General Chat

How terribly non P C

Teachers are voting on whether to call for grammar schools to be reintroduced across England. Comprehensive schools and a 'one-size- fits-all' policy do not deliver high- quality education, the Professional Association of Teachers will hear. Teacher Peter Morris says standards have fallen and discipline has worsened since the end of selective secondary education in most areas of England. The PAT's annual conference in Buxton, Derbyshire, will vote on the issue. Mr Morris said: 'We all have different strengths and weaknesses. 'Not everyone on this planet was born to be a brilliant academic. But there are some people in this country who are born to be brilliant academics. 'We must face up to the reality that children who are academically gifted should be given the same level of encouragement as those children who are slow learners.' Most 16-year-olds today would not gain good grades in the old O-levels, which were replaced in the 1980s by GCSEs, he said. Mr Morris, from Bishop Gore Comprehensive School, Swansea, said: 'Perhaps even more importantly standards of discipline have dropped with the introduction of comprehensive education. 'If a teacher spends too much time with low achievers then the high achievers become disruptive. The converse too is true.' Pupils in some parts of England - such as Kent - sit the 11-plus secondary school admission exam. Opponents say this is divisive and elitist, but supporters argue that children learn best if they are placed with others of similar ability

I hope they never bring back Grammar schools. I had one inflicted on me for 7 years and hated every moment. I didn't do as well in my exams as I could have done, either. My son went to the comp and got 12 GCSEs (mainly A and A*) and four grade As and a C at A level. If I'd had the chance of comprehensive education I may have done that well. Gwynne

I've never been to a grammar school, but no one is going to convince me that everyone is well behaved and angelic in them. Even private schools have their bad apples. Discipline goes beyond the confines of the school

I can't really comment as I never had the opportunity to go to Grammer school. I did well at the comprehensive as did a lot of my peers. I can see the sence in encouraging brighter children to acheive, but we had 'bands' at school where kids were grouped according to ability. Some kids were in a lower band for Maths, but they excelled at english so were in a higher band for that. Even if you were not academic, there was always the arts or sports so everyone seemed to find something they were good at. Seemed to work fine for us. :o) I'll be interested to see the opinions of those who attended Grammer School. I know my mum did and she enjoyed it, but was called 'posh' by the kids on the estate who didn't get in. Claire xx

If there was none than every single person under 20 would be breaking the law 24 hours a day, every day.

Not all of Kent has Grammar schools. We do near here, in Folkestone but go a few miles west and although children there also sit 'The Kent Test' for selection, their parents have to pay travel costs as the grammar schools are not 'The nearest appropriate school'. There are situations where children don't take the test because parents wouldn't be able to pay the travel costs. Money rather than ability governs their education.

You can't assume that no one no where gets discipline. I suppose the question is, what is discipline? Is it the cane? If so, Grammar schools still wont be able to use that just because of their status. If people from G. schools would like to share their discipline methods with the rest of us, it would help. (But as far as I know, things are exactly the same)

I attended grammar school and enjoyed it. Yes it was a bit strict at times but i don't think that it harmed any of us. The teachers were really focused on giving each child the best education they could and there was a feeling of pride for the school. Saying that, the year i went to grammar school was the last year of the 11+ round here and my 2 sisters went to the comprehensive school and didnt do too badly either.

I went to Grammar school (1957 to 1964) and discipline simply wasn't an issue. Bad behaviour was punished but on the whole we knew we were there to learn and respected our teachers. The comprehensive theory is great, but I don't think it can be flexible enough to cope with the enormous range of abilities present in children, particularly in a smaller school. I have a friend who is a secondary comprehensive teacher and he has found discipline to be bad, aggravated by the fact that in the location a substantial proportion of the pupils do not have English as a first language and therefore are largely incapable of understanding the lessons even where they are willing to try to learn.

I went to a grammar school which was very old-fashioned. I was very unhappy there, and apart from history and English, my two favourite subjects, I disliked the lessons. The history and English teachers I had were excellent, but I don't think the others were. My journey involved two buses and took over an hour. Theschool was very strapped for cash. My brother went to a secondary modern school which was 5 minutes' walk from our home. It had a language lab and a swimming pool and seemed much more progressive. But I don't think the answer is either grammar or comprehensive education - I think it is having smaller classes. And I am not sure how you 'hold back' a child that wants to learn any more than you can push forward a child that doesn't understand. All you can do is to help each child achieve his or her potential. nell

My son has another year in primary school before he goes to secondry school. He is a very bright lad, and has come top in every subject he is in. He is in a mixed ability class, and the under achievers in the class have not pulled him back in his learning. Even though the kids learn the same work, they are in different groups within the class, so where the top group may have 20 spellings, the ones who struggle will have five spellings. What is a fact though, is that the teachers are not allowed to go beyond the set work for the whole class, leaving over achievers often bored and frustrated. I was told a couple of years ago that all the teacher could do was involve him more during the lesson such as helping her do various classroom jobs once his work had been done (to stop him getting bored) Its not the teachers fault, but the system they must follow. I'm not sure what his future secondry school does with over/under achievers. I dont think Grammer schools will work and address the disipline problem at all. As said before you get bad apples whether they are in grammer schools and are intelligent or in a lower state schools and of lower inteligence. There is higher education such as college and uni for those who want to further their education. Maybe if the government make it an easier ride for students regarding hefty loans etc, then more young people would have a chance. Elaine x

I'm confused as there are still Grammar Schools out there.... I went to langley Grammar (I hated it and under achieved) and I went past there on Monday night and its still going!! So how can the re-introduce what is already around??????

I saw yesterday that Ruth Kelly wants to introduce individual Catch Up classes for those children, 'falling behind' What does she mean? Behind others in their class? Their year group? Expected achievement level? and how is each school going to afford INDIVIDUAL lessons, and when?

The lad next door is due to start secondry in sep. This week he is at a week long summer school (at his new school)for those who need a boost...all free. Apparently they are going swimming in the school pool today. Elaine x

We used to swim in our school holidays at our School Pool as the teachers used to volunteer to attend a day each and supervise us!! Best part of school me thinks!! :O)

Your own school pool?... very posh. The nearest I got to that was a tidal creek for geography walks.

I'm not very keen on the grammar school idea - it's all very well to say that above a certain grade bright kids can have a 'special' education but what about those that fall below - why should they have a sub standard education? I also think 11 is a funny age to be deciding these things. I improved in some subjects in the last couple of years and was then moved into the top groups for those. Don't really get the issue about discipline either - why would it be better in grammar schools? And if there's a way of improving discipline why hasn't it been used in comprehensives?

I certainly don't think that the local non-Grammar schools offer substandard education. I have several friends whose children have gone on to pass degrees after attending them. It's more often about pace of learning rather than level.

I want to know what happed to the technical schools,nobody mentions them. They were neither comp or grammar. Most of us left at the age of 15-16 and started as apprentices in one of the trades. Architects, Electricians,Plumbers,Heating engineers, Draughsman,tool makers etc. etc.