Education

[Freddie]

The problem is not the left,as the previous New Labour government wasn't 'the left' at all,just not quite a right wing as the previous Thatcher government.

Agreed, but the left start from the faulty position that everyone is equal and if everyone was given 'x' we'd all end up the same. This is in contradiction to all nature and is part of the new secular religion that we are almost compelled to follow in this day and age.

The problem AFAICS is the class system which is firmly rooted in UK society,a system that definitely and demonstrably is based on money which buys 'education' in,where if you can fool enough of the people enough of the time you'll rise to the top,which I accept is a generalisation but not totally.

To an extent, but a good proportion of working class children would not be capable of attending a rigorous grammar school, unless (as has happened to the universities) it was 'dumbed down' to accommodate. I think better that a select few working class children get through on merit and then can act as spokesmen for those of the working class, once they have 'arrived', so to speak.

We should not forget that education starts in the home. I suspect the time spent reading books and newspapers in working class households is vanishingly small compared to say middle middle and upper middle class households. An upper middle household might not even own a TV (which just rots minds), whilst the working and underclass household might have several huge panels running practically 24/7. I have been in homes where the TV has been left on even whilst trying to converse, these were not middle class households!

Yes people from humble backgrounds beat the system but they start from a much lower rung on the ladder and need to be dedicated and have a fine mind and a strong will to succed,such people get to the top despite their humble beginnings not because of it

You cannot defeat nature and nature is unfair. Unnecessary roadblocks should be removed (wealth, for example), but if you are not tenacious you will get nowhere today, almost irrespective of class, unless your family are part of the 1%, perhaps (those that earn £100,000+).

Competition is normal and natural and cannot be extinguished. It is unfortunate that some people start from humble beginnings whilst others are born into wealth, but short of confiscations, what should be done to rectify this and would it actually help those from poorer backgrounds? I say provide the most capable of the poor with the same education as the most capable of the rich. This would, unfortunately, exclude a number of children who weren't 'gifted' with the intellect necessary, but then I accept nature and don't pretend that it can be subverted to make everyone the same, like it or not.

[pete75]

Margaret Thatcher, as education secretary, created more comprehensive schools than anyone before or since. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think she was a Conservative.

Creation of one thing and destruction of another are two different things. Also, Margaret Thatcher was pretty revolutionary and not particularly conservative. She may have been a Conservative, but I doubt her credentials as a conservative (small c).

She shared much in common with the left, in that she was enamoured with the new (not a particularly conservative trait). That doesn't mean I'm trying to say she was of the left, but that she is a very singular example and certainly had something of a revolutionary spirit, which is hardly what one would associated with conservatives (small c).

Where I live, in Lincolnshire, there are still Grammar and Secondary Modern Schools. The county is about average in the league table s for 11-18 education. Other counties which are all comprehensive are much higher than Lincs in the tables.

The averages say nothing of the few remaining grammar schools in Lincolnshire. I imagine if you compared solely the grammars in Lincs to the comprehensives in other counties then the results would come out rather differently and in favour of the grammars.

There are not just a few remaining grammar schools in Lincolnshire. It's about half the schools and over half in some places. Sleaford, Boston and Spalding for example each have two grammar schools but only one non grammar secondary.

Perhaps you should do some research to see if your suspicions are correct. However to get a true picture you need to compare all the schools in a selective town with a comprehensive school. Comparing a school which selects say the 40% most able pupils with one which takes kids of all abilities is not a correct comparison. You need to compare the selective school's results with the top 20% of results from the non selective school.


There's a difference between the Conservative party and people who are conservative. The two are not the same and when talking about political parties it's the C that counts not the c. A person doesn't have to be conservative to be a Conservative. SIr Robert Peel is regarded as the founder of the Conservative party and he wasn't at all averse to new ideas and change. You seem to present the Conservative party as one which is against change or new ideas. Had it been so it would have withered many years ago.
I think you're confused, Grammar schools weren't destroyed they just became comprehensive schools.

[Freddie]

Comparing a school which selects say the 40% most able pupils with one which takes kids of all abilities is not a correct comparison. You need to compare the selective school's results with the top 20% of results from the non selective school.

Wouldn't it be the top 40% from both schools? At any rate, I don't think exam results are the whole picture of the quality of schooling. You might say that is convenient, but that is what I have always thought.

There's a difference between the Conservative party and people who are conservative. The two are not the same and when talking about political parties it's the C that counts not the c. A person doesn't have to be conservative to be a Conservative. SIr Robert Peel is regarded as the founder of the Conservative party and he wasn't at all averse to new ideas and change. You seem to present the Conservative party as one which is against change or new ideas. Had it bee so it would have withered many years ago.

No, and I don't think you think that I think that. I'd say a 'small c' conservative is not against change, but what they see as unnecessary or excessive change (destroying one thing to put another, often lesser thing, in its place). Change for its own sake, sometimes described in the 21st century as 'progress', when it is not clear that change for its own sake is progress is another thing 'small c' conservatives tend to dislike.

I think you're confused Grammar schools weren't destroyed they just became comprehensive schools.

Well, maybe, but then the railways in Britain weren't 'destroyed' by Beeching's axe and privatisation, they just serviced far less of the country and became rather more expensive for passengers to boot.

Perhaps the railways example is not a good one, because the railways remains the same in a sense, in that you pay for a ticket and then can use them, however diminished they may be. The differences between grammar schools and comprehensives are deeper than that.

Your argument seems to be they're still schools, so I'm wrong?

Freddie why do you regard the income of a typical, reasonably successful middle class professional, £100,000+ as wealth. How do you intend to remove that wealth - taxation. An average GP will have that sort of income as will a military officer with a successful career, a hospital consultant probably more, a partner in a reasonably successful solicitors practice double that, similar for an accountant in a decent practice

I don't. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant that ability to pay shouldn't be a factor in receiving a rigorous education, as per the old grammar schools.

[reohn2]

The problem is not the left,as the previous New Labour government wasn't 'the left' at all,just not quite a right wing as the previous Thatcher government.

Agreed, but the left start from the faulty position that everyone is equal and if everyone was given 'x' we'd all end up the same. This is in contradiction to all nature and is part of the new secular religion that we are almost compelled to follow in this day and age.

I disagree,the left start from a position that everyone should be treated equally,there's a huge diffence.

The problem AFAICS is the class system which is firmly rooted in UK society,a system that definitely and demonstrably is based on money which buys 'education' in,where if you can fool enough of the people enough of the time you'll rise to the top,which I accept is a generalisation but not totally.

To an extent, but a good proportion of working class children would not be capable of attending a rigorous grammar school, unless (as has happened to the universities) it was 'dumbed down' to accommodate. I think better that a select few working class children get through on merit and then can act as spokesmen for those of the working class, once they have 'arrived', so to speak.

We should not forget that education starts in the home. I suspect the time spent reading books and newspapers in working class households is vanishingly small compared to say middle middle and upper middle class households. An upper middle household might not even own a TV (which just rots minds), whilst the working and underclass household might have several huge panels running practically 24/7. I have been in homes where the TV has been left on even whilst trying to converse, these were not middle class households!

Yes people from humble backgrounds beat the system but they start from a much lower rung on the ladder and need to be dedicated and have a fine mind and a strong will to succed,such people get to the top despite their humble beginnings not because of it

You cannot defeat nature and nature is unfair. Unnecessary roadblocks should be removed (wealth, for example), but if you are not tenacious you will get nowhere today, almost irrespective of class, unless your family are part of the 1%, perhaps (those that earn £100,000+).

Competition is normal and natural and cannot be extinguished. It is unfortunate that some people start from humble beginnings whilst others are born into wealth, but short of confiscations, what should be done to rectify this and would it actually help those from poorer backgrounds? I say provide the most capable of the poor with the same education as the most capable of the rich. This would, unfortunately, exclude a number of children who weren't 'gifted' with the intellect necessary, but then I accept nature and don't pretend that it can be subverted to make everyone the same, like it or not.

You assume a lot.

[Freddie]

I disagree,the left start from a position that everyone should be treated equally,there's a huge diffence.

How is that any better, who would benefit from being treated equally? I haven't met one person that treats everyone equally and if there was such a person, they'd probably rather quickly become disliked.

You assume a lot.

I take it you're tired of the discussion already?

[reohn2]

I disagree,the left start from a position that everyone should be treated equally,there's a huge diffence.

How is that any better, who would benefit from being treated equally? I haven't met one person that treats everyone equally and if there was such a person, they'd probably become rather quickly disliked.

There's more chance of people reaching their potential if they're treated with respect and as equal members of society

You assume a lot.

I take it you're tired of the discussion already?

TBH I get tired PDQ of people who make sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up,only a rightwing biased stance with and an unsubstantiated attitude of the left and condemnation of the working class as being unable to stand the rigours of grammar school education and are more likely to have multiply tvs running 24/7.
Yes Freddie I'm tired already,pehaps it's my working class upbringing and brain rotted tv watching that's caused it all.
OTOH I may know when to stop conversing with someone who's mind is made up and who's attitude is one of unqualified superiority.,it's such an attitude that lead to country to where it is today IMO,YVMV.

[Freddie]

TBH I get tired PDQ of people who make sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up

...unless they're about people you see as going against your ideas/your class, perhaps...?

only a rightwing biased stance with and an unsubstantiated attitude of the left and condemnation of the working class as being unable to stand the rigours of grammar school education and are more likely to have multiply tvs running 24/7.

I think I've been pretty accurate in saying the left have an ideology based around equality. They often say so themselves, so I can but believe them. As for working class children, I'd say the top 15-20% could benefit from a grammar school education. This is around the percentage of the entire population I think should go on to tertiary level education (university).

Yes Freddie I'm tired already,pehaps it's my working class upbringing and brain rotted tv watching that's caused it all.
OTOH I may know when to stop conversing with someone who's mind is made up and who's attitude is one of unqualified superiority.,it's such an attitude that lead to country to where it is today IMO,YVMV.

Now who's assuming? Did you ask me what class background I come from and grew up in. Perhaps I might have some experience of the matter...

[reohn2]

Freddie
Give some facts on your assumptions and you may have a discussion until then your posts are speculation at best.

[Freddie]

I will try find some data as per hours of TV watched and hours reading done on a class by class basis. I thought this was such common knowledge though that it didn't need explanation.

All the same, common knowledge can be wrong, let me see what I can find.

[Carlton green]

Did anyone watch the video?

Yes, I have just watched it.

What’s interesting about what Ken Robinson has to say is that standardisation and testing has become the ‘be all and end all’ of education in so many places, and that that way of doing this results in little learning and disengaged pupils. Likewise schools focusing on STEM subjects which, whist very important, need the diversity provided by other subjects too support learning and develop the human.

Our current system in the U.K. ( Ken was mostly focussed on the USA) is flawed by over measurement, things have got out of balance and over focussed. That is, IMHO, ‘cock-up’ rather than ‘conspiracy’, well meaning folk who are remote from the classroom yet feel qualified to make decisions about how education is most effectively managed.

Teachers make or break schools and particular head teachers, they need empowering and they need to be able. Recent head teachers at my own community’s secondary school have, despite doing all the now required training, been hopeless. The school has declined to such an extent that to allow their children a fair chance of success many local parents have been forced to send their children to schools some distance away, that should never be the case. So two levels of failure there, government policy and local head teachers.

I’d love to see an overhaul in education and implementation of Finland’s methods here. As usual we have so much to learn from the Baltic Countries...

[reohn2]

Carlton Green
That's my understanding of it too.

[pete75]

Now who's assuming? Did you ask me what class background I come from and grew up in. Perhaps I might have some experience of the matter...

Lower middle class now at a guess. Born just above or escaped from the working class so look down upon it. Obviously not working class now and not middle class if regarding £100,000 a year as wealth. I'm retired now but my pension income last year was about half that. More this year because it's index linked so has gone up. Not bad for someone Freddie regards as unworthy of a rigorous education.
To further feed his prejudices I went to Leeds - a dumbed down, red brick university.

[Tangled Metal]

Long, boring discussion <snip>

I think the phrase R2 wanted read everyone should be treated as equals not equally. You can't really treat people equally and expect the best out of them. Some will always need more help, others less.

You can treat people as equals in that they are of equal worth and deserve equal chance at achieving their best. All very much idealistic though that is.

[Ben@Forest]

You don't have to google far to find there are private tutors in Finland which must mean some parents feel the education system is not doing enough for their kids.

It reminds me of an anecdote recounted by Billy Bragg in a book about touring in the Soviet Union. In their party of four left-leaning Brits two wouldn't ban private schools and two would. They asked their Soviet interpreter about it and he enthusiastically recommended private schools, saying that if his parents hadn't paid for private tutoring in English he wouldn't have the job he had now. The two who didn't agree with private education rather glumly shut up.

But the story proves a point - those who are better off, or who might sacrifice more for their kids, can always get better education.

[Freddie]

Lower middle class now at a guess. Born just above or escaped from the working class so look down upon it. Obviously not working class now and not middle class if regarding £100,000 a year as wealth. I'm retired now but my pension income last year was about half that. More this year because it's index linked so has gone up. Not bad for someone Freddie regards as unworthy of a rigorous education.

Pete, why so personal? I thought you were one of the tolerant, good ones; come on, don't cede the high ground to a rapscallion like me! I didn't say that a child not capable of attending grammar school was incapable of success, in fact, I think once intelligence goes beyond a certain point then the likelihood of success (at least in a monetary sense) lowers, because those at the extreme end get rather dreamy and less practical in their manner.

I just think it is an interesting discussion. It'd like to thrash out it with those that disagree with me, but they too often throw a huff and take offence, far sooner than considering the opposing side might have a point.

Come on chaps, don't throw in the towel so early. It is an odd thing to have very strong views and not be willingly to defend them.