|
|
|
|
|
by pjc50
2906 days ago
|
|
If grammar (you spelt this incorrectly) schools were effective at improving society as a whole, you'd be able to measure an effect in the places in the UK where they were retained. Especially Northern Ireland. Instead you have to address what happens to the 50% of people who don't get into the selective schools. You can't improve overall quality through rejecting students, because there's no "away" to reject them to! People who are actually involved in education are more likely to tell you that the key factor for most of the lower-achieving students is obstacles, especially out of school; are they getting enough sleep and 3 square meals a day? Do they have at least one parent around who's engaged in their education? What obstacles does that parent face? Is the child being bullied at school or home? etc. |
|
I live in a very rural area where a grammar school has been maintained (which my wife attended) and most of the people who go there end up at good universities and then move away for good careers in distant cities. Meanwhile, the people at the comprehensives usually end up staying in our area on lower paid jobs.
Does this lead to be a better society? It certainly provides a way for poorer but smarter people to find a way 'out' of a humdrum rural location, but I don't think it makes our area any better in and of itself.