British Politics Thread.

[Kirsten]

grammar schools are an appalling anachronism and it is a disgrace that the tories want to bring them back. yet another attempt to divide the populace.

[Psychosplodge]

Not if they're done properly. I think they need to find a way to prevent "teaching for the selection test" so they operate as intended.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

I'd say they also need to be met with technical schools. The constant focus on academia has left us with glaring skills gaps.

[Kirsten]

they can't be done properly, they are a disaster. Ofsted are against them, teaching unions are against them. hell, my sister had an entire A level course work thing in sociology about how awful they are. grammar schools are for the elite, the haves, to look down on the have nots. that is the sum total of it. they are not for the benefit of intelligent kids. they are for posh ****ers to send their kids to to avoid the terribly common state schools.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Don't you still end up with tiers though, with some getting a much better education than others? Won't that just end up eventually reshuffling who is poor, rather than actually dealing with poverty?

I.e., assuming the better-educated people get better wages when they grow up, and that grammar schools provide a better education, surely this system will just move some poorer people into a better position but still leave some in not such a good position. And due to the increased level of education in our currently small jobs market, it means that the demands for education in job applications can be raised, making it even harder for those with a worse education to compete?

Surely the better system is to "uplift" the underperforming schools until they perform at the same level, rather than shuffling kids around the better schools?

[Kirsten]

Surely the better system is to "uplift" the underperforming schools until they perform at the same level, rather than shuffling kids around the better schools?

exactly, grammar schools are empirically bad for kids. they are for the benefit of the wealthy, nothing more. work needs to be done to improve state schools, and get everybody in to them. out of grammar schools, out of faith schools, and make sure everybody gets a fair chance.

[Psychosplodge]

The problem is then they cater to the pupils furthest behind and everyone else suffers for it. Idk about you but I could have probably took three years off till we started the GCSE courses and they started streaming us, and even then we still suffered cause if they needed an extra member of staff to deal with the bottom set who could be trusted to be left by themselves for most of a lesson? ¬_¬

[Denzark]

There's me thinking lots of people from less well off backgrounds saw grammar schools as their leg up. And that the current system in state schools, where house prices rise in good school catchment areas go up - ensuring wealth plays a factor anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Loving Kirsten's blatant classism btw.

Grammar Schools - empirically bad.

The empirical evidence is so strong that the Tories want them back - just to separate their 'class' from 'working class' - irrespective of results.

OFSTED don't want 'em. Unions don't want 'em. Ummm - the Unions loathe OFSTED - who is right then?

Kirsten's sister did a whole A-level course work of analysis - must be better than the entire Department for Education - sign her up as a consultant and make her education minister when a safe seat comes up for by-election.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Got anything to support your points other than ad hominem jabs?

[Psychosplodge]

Excuse the source, but we had a run of grammar school prime ministers (from both sides) between the public schoolboys(again of both sides)
That suggests they might have been doing something right at one point.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_e ducation[/url]