The Grammar School Debate

debate

 

 

 

 

 

 

The appointment of Theresa May, a grammar school student, as Prime minister, has reignited the age old debate about whether we should be expanding the grammar school system. As both a teacher and a parent, I think this is unnecessary, and impractical. My only hope is that the new Education Secretary, Greening, does not jump onto this bandwagon as a way of making a name for herself, without gaining a true insight into the absolute turmoil the English education system is currently experiencing, and this is without adding grammar school expansion into the mix.

There are two major issues with grammar schools:

  • Selection at 11
  • Social division

My own experience of education was at a comprehensive school, where both my brother and I went on to academic success at university, and professional careers. I was the first of the family to attend university, through a system that was fair, and rewarded my academic capabilities. Nevertheless, the social and historical legacy of grammar school still resonates because of how this system impacted on my parents and grandparents.

My Grandfather

My grandfather by all accounts was an extremely clever man, he passed his 11 plus to go to grammar school. Unfortunately, his family were working poor; they could not afford the uniform and the books. Along with his brothers, he went down the mines at 13 years old, there was no option, he had to support his family. As a man he was over six foot, working in 19 inch seams, the very definition of Hell! His youngest sibling, the only daughter, also passed her 11 plus. Luckily, she was from a family who valued the education of women, and her brothers did not want her to have anything close to their own experiences, therefore the  brothers all contributed to her having her grammar school education, and “getting out” of what was the industrial barracks of The North East in the 1930s. My grandfather went on to be a butcher,  and fought for shop workers’ rights. His sister went on to do extremely well, she was a lifelong civil servant, and also joined the RAF during the Second World War. She moved away from the North East to achieve this, and although in some ways it was felt by others that she looked down on them, our branch of the family greatly appreciated that at heart she was firmly attached to her roots, and we never lost touch.

The “Failures”

What is also rarely mentioned in these debates are the students who do not achieve despite going to grammar school. My mother in law has felt a sense of almost permanent failure because she did go to grammar school and did not achieve her potential academically. It is not a guarantee of success or mobility, and passing, but ‘underachieving’ can be an even worse cross to bear.

My own mother went to Secondary Modern. She was clever, but, she spent a great deal of her childhood bedridden with severe asthma, and as a consequence did not pass her 11 plus. She loved her secondary modern school, and always claimed it was great for her – but in a comprehensive system she could have completed the qualifications once she caught up, rather than facing the stigma of ‘failure’ at 11. She was in the A stream – she did secretarial work and it did give her the skills to get good jobs when she left. She was a school secretary and then worked at the Northern Bus Company in the offices – and she absolutely loved both jobs. The bus company job gave her an opportunity to have a wide and varied set of friendships, and she also got the opportunity to travel across Europe, where she regularly went to Italy, France and Spain with her friends, long before the invention of the ‘girls’ holiday’.

When it became difficult for my mother was the attitude to women once they had children. In the 1970s, you HAD to leave work at the end of your pregnancy; never to return! By the time she was ready to re-enter the workforce her secretarial skills were obsolete and she had no formal qualifications to fall back on. Consequently, she ended up doing shop work and school cleaning job that she could fit around her children. Therefore, she did achieve great success when she was young, but the issues arose later in life because they did not sit formally recognised qualifications. This is where the GCSE as a universally recognised achievement came into its own,

My father says he failed his 11 Plus spectacularly – on entry to secondary modern he was placed into the bottom stream. After one week of school he was moved from bottom to top stream as they soon realised that his ability did not match his test result. But, if that is the case, should he have been at the Grammar School? In a comprehensive system, this would not have been an issue, moving sets would have been enough. He became a mechanic, and eventually owned his own business, but there s no doubt that dealing with the stigma of failing so badly at 11 has stayed with him. He is still convinced that he is physically, mentally and emotionally incapable of taking a written examination.

Current Grammar Schools

I have a close relative who lives in the area where there are still grammar schools. His children are in KS1, but just before the time to sit the grammar school tests, both parents and children are warned that the Y6 students are often so stressed they are (and were) being physically sick outside of school. There is also lots of crying and anxiety. At 11? It just seems excessively cruel to put children through this. This is in addition to the pressure of the SATs! The other major issue is the fact that there was blatant cheating taking place. Parents at the state primary school discovered that during this year’s  entrance exam, a boy from the local private prep school put up his hand and said that he had already sat the paper, and had there been a mistake… It appeared that the actual paper had been leaked to the local prep school and therefore gave these students a clear advantage over the others. How can a ‘working class’ child possibly gain entry into grammar school with the odds stacked so heavily against them? What it does do is confirm that the most recent debates arguing for social mobility are a complete nonsense.

The other social imbalance is the use of tuition. There is a major industry in the area, where the only focus is developing the skills to pass the grammar school entrance examinations. I was asked by my relative why the state primary school did not teach to the grammar school test, why should he have to pay for tuition? My response was, why should all students be taught towards something only 4% of students will benefit from? Plus, it is bad enough that these students have to sit the SATS. Embedding failure through multiple testing at 11 years old cannot be healthy for any child, and we wonder why there is an increase in anxiety in children? Teaching to a test is the dullest most reductive form of teaching. Ironically, some of the most gifted find this so boring they under achieve.What is really happening here is that it is the middle class parents who want to either save money and not send to private school, or cannot afford private school and see tuition as the cheapest option to get into grammar schools.

The Social Issues:

  • Split siblings – if one passes and the other does not, they are in different schools, and there is an intellectual hierarchy created within a family – the risk of sibling rivalry is extremely high.
  • There is still no actual evidence that single sex schools work. Socially in my opinion – mixed is always best. Even by university of the boys had NEVER spoken to the opposite sex, not a healthy way to grow up.
  • Clearly it is NOT the ablest students who get in. It is the parents who are prepared to push their children from the age of 8 to ensure they can pass a particular style of test.
  • It does not promote social mobility
  • It often creates social isolation – separation from friends, and most likely to have to travel out of the local area to school – which in turn creates anxiety.

The Real Education Issues:

  • Teacher retention and recruitment
  • A ‘new’ academic system for GCSE and A level that is not fit for purpose in the global market
  • Asset stripping of schools
  • The state money being wasted by academy chains – and the lack of accountability
  • The increase in child poverty, and an ever increasing gap between the rich and poor students

Ultimately, education is a best fit, but what we must aspire to is that all students should have the best possible experience. We all have to be more realistic about the purpose of education, and for me it is happiness and fulfillment of the emotional and academic achievement of every child. If students are physically sick with anxiety, and emotionally unstable, this is not an education system that is fully functioning for the benefit of the students. If this is the kind of pressure 11 year old children experience, and ultimately equate with ‘success’ we are most definitely failing. The areas with grammar schools will undoubtedly be keeping them, but what the rest of us need to do it to continue to support and encourage the development of a system that educates and supports the majority of students, not expand a system that reinforces the English class system and ultimately rewards the wealthy minority at the expense of the poor.

Share this:
Shopping Cart
  • Your cart is empty.
Scroll to Top