My mother went to a Secondary School, I had friends who went to the local Secondary School. None of them felt like failures. They still did well, respected the teachers and worked hard and would never have behaved in the manner that a lot of pupils do today. What the grammar schools did was give opportunity to the more able students that came from poorer backgrounds, nothing wrong with that.
I'm sorry but I fundamentally disagree with this, it's cherry picking 'the best' pupils out of the Secondary School system, so you end up with a two tier system where you're seen as inferior because you want to a Secondary School (A grammar education was (and still is in some circles) seen as superior) so you're writing these kids off at 11 years old as not being academically intelligent. You then have all the problems of Grammar Schools attracting the best teacher's as they want to work in an environment where (more or less) people want to learn. (Which I don't blame them for at all) Plus, you deprive kids with potential the chance to be challenged by their peers, not only academically but also socially. I can't imagine its much fun to be in a situation where everyone is expected to be intelligent from Day 1. If you'd have segregated me at 11, I wouldn't have passed the 11+ (My SATs weren't bad, but I remember that would be the equivalent) but came into my own in High School and ended up with exam results that enabled me to study Law at a top University- If you'd have taken away the challenge of wanting to be as good or better than my contemporaries, I wouldn't have worked so hard and probably wouldn't be where I am today.
Love all these posters lauding the Grammar School system. What of the majority who ended up in Secondary Moderns? Was it right to label them at 11 as failures?
I thought was a good programme. Being a teacher in a tough inner city school I agree with those saying its the parental involvement that is an important factor. I teach students whose parents have very little experience of schooling in their own countries and none of the UK system. I have to educate the parents on what they should be expecting from their child (and me/the school). Compare this to the private schools were parents will almost always have experience of education up to the highest levels.
The only people who apply the word 'failure' to kids who don't pass the 11+ are adults who claim the kids are labelled failures because they didn't pass it.
The headmaster is correct - removing the independent school system does not create fairness or equality of opportunity. Education overall needs to be upgraded to the same standard of what schools like Warminster are offering and we need a govt that is committed to providing and financing that. Closing the grammar schools in England simply drove business towards the private schools because, like it or not, there will always be parents who want choice in education and I am one such parent.
Love all these posters lauding the Grammar School system. What of the majority who ended up in Secondary Moderns? Was it right to label them at 11 as failures?
I thought was a good programme. Being a teacher in a tough inner city school I agree with those saying its the parental involvement that is an important factor. I teach students whose parents have very little experience of schooling in their own countries and none of the UK system. I have to educate the parents on what they should be expecting from their child (and me/the school). Compare this to the private schools were parents will almost always have experience of education up to the highest levels.
they certainly weren't failures if they failed the 11 plus. I had loads of friends who went to Sec Mod school and they nearly all run their own businesses .... Builders, electricians, plumbers, hairdressers, seamstresses, florists, caterers, mechanics, etc.
This country would grind to a standstill without people who do these jobs.
I remember girls of 15 and 16 at the Sec Mod laying on huge banquets for local bigwigs which would have put to shame anything that third year catering students at college would do now. They were taught to a very high standard.
Don't forget there was also the facility for kids to transfer at around 14 if they had slipped through the net and shown great promise at Sec Mod.
You then have all the problems of Grammar Schools attracting the best teacher's as they want to work in an environment where (more or less) people want to learn.
I've worked in both systems and that really isn't the case. I've seen some bloody awful teachers in grammar schools and they get away with it because the kids are generally better behaved than in comprehensives. They would be eaten alive elsewhere because their lessons are uninspired and their behaviour management awful.
Tbh the main thing I've found about teaching in a grammar school is the realisation that most (not all because they're not all angels!) students will do reasonably well whatever you do. Your job is the fine polish - it's understanding how you get them to get A*s rather than Bs. It's a different pressure from teaching in a Comp.
The main thing I disagree with about the system is the recent trend of private tutors etc to help students pass the Kent Test. That's not right and defeats the purpose of the system. Nor does it help the child if they scrape pass the test with extensive coaching and then struggle academically once they reach the school. I've definitely found in the last few years that we're getting more students who, imo, shouldn't be in this school based upon their ability.
(Which I don't blame them for at all) Plus, you deprive kids with potential the chance to be challenged by their peers, not only academically but also socially.
But don't you get that anyway with streaming? The less academic don't see how the more academic progress because they're never actually in the same class.
Just watched it. I went to a private school and was lucky enough to get a good job in IT in a multinational company. In the workplace, there is a mixture of people from both state and private, and they all went to a wide range of universities. Just because you went to a state school doesn't mean you will fail in life, and vice-versa. There is a lead developer who went to a state school and "average" uni.
I think university affects ones career more. I was really surprised when I went to uni as most people there came from state schools.
I was surprised when the narrator said near the end that the Lady Headteacher had retired (resigned?) from her post in the Derby school after her return.
I wonder what politics etc were behind that decision. She certainly had great intentions for her school during the making of the programme.
On another tack when I went to University, as opposed to "Uni", if I remember correctly the intake was kept to something like 5% of the pupil/student population, and it was very hard to get a place and it was something of a honour to get in to a well respected one.
I don't think I would bother now as they seem to be so devalued, and this loan business is shocking.
On the job training/apprenticships with occasional day or block release for qualifications, paid for by the company you work for, makes more sense.
My first job as a graduate was as an engineer with Rolls Royce aero engines, and the new engineers who had done sandwich courses ie on job training involving shop floor work and University release were by far the most valuable and respected members of the new staff. Nearly all were state school educated, certainly in my group ( in the !960s I may add!)
I was surprised when the narrator said near the end that the Lady Headteacher had retired (resigned?) from her post in the Derby school after her return.
I wonder what politics etc were behind that decision. She certainly had great intentions for her school during the making of the programme.
On another tack when I went to University, as opposed to "Uni", if I remember correctly the intake was kept to something like 5% of the pupil/student population, and it was very hard to get a place and it was something of a honour to get in to a well respected one.
I don't think I would bother now as they seem to be so devalued, and this loan business is shocking.
On the job training/apprenticships with occasional day or block release for qualifications, paid for by the company you work for, makes more sense.
My first job as a graduate was as an engineer with Rolls Royce aero engines, and the new engineers who had done sandwich courses ie on job training involving shop floor work and University release were by far the most valuable and respected members of the new staff. Nearly all were state school educated, certainly in my group ( in the !960s I may add!)
I can't agree with you that it's no longer worth going to university. There may be more of them but a good degree from a top quality university is still very highly valued. Maybe there's a case for sandwich courses but even if those people with on the job training were better to start with, surely a greater academic record has its benefits, particularly in breadth so you have more possible areas to go into.
I can't agree with you that it's no longer worth going to university. There may be more of them but a good degree from a top quality university is still very highly valued. Maybe there's a case for sandwich courses but even if those people with on the job training were better to start with, surely a greater academic record has its benefits, particularly in breadth so you have more possible areas to go into.
I think too many people are going to Uni these days and getting degrees which are not worth much in the jobs field. My nephew got a degree in Marketing and has only ever done bar and restaurant work here and spent some time labouring in Australia. He is nearly 30 now and never had a well paid job yet. I have two nieces one with a degree in American Literature and she works in a shoe shop. the other did Hospitality and Something else and ended up retraining as a dental nurse which she didn't need a degree for. My neighbours daughter has just completed a degree at Cambridge and has got a job in Admin.!
I think for some jobs where a degree is vital ... Say medicine or law .... Then that's different. Degrees used to mean something but I'm not so sure they do anymore.
Comments
I'm sorry but I fundamentally disagree with this, it's cherry picking 'the best' pupils out of the Secondary School system, so you end up with a two tier system where you're seen as inferior because you want to a Secondary School (A grammar education was (and still is in some circles) seen as superior) so you're writing these kids off at 11 years old as not being academically intelligent. You then have all the problems of Grammar Schools attracting the best teacher's as they want to work in an environment where (more or less) people want to learn. (Which I don't blame them for at all) Plus, you deprive kids with potential the chance to be challenged by their peers, not only academically but also socially. I can't imagine its much fun to be in a situation where everyone is expected to be intelligent from Day 1. If you'd have segregated me at 11, I wouldn't have passed the 11+ (My SATs weren't bad, but I remember that would be the equivalent) but came into my own in High School and ended up with exam results that enabled me to study Law at a top University- If you'd have taken away the challenge of wanting to be as good or better than my contemporaries, I wouldn't have worked so hard and probably wouldn't be where I am today.
The only people who apply the word 'failure' to kids who don't pass the 11+ are adults who claim the kids are labelled failures because they didn't pass it.
The headmaster is correct - removing the independent school system does not create fairness or equality of opportunity. Education overall needs to be upgraded to the same standard of what schools like Warminster are offering and we need a govt that is committed to providing and financing that. Closing the grammar schools in England simply drove business towards the private schools because, like it or not, there will always be parents who want choice in education and I am one such parent.
they certainly weren't failures if they failed the 11 plus. I had loads of friends who went to Sec Mod school and they nearly all run their own businesses .... Builders, electricians, plumbers, hairdressers, seamstresses, florists, caterers, mechanics, etc.
This country would grind to a standstill without people who do these jobs.
I remember girls of 15 and 16 at the Sec Mod laying on huge banquets for local bigwigs which would have put to shame anything that third year catering students at college would do now. They were taught to a very high standard.
Don't forget there was also the facility for kids to transfer at around 14 if they had slipped through the net and shown great promise at Sec Mod.
I've worked in both systems and that really isn't the case. I've seen some bloody awful teachers in grammar schools and they get away with it because the kids are generally better behaved than in comprehensives. They would be eaten alive elsewhere because their lessons are uninspired and their behaviour management awful.
Tbh the main thing I've found about teaching in a grammar school is the realisation that most (not all because they're not all angels!) students will do reasonably well whatever you do. Your job is the fine polish - it's understanding how you get them to get A*s rather than Bs. It's a different pressure from teaching in a Comp.
The main thing I disagree with about the system is the recent trend of private tutors etc to help students pass the Kent Test. That's not right and defeats the purpose of the system. Nor does it help the child if they scrape pass the test with extensive coaching and then struggle academically once they reach the school. I've definitely found in the last few years that we're getting more students who, imo, shouldn't be in this school based upon their ability.
But don't you get that anyway with streaming? The less academic don't see how the more academic progress because they're never actually in the same class.
I think university affects ones career more. I was really surprised when I went to uni as most people there came from state schools.
I wonder what politics etc were behind that decision. She certainly had great intentions for her school during the making of the programme.
On another tack when I went to University, as opposed to "Uni", if I remember correctly the intake was kept to something like 5% of the pupil/student population, and it was very hard to get a place and it was something of a honour to get in to a well respected one.
I don't think I would bother now as they seem to be so devalued, and this loan business is shocking.
On the job training/apprenticships with occasional day or block release for qualifications, paid for by the company you work for, makes more sense.
My first job as a graduate was as an engineer with Rolls Royce aero engines, and the new engineers who had done sandwich courses ie on job training involving shop floor work and University release were by far the most valuable and respected members of the new staff. Nearly all were state school educated, certainly in my group ( in the !960s I may add!)
http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/School-Swap-Derby-s-Bemrose-pupil-Brett-Riley/story-27682650-detail/story.html
I can't agree with you that it's no longer worth going to university. There may be more of them but a good degree from a top quality university is still very highly valued. Maybe there's a case for sandwich courses but even if those people with on the job training were better to start with, surely a greater academic record has its benefits, particularly in breadth so you have more possible areas to go into.
I think too many people are going to Uni these days and getting degrees which are not worth much in the jobs field. My nephew got a degree in Marketing and has only ever done bar and restaurant work here and spent some time labouring in Australia. He is nearly 30 now and never had a well paid job yet. I have two nieces one with a degree in American Literature and she works in a shoe shop. the other did Hospitality and Something else and ended up retraining as a dental nurse which she didn't need a degree for. My neighbours daughter has just completed a degree at Cambridge and has got a job in Admin.!
I think for some jobs where a degree is vital ... Say medicine or law .... Then that's different. Degrees used to mean something but I'm not so sure they do anymore.
http://www.itv.com/news/central/update/2015-09-09/school-swap-the-class-divide-brett-rileys-story/