Poll: Grammar Schools back on the table.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
Plenty people still want to be teachers from my experience... I know loads of people who are doing varying teaching courses at school or who have done.
Also there is decent money to be had from teaching... like any job you just have to be good at it and stick out.
One thing I would say though is that I know quite a few teachers who have had a career change after the first few years. Main reason is the kids. Attitudes towards education is woeful. 2nd biggest reasoning is the parents...
I for one couldn't do it.
More investment is always a winner. But isn't a bigger version of slicing the pie differently.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
No idea - The Grammar school I went to still is one, at least in name.
My parents weren't rich or middle-class either, so if I can get in then surely it's not that much of an issue... ?
Because you cant just magically drag all children up to the same level of ability.
Ahwn you mix the the top and bottom set in a nornal school you dont end up riasing the lower sets abilities but you completely ruin the education for the top set students
I don't inherently disagree with the concept of segregated education - those who want to learn can do so without the idiots at the back - but I think the selection criteria used in grammar schools are a joke, and remove the ability of children to progress.
At 11, it is not possible to accurately determine much of anything about a child's current or future abilities. What you're testing is a child's ability to successfully negotiate one test at one point in time, irrelevant of their background, their experience with similar tests, stress, levels of coaching, etc. There is undoubtedly a correlation between IQ at a young age and IQ (and 'success', however you define it) in later life - this is well studied, and a large chunk of it is genetic - but there should be a system in place that allows for progression of children according to their real abilities. In reality, this is already done through 'sets' within year groups for certain subjects like Maths, and is something that should be more widely applied, in my opinion.
I personally failed the 11+, but went on to have excellent GCSEs and A levels, went to Oxford, and have a PhD. Did the system work?
At 11, it is not possible to accurately determine much of anything about a child's current or future abilities. What you're testing is a child's ability to successfully negotiate one test at one point in time, irrelevant of their background, their experience with similar tests, stress, levels of coaching, etc. There is undoubtedly a correlation between IQ at a young age and IQ (and 'success', however you define it) in later life - this is well studied, and a large chunk of it is genetic - but there should be a system in place that allows for progression of children according to their real abilities. In reality, this is already done through 'sets' within year groups for certain subjects like Maths, and is something that should be more widely applied, in my opinion.
I personally failed the 11+, but went on to have excellent GCSEs and A levels, went to Oxford, and have a PhD. Did the system work?
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,853
Ok, I was planning on moving to this area in 5 years or so so I can give my lad a shot at getting into the Grammar school but this thread has confused the hell out of me, I was completely under the impression he would just sit an exam and that would be that, need to read into it a bit more
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
Because the dross pupils tend to drag the whole school towards the lowest common denominator. Life is selective, kids need to accept that hard work pays off, and that all people are not academically equal. They also need to learn money talks and working towards getting as much as possible can make misery easier to bear
So people with money and/or better parents deserve a better level of education
Yeah, lets kick people in the teeth who have already been dealt a rough hand in life, sounds very civilized and fair
Or people who aren't mature enough emotionally and intellectually should perhaps hold off on having children until they have the mental fortitude to realise that having a child means a lot more than a **** then ignoring them for the next 18 years.
Oh no instead lets limit everyone because some people cannot bring up their children correctly. It is unfair on the kids but parents need to take some self responsibility, too many ******* morons have kids and think conceiving them is the only job they have to do when it comes to parenting.
I'm not from an affluent background, no one in my extended family had even been to uni before me, my parents scraped together cash to get me extra tuition. We wernt middle class/wealthy or privileged but my parents had the right attitude. I don't my children held back (as neither did they) because others don't give a **** about their offspring.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Which area? Reading?
Don't look to me for that, as I went to the boys' Grammar in Watford.
Having warm bodies to fill places isn't enough. We need to attract and retain good teachers.
That depends on where you live. It's pretty terrible money for someone in the south east considering the hours, responsibility and lack of flexibility. London weighting really doesn't come close to making up for the increased cost of living.
It's still a great job if you live in a former industrial town with high unemployment though.
No, but 90% of the time investment in = results out.
The government has often lauded the success of academies. Academies have improved results because they've got more money to spend per child and there's more room for improvement in failing schools.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,853
No where the Grammar school is that I am sat down the road from, same area where I work
![[TFU] Thegoon84](/styles/overclockers/avatars/6.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 7,089
- Location
- Swansea
I don't know enough to make an informed choice, however I've selected "NO"... Purely because what ever the tories do put middle class and upwards first, which I'm sure somewhere down the line disadvantages the poor.... Its as simple as that.
Everything they do divides us further and further and further apart!
Destory the NHS - Mission almost complete
Destroy Education through exclusion - Mission engaged.
Everything they do divides us further and further and further apart!
Destory the NHS - Mission almost complete
Destroy Education through exclusion - Mission engaged.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 7,089
- Location
- Swansea
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Ohh, the market will open up for private tutoring for 10 yr olds again then. My father in law made a fortune as a sideline to his normal teaching when grammar schools were last around
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,655
Ah, I get it.No where the Grammar school is that I am sat down the road from, same area where I work
I couldn't see where you were from behind your post...
I don't know what world people live in but its not the real one. Its like people think that the current system is fair. Its like people think that the quality of schools isn't hugely dictated by the area it is in.
You cannot remove schooling from the simple fact that areas of affluence will have better schools however you want to label them. People in wealthy areas take more interest in their childrens education and the children do the same.
The best teachers still gravitate towards either private schools or the better schools within the standard system.
Our biggest issue isn't making sure that we don't create a system that pushes the wealthy further away from the rest, its the dregs of society bringing down everyone else.
The school my mum worked at had huge problems because it was on a rough council estate where the parents didn't give a **** and the kids took the same attitude. The teachers had mostly given up and the kids that did want to learn were brought down by those that didn't want to.
You can claim that the sins of the father shouldn't be born by the son but thats life. Its largely inescapable. If you have a scummy family then its really hard to get out of that situation.
Its just sad that we see encouraging some of our brightest to achieve is a bad thing and that it comes at the expense of others. You want education standards to improve? Sort out the parents.
The idea that everyone is a genius just waiting to be set free is ********. Not everyone is clever and most schools have teachers that are good enough to get kids up to a fine standard of education if given the chance.
This stupid idea has even managed to make its way up to university where idiots think that tuition fees are unreasonable yet at the same time advocate every man and his dog getting a degree in washing up. If you want a good university system then make it merit based and free. You can't have it both ways.
You cannot remove schooling from the simple fact that areas of affluence will have better schools however you want to label them. People in wealthy areas take more interest in their childrens education and the children do the same.
The best teachers still gravitate towards either private schools or the better schools within the standard system.
Our biggest issue isn't making sure that we don't create a system that pushes the wealthy further away from the rest, its the dregs of society bringing down everyone else.
The school my mum worked at had huge problems because it was on a rough council estate where the parents didn't give a **** and the kids took the same attitude. The teachers had mostly given up and the kids that did want to learn were brought down by those that didn't want to.
You can claim that the sins of the father shouldn't be born by the son but thats life. Its largely inescapable. If you have a scummy family then its really hard to get out of that situation.
Its just sad that we see encouraging some of our brightest to achieve is a bad thing and that it comes at the expense of others. You want education standards to improve? Sort out the parents.
The idea that everyone is a genius just waiting to be set free is ********. Not everyone is clever and most schools have teachers that are good enough to get kids up to a fine standard of education if given the chance.
This stupid idea has even managed to make its way up to university where idiots think that tuition fees are unreasonable yet at the same time advocate every man and his dog getting a degree in washing up. If you want a good university system then make it merit based and free. You can't have it both ways.
I always thought it'd be better making STEM degrees free or heavily discounted and offset by making the more tenuous courses more expensive. The problem lies in ensuring the country sees the benefit of this by keeping the talent at home.
I'm not sure how you'd do that - maybe an incentive by way of writing off a percentage of, or all of the debt after a certain number of years being employed in a relevant sector (eg: NHS work for medical degrees).