are either from one of the local prep schools or their parents pay for private tutors.

The 11+ in this area is not just about how bright a child is but how much extra the child has been given to get them through the exam. This is where the system falls down.

The kids who get into the grammer school look down on the other kids - something which carris on into adult life. The kids who do not pass feel failures which is reinforced whenever state schools are criticised.

Also, in my area, school choices have to be entered before the results come out so many parents do not put a grammer school down as first choice because failure means that the best secondary modern places are gone and their kid could end up in a sink school (we have had two schools who have been named worst in the country over the last few years!). This means that there are many children at the secondary modern who could have passed the 11+ and did not take it or missed a place by 1 or 2 marks. There are also empty places in all years in the grammer schools but the secondary modern is over subscribed.

I really believe that all schools could work and we would see true results if they all had the same funding, were allowed to introduce proper discipline, remove kids who are affecting the education of others and kids were put in sets according to their ability ie, high set if good at English but a low set for maths if it is weak. This way, kids work at the level they are able to.

Answer 2

The re-introduction of grammar schools would be a total disaster. They only succeed because they cream off the best teachers and students. The students mostly come from the richer families. They were wrong in 1948 and they are even more now.

In 1948, there were many factory jobs for those who were the 80% rejects from the 11+. Those jobs are not there now. I went to a reject school, they were called Second Moderns. I left with one O Level and almost illiterate. My teachers tried, however, they had little to no resources. I went from factory job to factory job until, at the age of 39 I graduated with a degree from Bangor University.

I have taught in both Grammar and Comprehensive schools teaching A Levels; something which did not happen in my school. (indeed, it was only the elite few who took O Levels.), I found little difference between the students except:

1/ most of the Grammar students came from a richer family, usually in the professions.
2/ the parents were more enthusiastic about education.

To sum up:
Grammar schools are just a way for the middle classes to get education on the cheep at the expense of the tax payer

they would be a disaster if re-introduced nation wide, as it would leave a very large number under educated.

the whole education thing is just a political and media battle zone where the student, and our future is scarified for sound bites.

since the introduction of comprehensive schools, the media and most of government has done their up most to destroy them.

If you want to see how a European education system can be run, look at the continuously top scoring country - Finland. They have set up a system that keeps them higher than any other country other than the Eastern Asian countries. How do they do it? By doing things completely the opposite to the Torys.

Answer 3

A few years ago I would have agreed with him, however I have grandson who is extremely bright and clever and he is not been challenged enough and is in great risk of turning off from learning altogether. I think he is prime candidate for grammar school education.

I also think that introducing the technical schools as we had in the 60's would be of benefit to the 'Late Developer'

Mine is perhaps a selfish reason though it worries me that conscecutive governments have failed to make edcation a major priority and set polilcies for learning and stop chopping and changing. This modula way of learning must be a nightmare for the kids as they have so much to absorb but end up being master of none. Multiskilling is all well and good but what is that saying about jack of all trades and master of none.

At least grammar schools give a sound foundation and opportunitites for further education, learning and training. Instead of breeding a nation of youngsters who can only find work in call centres and retail outlets. Not that there is anything wrong with either of these but we are in danger of losing those bright young things to despondency instead of academia.

Sad!

Answer 4

Grammar schools were excellent.If you were good enough to pass the 11+ you got in, regardless of how much money your parents had.
Why they had to get rid of them in the first place beats me...look at the standard now.

Answer 5

Absolutely- it's his way of pandering to the chardonnay set that all major party politicians try and woo.

For me- it is great as it will drive more traditional conservatives to the true opposition party, the BNP- a party for traditional conservatives.

Answer 6

He is very wrong and if he can't grow up he will be a very poor Leader.

Answer 7

what exactly has he said about them?? i see he has sacked someone for challenging him over whatever his plans were

Answer 8

.less