Could a revisiting of the grammar school debate help Brown gain back some momentum?

Mike Ion Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:58:24 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Writing in this week's New Statesman Peter Wilby has produced a powerful critique of the age old chestnut that grammar schools = excellence. He also takes issue with the Tory party's near obsession with setting and their passion for the introduction of the so called 'grammar' stream.



The reality is that the surviving 164 grammar schools in England (there are no selective schools in Scotland or Wales and they are on the way out in Northern Ireland) are in the main schools for the middle-classes. There now appears to be cross-party consensus that selective schools are not escape routes from poverty, do not offer good value for money and do not help raise standards overall. So perhaps it is now time to address, once and for all, the archaic and socially exclusive policy of academic selection in England. I doubt David Cameron has the stomach for it but what about Gordon Brown?


tags: (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Could a revisiting of the grammar school debate help Brown gain back some momentum? | 21 comments (21 topical)

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#1)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 02:39:13 AM GMT

You must be joking! Brown knows he's losing the fabled 'middle England' and fast - he's not going to go 'kamikaze' and make things even worse for himself.

We need to accept reality. Grammar schools and faith schools will be around for a long while yet under either Labour or the Tories.

Also, I think the idea of setting is actually a good idea and one that is regularly used in practice now.


Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#2)

by Mike Ion on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 11:11:01 AM GMT

Why would it upset middle England? Nobody is suggesting closing grammar schools, simply opening them up to all local children - in many areas of the country that could be a vote winner.

Setting - if you read Peter Wilby's article what he says is that the Tories are trying to suggest that setting does not happen in most secondary schools already. It does.


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#6)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 12:31:48 PM GMT

Well making grammar schools end selective exams is effectively 'closing down' the grammar school system.

My experience of towns with grammar schools is that the public get violently angry at any suggestion that all state schools should be comprehensives - it would turn into Labour's poll tax if Brown tried to shut them down!

Mike, I know you're keen on getting rid of grammar schools but to be honest it's not a pressing issue and it certainly won't happen anytime soon under Brown.


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#3)

by doctordunc on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 11:18:44 AM GMT

I live in an area with grammar schools.

a) I don't think it's 'middle england' that Brown has to worry about;

b) The argument against grammar schools (or, rather, against selection - as Mike correctly made the distinction) can be won in the areas where they exist.  After all, a minority attend them and there is a growing resentment in most areas where they are located about the iniquities of selection, even within the system's own logic (e.g. it is "easier" to be selected to a grammar school in Ripon than in Skipton; people travel great distances from out of the area to take a finite number of grammar school places, hugely skewing the selective system) - this is an argument that can be won, is still large enough to be significant, which is radical, and which would enthuse party members and supporters who are in need of a boost.


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#4)

by Mike Ion on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 11:55:17 AM GMT

Succinctly pot doctor - thank you.

Mike


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#5)

by Mike Ion on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 12:02:01 PM GMT

Apologies - what I meant to type was succinctly put doctor (not pot).


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#7)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 12:35:08 PM GMT

I think you're very much underestimating the opposition we would come up against. Local communities already have the power to remove grammar schools - I believe Ripon actually held a vote and chose to keep them.

Look at the scorn against Cameron for wanting to stick with the status quo then multiply that by ten. That's what we'd be on the receiving end of.


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#8)

by swatantra on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 03:09:51 PM GMT

Its not worth expending that much energy on getting rid of the remaining 164. Let them die a natural death. I don't believe the Tories would reintroduce any more. The focus of debate has now shifted to Academies. 


[ Parent ]

Re: Could a revisiting of the grammar... (#9)

by doctordunc on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 05:39:36 PM GMT


There was such a vote in Ripon, but it's quite a while ago now.  I think it's time to revisit it.  I've never been entirely sold on the local referendum idea for grammar schools: nobody ever asked people if they wanted middle schools closing, or schools closing and academies opening, etc, etc - I'm sure there's a sound logic for not having referenda on those matters, but I'm sure the same logic exists on grammar schools: the people who vote for them are hoping that their children will go to them (perhaps foolishly, as it happens - having attended one for a few years, I wouldn't send a dog to a grammar school) - actually that will only happen for a very few of them.  A lot of people also don't seem to like the idea of heavily taxing the super-rich - not because of a mistaken sense of philanthropy towards those poor, hard-done-to super-rich citizens, but because a lot of people aspire to be super-rich themselves.  However, most of them won't be, and in the mean-time could do with properly-funded public services.


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#10)

by jkitleft on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 05:44:10 PM GMT

I’m in favour of grammar schools. They didn’t need abolition, but they certainly needed reform. The 11-plus was a grotesque form of Social Darwinism, and it is utopian thinking to suggest the top 25% would ALWAYS be in a grammar school. But I believe in selection by ability, not selection by wealth. And when the grammar schools were abolished, the private schools simply absorbed them, creating a two-tiered education system, where by rich kids would almost always get a superior education to kids that are not as rich. If kids from a background of working-class miners had got into grammar schools, I would imagine their parents would be proud, rather than appalled. The grammar schools needed reform not abolition, and a consequence of this action, has lead to a grinding halt in social mobility (in combination with Thatcherism)


Re: grammar schools (#11)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 10:01:29 PM GMT

Fair points.


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#12)

by alexhilton on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 01:20:51 AM GMT

If only they had embarked on making more and more schools into grammars schools until they were all grammar schools.

We would then have truly comprehensive education by now


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#13)

by JoeRoberts on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 01:26:58 AM GMT

No it wouldn't help us gain any momentum. It will be divisive and it will not really appeal to anyone outside the ranks of Labour activists. It may be a touchstone issue for a few people in CLP meetings but most of the public just want good schools and aren't particularly fussed whether they're comprehensives, grammars or city academies.


There are very few grammar schools left in any case so this wouldn't actually affect many people. It would be gesture politics. I know some people come into politics mainly to posture and boast about how principled they are but I think most of us in this party are more interested in getting things done and improving educational standards for everyone.


When we're under pressure the last thing we want to do is retreat in on ourselves, and back into our political comfort zone, just talking to each other about our issues in our own language. The Tories did that and look where it got them!


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#14)

by Group51 on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 01:53:04 PM GMT

You can still have selection by ability and abolish grammar schools.  In fact, I think it's a disgrace that mixed ability classes persist in secondary schools.  We need to stream off the fastest learners (not brightest, fastest), stream off the slowest and given them small classes (more help) and provide good quality aspirational teaching with the middle.  ALL IN THE SAME SCHOOL.

Who cares about Grammar schools if you know your local school can teach the fastest learning pupils, push your middling kid to do better, and provide special help for the special ones.  That's the point isn't it?


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#15)

by Group51 on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 01:58:57 PM GMT

To qualify, by 'abolish' I am not saying close, why close a good school?  Just let more people take advantage of it, and make the other 'bog-standard' comps do the same thing.

 


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#16)

by jkitleft on Sun Nov 25, 2007 at 08:53:08 PM GMT

the difference with grammar schools, was that there is more likely to be an increase with social mobility, maybe streaming will do the same thing. But with graamar schools, it is more likely to have rich kids, middle-class kids, and working-class kids going to the same school. There is a probability that we will just be streaming the middle-class kids, and the working-class kids, and the rich kids in different schools.


[ Parent ]

Re: grammar schools (#18)

by Group51 on Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 01:54:37 PM GMT

"the difference with grammar schools, was that there is more likely to be an increase with social mobility"

The evidence says that educational attainment is strongly linked to familiy income.  You may get a better education from going to a grammar school (as you would expect since only the very best are selected), but most kids won't get in, and most of them are from poorer families.

What we ought to be doing is breaking the link between low family income and low attainment, not just protecting the cream at the top.  This means, small class sizes for low attainers, and seriously tacking (funding)  literacy in Primary school.


[ Parent ]

Grammar Schools (#17)

by laurencemarshall on Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 01:01:43 AM GMT

I agree that it should be brought up, but I don't think it's the silver bullet.

Furthermore, it's been done to death in the press lately, bringing it up now smacks of desperation to land a blow on the tories.


Re: Grammar Schools (#19)

by ComradeNorton on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 08:25:59 PM GMT

To be perfectly honest, I don't think people care what structure is in place, it is the results that matter and a high performing school can resist any politician any day of the week.  Any politician that would go against a headmaster of a good school is a fool.

We need to focus on results and what all schools do to address the performance 11-16.  At present there are a vast amount of young people who leave school without the essential skills in literacy and numeracy to function effectively in society.

What is worse, that comprehensive grammar or academy, the focus on 5 A*-C GCSE's perpetuates this segmentation of the cohort and focus on the students with better prospects.

We need to take the tories into the trenches regarding a commitment over basic skills levels and the way in which when they were last in power they were perfectly happy to write off a large section of society that today form a large underclass. 

To focus upon education spending, particularly at those without the ability to read, write or count would greatly assist the prospects of those marginalised from society and would be a geniune attempt to do something about the likes of the BNP (with the added benefit of switching the immigration agenda to a skills debate rather than a bunch of soft lefties in power).

Personally, I am very suprised that the Tories do not press basic literacy and numeracy figures further because in Wales the adult basic skills figures are shocking (950,000 out of a 3 million population do not have functional numeracy and 480,000 do not have functional literacy).

A pledge that no child will leave school without level 1 literacy or numeracy would give a very clear steer regarding what is and is not acceptable from the state system.  What would be better is that the Tories would hate to be dragged into this area and would crack very quickly when they saw the "undeserving poor" getting proper teaching. 

 


[ Parent ]

Re: Grammar Schools (#21)

by Group51 on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 10:25:11 PM GMT

A pledge that no child will leave school without level 1 literacy or numeracy would give a very clear steer regarding what is and is not acceptable from the state system."

Seconded!


[ Parent ]

Re: Grammar Schools (#20)

by ComradeNorton on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 08:26:01 PM GMT

To be perfectly honest, I don't think people care what structure is in place, it is the results that matter and a high performing school can resist any politician any day of the week.  Any politician that would go against a headmaster of a good school is a fool.

We need to focus on results and what all schools do to address the performance 11-16.  At present there are a vast amount of young people who leave school without the essential skills in literacy and numeracy to function effectively in society.

What is worse, that comprehensive grammar or academy, the focus on 5 A*-C GCSE's perpetuates this segmentation of the cohort and focus on the students with better prospects.

We need to take the tories into the trenches regarding a commitment over basic skills levels and the way in which when they were last in power they were perfectly happy to write off a large section of society that today form a large underclass. 

To focus upon education spending, particularly at those without the ability to read, write or count would greatly assist the prospects of those marginalised from society and would be a geniune attempt to do something about the likes of the BNP (with the added benefit of switching the immigration agenda to a skills debate rather than a bunch of soft lefties in power).

Personally, I am very suprised that the Tories do not press basic literacy and numeracy figures further because in Wales the adult basic skills figures are shocking (950,000 out of a 3 million population do not have functional numeracy and 480,000 do not have functional literacy).

A pledge that no child will leave school without level 1 literacy or numeracy would give a very clear steer regarding what is and is not acceptable from the state system.  What would be better is that the Tories would hate to be dragged into this area and would crack very quickly when they saw the "undeserving poor" getting proper teaching. 

 


[ Parent ]

Could a revisiting of the grammar school debate help Brown gain back some momentum? | 21 comments (21 topical)