On 14 Apr 2017 at 9:09am Newms wrote:
Lying with numbers is changing It was Gordon Brown`s shameless “presentation” that necessitat-ed the invention of the Office Of Budgetary Responsibility, (the stop Chancellors lying department ) .
A recent leftish example was a graph produced by ‘anti austerity’, unions showing that borrowing was not so bad by setting the state of things in 1945 on the y axis. This warped picture so flattened subsequent movement as to totally misrepresent our National debt as trifling.
People with causes break the rules but whilst this was the lefts M O, the Conservative party are far the worst offenders now. In this context consider these numbers; the first has been widely publi-cised by the government to show that Grammars not segregating by class, the second and third buried.
Headline
Pupils form from “ordinary working families”,- 36% at grammars/ 35% others
Truth
Disadvantaged children-Grammar – under one in ten /Others - one in six
Above media income -Grammars – Over 50%/Others – Under one in three
Wider Picture
Even this does not truly describe the social segregation Grammars are really aimed at creating because it would all be much worse if “Others” were not practically every school in the country and Grammars a few atypical nub ends of the past.
Why It Matters
A Grammar in Lewes would be devastating to our schools and represents a dogma driven pointless act of class segregation forcing ordinary families to pay for a Public school education for the better off .
Don`t let it happen- get Caulfield Out
On 14 Apr 2017 at 12:49pm We'vehadourfun wrote:
And your point is?
On 14 Apr 2017 at 3:31pm Amon Wildes wrote:
You are rambling rather Paul! However, this is incredibly stupid, even for this Government. Nobody, except a few old Tory buffers and Theresa May, want grammar schools back. Everyone witters on about helping disadvantaged children, but no one mentions the flip side. Secondary Moderns, or whatever you call them, seriously let down all those who didn't make it into Grammer Schools. By allowing Grammers again, it will weaken the already hard pressed comps. who do a terrific job while starved of funding. For heaven's sake, try and improve what we have which works perfectly well. Free schools are an outrage and are distorting the system and no one wants any more Academies. When will this meddling lot of Politicians leave Schools, and the NHS, alone to do what they are trying to do and not keep buggering about with them.
On 14 Apr 2017 at 6:16pm JMMM wrote:
The problem with Grammar Schools isn't the schools themselves but the way we identify kids who would benefit. Get rid of the discredited 11+ and introduce teacher recommendation instead. There are other ways to assess children's potential than the hated exam system which does no one any favours. Teachers' knowledge of kids is second only to parents'. Take a more flexible approach and then there will be a wider variety of backgrounds in the schools. Make sure the other children in the alternate system feel valued and give them the skills to go into with workplace.
On 14 Apr 2017 at 6:42pm Newms wrote:
Yes excuse me that should have been edited I was in a hurry to get out this morning still glad to see some agreement . I cannot remember a stupider idea .. it drives me scatty
On 14 Apr 2017 at 10:39pm Fairmeadow wrote:
I did go to a Grammar School back in the old days, despite coming from a very ordinary family, and it certainly helped me on my way. In those long-gone days just 20% passed the 11+ and less than 5% went to university. There were plenty of careers then that didn't need any educational qualifications.
Today around 40% go to university, and if you are in the other 60% your choice of career is restricted. Back in the old days you didn't need a degree to be a solicitor or a social worker or an accountant or a teacher, and certainly not to be a nurse or a policeman. Now you do, at least if you want to have any chance of rising to a senior position. In this context we need to educate a far higher proportion of our kids to a high standard, and guess what: when you try you can. We have some local counties [East & West Sussex, Hampshire, Essex] that have developed great comprehensive systems. Other neighbours [Kent, Surrey, Bucks] persist with a grammar school system, but still select only 20% at age 11. Is Kent a more prosperous or better-educated county than East Sussex? As a former university admissions tutor for a very competitive subject I can assure you with complete confidence that the very best students from the counties that kept grammar schools were no better than their peers from Sussex & Hampshire. There has never been any doubt at all which system is better for those who didn't make it into the top 20% when they were 11.
On 14 Apr 2017 at 10:57pm Leftwinger. wrote:
More good sound common sense from the increasingly commonsensical Newms.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 11:39am Amon wildes wrote:
Does any one know what our Ms Fluffy Caulfield's position is on Grammers? She consistently goes with the party line. Her Spring newsletter suggests she is fighting for more school funding: how could she not. Her 'in Box' must be bursting with furious correspondence from local parents. But, as with her time on the Brexit committee, she always goes with the far right Agenda and toadies up to the PM. She never lets common sense get in the way of party ideology.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 3:55pm Self harmer wrote:
I just wonder if we did away with grammar schools and private education and closed all these schools down would the state system be able to absorb all these kids? If not then I wouldn't mind paying a large increase in my taxes to fund state education for all. This includes private hospitals as well, the NHS should absorb all private patients so there is free health care for all and for there tonh bconsistency in health care throughout the country. Again I have no problems in waiting longer for treatment or paying higher taxes to finance this. Education and Health should be provided by the state as a free service to all. Shut down all private businesses, collectively we can make this happen by sacrificing more from our salaries.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 7:35pm Marlen wrote:
I got sent to the nearest state run " Gymnasium" in Germany - selective only according to academic interests, but not in terms of "prestige". Other kids less inclined to learn Latin and French went to a more practically oriented state run" Mittelschule", and then on to a rigorous half practical, half theoretical professional training course.
Private schools and boarding schools were seen as the preserve of mentally disturbed or seriously dumb poor rich kids - and associated with a certain social stigma. Nothing to be proud of, in short.
It's not the state run grammar schools but the continuation of the British public school system that will perpetuate a most outrageous class divide. That's the real elephant in the room. Abolish them and make everybody attend their nearest state school. Thus well off and influential parents will make sure that standards will rise very swiflty indeed.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 8:41pm Green Trees for all wrote:
I agree, abolish Grammers and anything private, let the state take the burden and provide for all.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 10:26pm Mark wrote:
Weird. An increasingly commonsensical Newms. Grammars. An utterly pointless, expensive and retrograde step. Grammars were never anything but a stab in the back for working class children.
On 15 Apr 2017 at 10:37pm Marlen wrote:
Blinded by LIb-Lab ideology. It's the private school system (Orwellian irony to mis- name it "public" school) that's at the root of the class divide.
On 16 Apr 2017 at 11:17am Newms wrote:
Marlen - I understand your point about Germany, a country I think we could learn a lot from. But most of the people , in the UK, who say Plumbing is a prestigious profession, would cut their legs off before they directed their own children to that life.
I don`t mean to be facetious (I well just a bit ) but wishing one country was another one is not as useful as it sometimes looks.
Public schools, certainty do have the affect you mention but the same class of people, game every system. If not public school then tutors, if not a school tie then an expensive post graduate internship and so on…
Labour MPs have used all of these tricks a great deal and you will not, and should not, wish to stop people helping their children.
These are good people not cheats, they have already paid for the state system and if they choose to pay again then there is a civil liberty issue. Furthermore every punishment of Public schools only punishes those on the margins and make the system more segregating.
My suspicion is that you are a Conservative apologist wishing to disguise the class selection Grammars will use by the old tactic of … what aboutery ( ie what about Public schools ).
What about we stick to the point.
The cost to the 80 % of selecting the top 20% into different life chances is appalling unfair . I understand that some parents would like low income tax payers to buy them a state public school , but this is an obvious social injustice and of no benefit whatsoever.
Setting and streaming can provide all the teaching advantages where they exist and ( funnily enough) our top 20% in the state sector are already performing as well as the German system ( regionally various though it may be ) if not better.
This country lags badly in the bottom 50% and it is here that Germany is far ahead. We do not need German Grammars we may well wish to look at other aspects of what is a certainly a highly successful country I happen to admire enormously
On 16 Apr 2017 at 7:52pm Long memory wrote:
When I worked for the Conservative controlled ESCC, the council's Education Committee was adamant that the comprehensive schools that they were responsible for delivered better results overall than a mixture of secondary moderns and grammar schools would achieve. AND, of course, a system that didn't impose 11+ failure on the majority of children was more just and fairer for everyone.
On 16 Apr 2017 at 11:22pm Mario wrote:
A better option all round would be to force state run comprehensive schools to educate children to the same standard as grammar schools.
On 18 Apr 2017 at 8:14am lewes resident wrote:
Peter Hitchens article in the Sunday Mail was spot on.
On 18 Apr 2017 at 10:18am bobobob wrote:
But Jeremy Corbyn went to a grammar school so we must keep them - Theresa May (probably)