News
Featured
Opinion
Elections
Outside View
Video
RSS

February 27th, 2013 in Opinion

logo_graphic_small

Grammar school revival would treat children as individuals

by
Bookmark and Share

Since the grammar schools programme was ended in 1980’s we have seen the vast majority of state funded children being sent to comprehensives.  When the decision was taken to stop the divide between going to grammar or secondary schools the vision was that every child would get an education worthy of a grammar school. Unfortunately the opposite occurred and every child is now given an education similar to that of the students in secondary that failed the eleven plus.

The current education system treats every child the same and does not allow children to excel in set skills. By creating a system that has grammar & professional schools we could allow all children to specialise and be appreciated for the different skills they possess. We should not return to the old eleven plus, we should create a new test that would assess students across the board; academic, technical and other abilities.

The grammar schools would teach children predominantly academic subjects. Whereas the professional schools would focus on training children in a skill whilst teaching basic Maths, Science and English. This would help create a diverse and skilled workforce that benefited the British economy rather than training everyone for similar academic jobs.

I went to school with several students who did not want to be trapped in the classroom, when they were able to join a non-academic setting that did not confine them to fit a mould that was not right for them, they flourished. We should make these opportunities more accessible, so people who are academic can focus their time in the classroom and value the contribution and skills of non-academic workers.

Since grammar schools were removed from the British school system social mobility has collapsed, those who could afford to go to private schools got the best educations, top University places and the highest paid jobs. The comprehensive schools have dragged everyone who could not afford private education away from high level achievement and jobs irrespective of their intelligence. Grammar schools will bring back aspiration to the working and middle classes in education who could not previously afford it and bridge the gap between the state and private education.

Competition is avoided within state schools, which is a real shame as it stops teachers and other students encouraging themselves to strive to be better. So instead we have a system that is a race to the bottom, where those above average are ignored as long as they are passing and achieving quotas, while those not near enough to a pass grade are not encouraged or offered appropriate options as they are not seen as a viable resource within the present structure. This targets culture, has meant students aspirations and personalities are ignored for the sake of statistics. Lets start focusing on the individual and tailoring education to every child individually.

Jack Duffin
Jack Duffin is a student at Brunel University, studying financial mathematics. He is the current Secretary of Young Independence and tweets at @jackduffin
  • Charles Dawne

    Good post. Many MP’s from Labour and Lib Dem have had a grammar school education (e.g. Vince Cable) and have prospered from it, they are now denying it to others. Why?

    Grammar school education ensured schooling was on merit and not just riches. It favoured the poor as well.

  • http://twitter.com/BloggingBeth Beth Dawson

    I am a UKIP supporter but cannot agree with a return to grammar schools. Grammar schools benefited the minority (20%) at the expense of the majority (80%). I know from experience that it particularly failed able and conscientious pupils.

    Secondary modern pupils were denied many academic subjects and provided with an inferior education. Secondary schools would not usually even offer the opportunity to learn a foreign language, and once placed on this slow track it was impossible to bridge the educational gap with grammar school peers.

    I moved to a grammar school at age 16 in 1972 when they were obliged to take secondary school pupils for ‘A’ levels. Many of the teachers resented anyone from a secondary modern school and I experienced bullying from both teachers and pupils.

    In addition, my secondary modern education had not equipped me to take advantage of the A levels on offer and the grammar school simply allowed me to waste two important years, saying in my final report that I had not taken anything away from my time there.

    Unfortunately, what I did take away was an inferiority complex, feeling that I was unacademic and unsuited to anything more than secretarial work. However, in my 20s, once I had regained some confidence, I took evening classes, passed 3 ‘A’ levels and at the age of 35 I graduated with a 2.1 Joint Honours degree from Birmingham University.

    But even as a graduate from a red brick university, having lost so much time, I was still locked into secretarial work until very recently because it is very difficult to make the financial sacrifices needed to develop a career once you are older and have financial responsibilities.

    In my mid 50s I managed to make the move from secretarial work to a job with career prospects. But it’s all rather late in the day and, without a doubt the grammar school system, was responsible.

    I, therefore, cannot condone UKIP’s policy on a return to the grammar school system. Too many able and conscientious young people were the victims.

    • http://twitter.com/HarryAldridge Harry Aldridge

      UKIP policy for education is first and foremost the implementation of a voucher system, giving choice and competition and putting parents in charge of their child’s education.

      Secondly is the promotion and creation of “new
      grammar schools and specialist schools, which will be called
      ‘professional schools’. UKIP will not return to a pass/fail 11-plus test
      but introduce a ‘Comprehensive Test’ to assess merit across a wide
      range of academic and non-academic abilities including vocational skills”

      So the idea is not to simply go back to the Grammar system as it was before, but to go back to the principle of selective education within a broader and more diverse system of choice and competition.

    • Catalpa

      What you are describing is the failure of the Secondary Modern schools, not the failure of the system. Instead of abolishing the Grammar schools in favour of Comprehensives, the Secondary Modern schools should have been improved, so that they gave a good education to the less academically inclined, pushing them as far as they could go both academically and vocationally.

      • http://twitter.com/BloggingBeth Beth Dawson

        The 11-plus was a form of social engineering, designed to make sure that only a minority went on to university and to graduate careers, leaving the majority to work in manual or clerical jobs. Once you select number of children for a superior education you deliberately disadvantage the others. That can’t be right.

  • david.geddes1

    Forget comprehensive or grammar the real issue is that the people who run this country are mostly privately educated, including the chaps in Labour.

  • Adrian West

    As a UKIP supporter and educated at a grammar school I am ashamed of the UKIP stance. The grammar school system was socially divisive and it condemned millions to a second class education and menial jobs. Of course grammar schools show good results, but so they should because they are selective. Anyone who bases a policy on a selective scheme is being unrealistic. We should cocentrate on improving teaching and school management skills.

    Adrian West

  • GOM

    The Tories are anti-grammar schools, particularly a return to a universal system, because the last thing they want is the possibility of bright but poor kids having better chances vis-a-vis the ‘posh boys who don’t know the price of milk’..