Tax Credits

CLAPTON

dktreesea wrote: »

Do the "chav element" stick together because they want to, or is it like at our children's school, where the well off kids sniff them out so to speak and avoid them, leaving them with only their fellow chavs to hang out with?

'well off' isn't the opposite of 'chav'


motivated, with caring parent whether poor, well off or rich could be the opposite of 'chav'.

gadgetmind

WHA wrote: »

they'll still end up sat with and hanging out with the other chavvy kids who don't have parental support.

When you pay for private school it may be partly better facilities, better teachers, smaller classes, etc., but 90% of what you pay for is a better peer group.

We need to find ways of getting the kids of !!!!less parents out of their poor situation and instilled with a sense of self belief, study and work ethic.

We used to have grammar schools, which allowed bright kids from working class backgrounds (such as myself) to get the grades required for university, but these are mostly gone now.

ukcarper

gadgetmind wrote: »

When you pay for private school it may be partly better facilities, better teachers, smaller classes, etc., but 90% of what you pay for is a better peer group.



We used to have grammar schools, which allowed a small number of thebright kids from working class backgrounds (such as myself) to get the grades required for university, but these are mostly gone now.

Corrected that for you

CLAPTON

The issues isn't about kids getting to Uni, but about kids doing as well as they can and learning some life skills: these including wanting to learn, obeying the teachers, being quiet and respectful etc,

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

The issues isn't about kids getting to Uni, but about kids doing as well as they can and learning some life skills: these including wanting to learn, obeying the teachers, being quiet and respectful etc,

This is something I can agree with you on only slight change I would make is to change wanting to learn to being prepared to learn. I went to a secondary mondern school in the 60s along with the rest of the riff raff and everybody in the class was well behaved you had to be.

setmefree2

ukcarper wrote: »

Corrected that for you

5 years ago my friends' kid failed to get into one of the still existing grammar schools - he just got 10 A*s and an A at GCSE this summer.

Truth is bright kids don't need grammar schools to do well. And the 11 plus misses plenty of bright kids.

Personally, I don't like grammar schools - we don't have them here in London and the schools are great.

gadgetmind

No system is perfect, but streaming allows those who're bright and hard-working (in whatever combination) to get a good outcome that they'd struggle to achieve if surrounded by those who frankly don't give a chuff and would rather not be there.

And yes, maybe grammar schools didn't benefit that many, but at the time I went to one, only 2% of the population went to university. Of course, people are smarter now.

ukcarper

gadgetmind wrote: »

No system is perfect, but streaming allows those who're bright and hard-working (in whatever combination) to get a good outcome that they'd struggle to achieve if surrounded by those who frankly don't give a chuff and would rather not be there.

And yes, maybe grammar schools didn't benefit that many, but at the time I went to one, only 2% of the population went to university. Of course, people are smarter now.

That might be true but making that decision at 11 and consigning the rest to the bin is not the way forward.

When comps were being sold the idea was the larger numbers would allow streaming by the subject and allow for the different speeds children develope at if those goals have fallen by the wayside that's not the fault of the system.
I can understand why people who benefited from a grammar school education applaud it but that praise is at the expense of a lot of other people.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

That might be true but making that decision at 11 and consigning the rest to the bin is not the way forward.

When comps were being sold the idea was the larger numbers would allow streaming by the subject and allow for the different speeds children develope at if those goals have fallen by the wayside that's not the fault of the system.
I can understand why people who benefited from a grammar school education applaud it but that praise is at the expense of a lot of other people.

why do you consider that children who went to secondary moderns 'consigned to the bin'?
Isn't that just left wing propaganda of the worst sort?

Germany seems to have a system of parallel schools and they do reasonable well

gadgetmind

ukcarper wrote: »

That might be true but making that decision at 11 and consigning the rest to the bin is not the way forward.

Agreed, though the comprehensives were barely "the bin", but neither were they really aiming for the standards required for universities at the time.

I can understand why people who benefited from a grammar school education applaud it but that praise is at the expense of a lot of other people.

They provided a degree of "educational mobility" that's now filled by private schools, for those who can afford them, which my parents definitely couldn't! Given the choice between not streaming at all, streaming by money, or streaming by ability, I'm afraid that I'll always choose the latter.