An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

Out,_Vile_Jelly

The single biggest factor in a child's education is the attitude of their parents to education. I don't think it matters what school system we have if there are swathes of households containing no books and no quiet areas for study, where teachers are the enemy, school is a building that provides free childcare, after-school clubs are for swotty losers and trying hard is discouraged. As I've said, I've no idea what a government can do about this.

Filo25

ukcarper wrote: »

That is not the argument. Good comps do not pull down the brightest and give the less bright a better education than they would get if selection was reintroduced.

I'm far from an expert on the area but that was the impression I had as well, hence why so few experts appear to be backing a reintroduction of Grammar Schools.

Not that I'm saying for a minute that we couldn't have meaningful, positive reform of education in the UK, but I'm not sure reaching back into the past for a model of schooling which has already been ditched is likely to generate it on its own.

ukcarper

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I'd like to see the data they had for this graph. Since reading a publication from the UK parliament supports what I'm saying regarding attainment. And it's not slight, it's quite a large difference.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjW4fSsyJPPAhVpBcAKHaSAAgwQFggeMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2Fsn01398.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHq3fMa3x-ymi1m7NPGM_AoQdH22w&sig2=jvXLnrMTVLNPGKKl4tNy4w&cad=rja

The table on Page 7 of the document is quite stark.

I'd also like to refer you to point 2.2 on page 5.

Link doesn't work

TrickyTree83

ukcarper wrote: »

Link doesn't work

Try this one.

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01398/SN01398.pdf

ukcarper

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

The single biggest factor in a child's education is the attitude of their parents to education. I don't think it matters what school system we have if there are swathes of households containing no books and no quiet areas for study, where teachers are the enemy, school is a building that provides free childcare, after-school clubs are for swotty losers and trying hard is discouraged. As I've said, I've no idea what a government can do about this.

I agree and would say that selection compounds it.

ukcarper

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Try this one.

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01398/SN01398.pdf

That only proves that if a school only contains pupils who are likely to achieve more pupils achieve than in a school with all abilities.

Filo25

ukcarper wrote: »

That only proves that if a school only contains pupils who are likely to achieve more pupils achieve than in a school with all abilities.

Which is hardly a surprise, and very little to do with the quality of the school, and more with the higher average ability levels of the pupils.

Does the London educational system (few grammar schools) not significantly outperform the Kent system (lots of Grammars)?

I went to a Grammar School myself (Northern Ireland had selection at 11 long after the rest of the UK had largely abandoned it) so have no particular axe to grind on this one.

MobileSaver

Filo25 wrote: »

I'm not sure reaching back into the past for a model of schooling which has already been ditched ...

It seem to me that the model was ditched as part of general dumbing down malaise at the time; middle-class children benefited more than working-class children and we can't have that so let's bring everyone down to the same (lower) level.

I genuinely do not understand why people think giving the brighter pupils a better education is a bad thing?!?

TrickyTree83

ukcarper wrote: »

That only proves that if a school only contains pupils who are likely to achieve more pupils achieve than in a school with all abilities.

The percentage of pupils attaining low grades at a selective school is lower than the admission rate of disadvantaged pupils. So it's fair to say that a proportion of those disadvantaged pupils attain high grades within this system.

I agree that the current grammar entry tests are not perfect, I also agree that at the moment, most likely due to their locations, that the majority of pupils attending these schools come from a background of privilege.

That doesn't mean that increasing the intake of disadvantaged pupils into a grammar system would not translate into those pupils achieving better grades than they do under a comprehensive system does it?

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

So the answer for all you grammar supporters is to pick an arbitrary age and test apply this to all children then if they don't pass condem they to a future of poor education and opportunities.

I don't see that as the way forward, a comp which is correctly streamed by subject should not disadvantage the more gifted children or someone who for instance is very good at maths but no English.

You are living in a world 20 years out of date. The highest quality Information and education is now totally free and accessible to everyone in the world with an internet connection. You now have world class universities who have their lectures online for free for anyone.

Any child who wants to learn anything is no longer limited by who their teacher was. Its a fantastic achievement because there are a lot of crap teachers in all types of schools

The roles of schools are primarily cheap childcare