Secondary I mean, rather than listing the full works from infants upwards.
My seat of learning was St Bonaventures in Forest Gate, east London. An all boys catholic outfit not noted at the time for it's academic qualities but apparently one of Newham's best performers these days.
|
Secondary I mean, rather than listing the full works from infants upwards.
Beauchamps Comprehensive, Wickford Essex, then Southall Technical College.
|
|
Bancrofts, Woodford Green. A minor public school where I boarded, on a scholarship (my parents couldn't have afforded to pay for it). Pretty tough regime in the early years. Academically I probably fell short of scholarship standards!!! But I enjoyed it and went back last autumn for the first time to the Old Boy's dinner, what with it being the 40 year anniversary since we'd left. First time I'd been back properly since leaving in 1974 and I hadn't forgotten much!!
|
I went to three secondary schools. Fishguard County Grammar where I went from age 10 to age nearly 13. The other kids were two years older than I was, as well as Welsh-speaking in quite a few cases, and it had a very challenging and intimidating side. Had a couple of allies though so survived OK. After that, Plymouth College until after O level. It was all boys in those days, one of three in Plymouth along with Devonport High and Sutton High which was Catholic I believe. It thought of itself as the best and classiest of the three. For A level, through Jesuit family connections, my parents managed to scrape the fees together for Beaumont, a Jesuit public school that was closed down some years ago (too small to be economically viable apparently).
It served as a sort of finishing school that would give me, my parents hoped, a bit of much-needed polish. Actually it helped turn me into the conceited pretentious hobbledehoy that in dark moments I fear I may be.
|
Plymouth College was the best of the three academically, although the small classes and agreeable (on the whole) buildings at Beaumont imparted a strong sense of undeserved privilege and entitlement, seductive when you're young and thoughtless. It had a few good teachers too. I idled away a couple of years there vegetating intellectually.
It was bad of me because although my parents didn't pay the full fees the rich parents paid, they had other children and civil service salaries weren't up to much in those still post-war years. I felt I was short-changing the parents, although they were very nice about it themselves.
|
Fishguard CG was negligible academically. Although two years underage I knew everything I heard in class already and was regarded as a freak. Some teachers found it annoying but others more humane twigged and favoured me. Of course this got me called a teacher's pet, unfairly because I did my best to be wicked. Usually my allies protected me.
There were a couple of nice teachers there and the gorgeous Miss Jenkins who turned up as Latin teacher (I don't think there was one before the gorgeous Miss Jenkins). Anyway she vanished after a couple of terms, made pregnant by a thuggish farm-boy sixth former, frightful chap.
Pubescent and half in love with the gorgeous Miss Jenkins, I was surprised and upset by that.
|
Aireborough Grammar School at Yeadon on the outskirts of Leeds. Opened in early C20 as Yeadon and Guiseley Secondary School, later becoming an elevenplus era Grammer establishment. I went as a Grammar boy in Sept 71 having passed the continuous assessment 11+ in final year juniors known as the 'Thorn Scheme'.
It went comprehensive in 1974, under a West Riding wide programme authorised by Mrs MH Thatcher, who later affected to forget her role in the abolition of grammars.
It closed in the early nineties and was demolished to make way for housing. A little of it's history lives on in (a) the carved coping stones naming Aireborough's constituent villages being incorporated into the boundary walls and (b) roads in the estate named Cavendish, Coverley, Fairfax and Foster after the school's four houses.
Piccyy from early days:
www.wharfedaleobserver.co.uk/resources/images/1395411/
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 14 Jul 15 at 16:52
|
Passed the 11 plus and thought i'd be clever and choose a school near to home... only it wasn't, all the kids at the central schools used to fill up the buses and I'd not be able to get on until later buses came along.
Aged 11 - 13 it was Widey Technical, Crownhill, Plymouth.
13 - leaving, it was Totnes Comprehensive.
The first school was blooody good, made me learn and was quite strict.
The second one was not.
I think it is very mean indeed to foist the comprehensive system on everyone, all it did was lower standards, it certainly did mine.
|
>> I think it is very mean indeed to foist the comprehensive system on everyone, all
>> it did was lower standards, it certainly did mine.
The driver for comprehensives was from the 80% who didn't get through the 11+. For many of those they raised standards.
|
>> The driver for comprehensives was from the 80% who didn't get through the 11+. For
>> many of those they raised standards.
>>
Im in the middle of a forest, camping with no signal and only a telephone.
So you'll have to make do with the following until i am back in civilisation;
Billhooks. Complete garbage.
|
>> Billhooks. Complete garbage.
Which bit is billhooks, the 80% or the improved standards for that cohort?
|
The idea that forcing everybody into the same type of school was a benefit.
It was the desire for lowest common denominator preventing any school failings standing out.
I was expelled from Grammar School and did very badly while i was there, but many people flourished.
We are paying now for the ridiculous need to remove competition be it between schools or within one single school .
Wait till saturday. I'll only throw this phone in the lake if i try typing on it anymore. And that'll annoy No 1 who is fishing.
|
>> The idea that forcing everybody into the same type of school was a benefit.
'Bog Standard Comprehensive' worked fine for my two but YMMV applies bold/capitals/italicised in this field.
I will though maintain that this argument is always pursued from the angle of the 20% who would go to grammar school and not the 80% bound for to Secondary Modern or the (in practice non-existent) technical schools.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 14 Jul 15 at 18:53
|
|
Will pick up at the weekend.
|
>> Will pick up at the weekend.
OK but we may be in opposite positions by then. I'm off to France on Sunday so no data on mobile and dependent on camp-site wi-fi.
|
You and me opposite Simon? Say it ain't so!
Have a good time.
|
>> The driver for comprehensives was from the 80% who didn't get through the 11+. For
>> many of those they raised standards.
>>
How?
Many kids don't want to learn, they have to be pushed into learning and for that you need discipline. Without it, they sod about.
My comprehensive was useless at clamping down on the sodding about, hence my education suffered.. a lot.
What's the problem with the brightest being pushed, do we not need them ultimately for the country's benefit? Why would you want to drag down the brightest to the less bright standard?
|
>> How?
There's a piece here tinyurl.com/qxwnadp written by a Professor from York Uni, David Jesson, which gives a useful account of the drivers for comprehensive schemes. It can be seen that conversion was under way long before Tony Crosland's 1965 circular requesting all councils to produce conversion schemes.
Drivers were, as I said above, concerns about the fairness of selection and the fate of the 80% who did not 'pass' and were deemed failures before entering their teens.
Schools can have discipline without being selective. As you say your school was useless at clamping down on sodding about. That is a failure of leadership and teaching.
Of course the brightest should be pushed. But that happens in decent comprehensives. Differing abilities can be managed by setting or streaming. And judging who's bright or not at age 11 is a fool's game. One of the sharpest girls in my junior school class failed the grammar selection while others who apparently made the grade struggled when they got there.
There was plenty of sodding about too, I took more than my share of opportunities to participate.
|
>> Of course the brightest should be pushed. But that happens in decent comprehensives.
Now if I could believe that, I'd be willing to change my whole tune. I do not.
>> There was plenty of sodding about too, I took more than my share of opportunities
>> to participate.
So did I.... and I shouldn't have been able to.
It is my belief that comprehensives have bred mediocrity and far from helping the 80% have just hindered the 20%.
What is wrong with the 20% being allowed to get on with it in their school.. and concentrating resources on the 80% to improve their lot as well?
|
I seem to remember sodding about creatively in eight schools, or perhaps only seven because I was too young not to be good when only two or three.
I'm happy to say I was caned and hit on the hands with a Jesuits' rubber cosh, the much feared ferula, in all my secondary schools and the best of the primaries.
They often used to make you wait. With the Jays you had to see the First Prefect after breakfast next day. At Plymouth College they would tell you tiredly to 'Get the cane. Coussine,' and you might have to walk five or ten minutes there and back to ask the head for the damn cane. At the Hill School a prefect would come over and murmur at breakfast that the head wanted to see you in his study after breakfast. You knew it was coming of course from the three conduct marks awarded the day before for some careless bit of cheek. More in sorrow than in anger, the beak would put you over the arm of a chair and administer three or four painful swipes with the back of a heavy black hairbrush murmuring something like 'You've been rather silly this term, Coussine'. The other children tended to be sympathetic.
Later the ex-commando Mr Chitty arrived and introduced the cane. We liked him, but my parents didn't like the weals on my nyash and I had to plead with them not to complain.
|
>> my parents didn't like the weals on my nyash and I had to plead with them not to complain.
No one should imagine that I liked corporal punishment. It was by far the most painful thing that I experienced in childhood. One would go to any length short of lying or dropping someone else in it to avoid it. The forties were robust. God knows what the twenties and thirties were like.
There were some teachers who 'couldn't cane'. Probably they didn't want to, they just weren't mean enough. One couldn't help liking them for various reasons but one didn't take them entirely seriously either.
|
"What is wrong with the 20% being allowed to get on with it in their school.. and concentrating resources on the 80% to improve their lot as well?"
There's quite a lot wrong with it actually not least the method used for the arbitrary sorting of the minority who are destined to receive a superior education from the rest.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Wed 15 Jul 15 at 23:57
|
>> There's quite a lot wrong with it actually not least the method used for the
>> arbitrary sorting of the minority who are destined to receive a superior education from the
>> rest.
>>
There's nothing random about the choice? You either pass an exam or you do not.
What's the difference, in principle, between a child passing an exam and getting into a grammar school (and then being 'destined to receive a superior education' as you have put it).. and.. a young person applying for and getting into a university?
Both have entrance standards, both provide a superior education and there's a bar to reach to be able to get into it...
...you know, similar to those aspects of life that affect everyone once they've left education.
|
>> There's nothing random about the choice? You either pass an exam or you do not.
And the way in which the exam is constructed? What exactly is it testing and how? is it fair? In those areas that retain grammars there's a huge problem with kids who's parents can afford private tuition to teach how to pass v those who cannot. How is that fair or equaitable. How is it giving those from less advantaged backgrounds the 'leg up' that advocates say is the raison d'etre for selection?
>> What's the difference, in principle, between a child passing an exam and getting into a
>> grammar school (and then being 'destined to receive a superior education' as you have put
>> it).. and.. a young person applying for and getting into a university?
In principle or in practice?
The 11+ is/was taken at the end of primary school. At that stage in their lives, even if development were exactly equal and linear the oldest child is 10% ahead of the youngest. Then factor in 'late developers'. differences between genders etc.
You have one try, for one grammar place and if you fail that's it......
At age 11. You're still a kid.
Even if you pass friendships that endured through primary are broken when one passes and the other fails.
When you're still a kid.
University is a different ball game. The applicants are young adults. They've got ideas of where they want to go. Entry isn't just about a day of tests, there's a negotiation leading to an offer of a place.
There's a massive choice of University, subject, course structure etc. Bets can be hedged with 'insurance' offers and if at first you don't succeed you can try, try and try again. And if you still fail the rest of the world is still your oyster.
So no real comparison at all.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 17 Jul 15 at 20:19
|
>And the way in which the exam is constructed? What exactly is it testing and how? is it fair?
You tell us. You're the one criticising it.
>In those areas that retain grammars there's a huge problem with kids who's parents can afford private tuition
>to teach how to pass v those who cannot. How is that fair or equaitable. How is it giving those from less
>advantaged backgrounds the 'leg up' that advocates say is the raison d'etre for selection?
FFS Bromp. There would be no need for grammars if state comprehensives achieved the same results. Why is the automatic response of all you lefties, to every imagined social injustice, to try and drag standards down to whatever level of mediocrity you've managed to create and see as 'fair'?
|
>> You tell us. You're the one criticising it.
No. WP suggested it was straightforward. I'm saying it's not for reasons recited.
>> FFS Bromp. There would be no need for grammars if state comprehensives achieved the same
>> results. Why is the automatic response of all you lefties, to every imagined social injustice,
>> to try and drag standards down to whatever level of mediocrity you've managed to create
>> and see as 'fair'?
Are you on Cyclechat too? I only ask because a number of posters there are obsessed with idea of 'lefties'.
Selection at 11 or thereabouts might have had some justification in second quarter of last century when large numbers went into the factory/mine etc at 15 without any school leaving qualification. Nowadays we need the whole workforce to have proof of literacy/numeracy. The sensible way to do that is via the GCSE. As with Comprehensive schemes in the sixties that's not a matter of serious party political controversy.
It makes no sense at all today to have two different routes to that exam determined by some random test at age 11.
|
>Are you on Cyclechat too? I only ask because a number of posters there are obsessed with idea of 'lefties'.
No I'm not, but have you considered that those you describe as 'obsessed' might just be average Joes and Janes who don't agree with you? Maybe it's you who is 'obsessed'?
|
>> So no real comparison at all.
>>
Wasn't comparing them..........I was talking about the the principle of having to achieve something first, to get in...i.e. 11 plus for a Grammar and 'A' levels for a Uni.
As for the rest of it, Kevin has nicely answered that for me.
|
>> Wasn't comparing them.........
If the question 'what's the difference' is not an invitation to compare then what on earth does it mean?
|
>> If the question 'what's the difference' is not an invitation to compare then what on
>> earth does it mean?
>>
The clue is in the two words that came after...'in principle'.
|
>> The clue is in the two words that came after...'in principle'.
But the propositions of 11+ and Uni entry are so different in practice as to defeat any similarity in principle.
|
>> But the propositions of 11+ and Uni entry are so different in practice as to
>> defeat any similarity in principle.
>>
FFS...forget the actuality, just think of the loose principle.
I know the two do not equate as actual comparisons, nowhere near... but they do have similarities, in that they have a standard to be reached to be able to join them and they provide an advance to education that an average or below average student probably will not be able to attain.
So my point is if you oppose someone being able to go to a grammar school, having been bright enough to pass the 11+ ... because you think that is unfair....how come you don't oppose someone going to Uni who has been bright enough to get 'A' levels (or whatever they are nowadays) and/or pass an entrance exam for Uni?
How come in your world that isn't 'unfair'?
I see both systems as being there to facilitate the learning of the brightest, something we need in this country as we have gone steadily backwards over a period of time.
|
At a principled level they're sort of similar. But then so were the headline policies of the Tories and Labour in the last election around the deficit. Both intended to eliminate it. Once you dig down though, as you have too, they're quite different animals.
>> How come in your world that isn't 'unfair'?
See my previous posts. The unfairness of the 11+ was primarily the young age at which it was administered, the single bite of the cherry and the digital outcome. To which could be added the nature of the tests, upon which educationalists can have a field day, and their susceptibility to being subverted my the better off.
Having seen both mine through Uni entrance I can assure you it bears no relation whatsoever to the 11+. There's a huge menu of choice, even if you restrict yourself to Oxbridge/Red Brick. A levels can be retaken and you can even defer entry for a year or twenty.
>> I see both systems as being there to facilitate the learning of the brightest, something
>> we need in this country as we have gone steadily backwards over a period of
>> time.
Have we really gone backwards? Is there reputable research that shows that? Or is it jut Common Sense - like the view that 50% of the welfare budget goes to the unemployed.
Frankly the brightest, the real ones not those who are good at primary school arithmetic and verbal reasoning, will float to the top anyway. As will the offspring of the middle classes. The people who need help are the those who are disadvantaged and/or struggling to attain the basic level of literacy/numeracy needed in the modern employment market.
And don't give me the 'falling standards' scheiss as a reason for those cases. They were ALWAYS there - see recruitment to WW 1 and umpteen examples since.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 14:19
|
pedant mode ON
you said "the digital outcome"
you presumably meant binary outcome?
(If in doubt - see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-state_logic)
pedant mode OFF
However in my day we had >5% of the Grammar School 6th Form who were incomers to from the 2 local secondary schools. Most did reasonably well in further education and careers - probably because they had developed a work ethic. So opportunites did exist for some of those who had missed out at an earlier stage.
|
>> Have we really gone backwards? Is there reputable research that shows that? Or is it
>> jut Common Sense - like the view that 50% of the welfare budget goes to
>> the unemployed.
This is the first one I looked at. I note it is a left wing publication.
tinyurl.com/nfpmxxc
|
|
I'm taking no sides here but those are both 7+ years old...
|
>> I'm taking no sides here but those are both 7+ years old...
>>
Fair enough, didn't notice, this one is 2013:
tinyurl.com/qdm5vo8
As is this one:
tinyurl.com/o3fnnct
Last edited by: Westpig on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 19:53
|
One of the main reasons for the abandonment of the eleven plus examination.was that statistically a far larger proportion of middle class children secured a place at grammar schools than did working class children.
Now you could argue that either middle class children were more intelligent than their working class fellows or alternatively the ability to pass the exam reflected the child's background and environment rather than any natural abilitythye had. Most believ d the latter
The ideal of a comprehensive I.e. A school giving equal opportunity to all is surely difficult to argue with. As has been pointed out Eton is a comprehensive accepting a wide range of abilities as long as the parents have sufficient funds.
The problems in our educations system are more.to do wiith the the lack of value that we as a society place on education compared with other nations.
|
>> One of the main reasons for the abandonment of the eleven plus examination.was that statistically
>> a far larger proportion of middle class children secured a place at grammar schools than
>> did working class children.
And conversely a proportion of middle class children ended up in the Secondary Modern where they were denied opportunity to progress. And thus came much of the pressure for change.
The 11+ was and remains too much of a lottery to determine a child's life chances.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 17 Jul 15 at 22:37
|
|
Sarfhall? But I'm telling you, any more fares please?
|
|
William Penn Comprehensive. Red Post Hill. Dulwich.
|
|
Every school I have attended since age 7 has either closed, amalgamated or been destroyed by fire since I left. Someone is trying to tell me something.
|
Isleworth Grammar School opposite Borough Road College and near Osterley Tube station.
John Disley was our PE teacher so running round Osterley Ppark was well supervised :)
|
|
Luton tech, then Mander college Bedford for my C & G full tech.
|
|
Killigrew JMI (run now as then as two schools, infants and juniors) then Francis Bacon (Grammer) School which no longer exists. It had a name change at the time of being converted to academy status.
|
>>> Francis Bacon (Grammer) School which no longer exists.<<<
Surprise, surprise! :)
|
Francis Bacon (Grammer School)
I guess they were no good at that grammar and spelling stuff. Better off as an akademy.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 14 Jul 15 at 21:32
|
One thread on here asking for birth town and where you grew up and another thread asking what schools you went to.
If you are using real names to log on then some social engineering could be going on to identify you personally!?
|
|
We'll worry when someone starts a thread asking who we bank with.
|
|
I do all my financials with some nice Nigerian chaps over the interweb.
|
>> We'll worry when someone starts a thread asking who we bank with.
First National Bank of Nigeria. I have a problem some of you might be able to help me with, I have a very large (hundreds of thousands of dollars) cheque that i need to cash, anyone happy to cash this through your bank?
Name, account number, sort code and three digit check code on the back please...
|
At the time I started there, the yearly intake was circa 150 pupils, with 80 of them being grammar school kids. It was still called Francis Bacon Grammar School but in another two years had dropped the Grammar tag.
|
|
Valentines High School, Gants Hill, for GCSEs and A Levels.
|
|
.
Last edited by: Maisie's Dad on Tue 14 Jul 15 at 22:33
|
|
Comprehensive.Then Technical School in R/Dam.
|
>> Comprehensive.Then Technical School in R/Dam.
We used to have English Language lessons at our school. Sometimes we had back-to-back lessons, and we called it "Double English".
If you had the same system you could call it "Double Dutch".
.... I'll get my coat.
|
Chorlton Grammar School, South Manchester. Boys only 1957 to 1963. Discipline very low, what there was was maintained by violence by some masters. All black gowns and the strap.
Hated every minute except geography and German. Latin ?...Schmatin !. tried Russian instead but got no further than being able to write ' Manchester '.
Every lad had a job lined up so no-one in the last year bothered much. Never went back but I could see the cupola on the assembly hall roof from where I liv now !
Not gone very far....200 yds. A good point was the LMS/LNER running at the side of the school field. There's a good website with lots of photos of old boys and staff. The only females there were the dinner ladies who served the muck to us and the school secretary.
|
King's School, Rochester. 3 to 4 years approx (Common Entrance Exam, age 9 or 10 ish?).
Beckenham Grammar School (One year).
Sir Roger Manwood's School, Sandwich, Kent, as a boarder. This was a fully State run Grammar School, of about 350 pupils, so free tuition, which had a smallish boarding element. Now a massive Academy!
I still, to this day, remember the school cook - Miss Rabson, a vile harridan who smoked so much (yes - IN the kitchen) she had a nicotine stain from her lips to her nose!
Ah - school food. Memories!
Last edited by: Roger. on Wed 15 Jul 15 at 00:36
|
|
Huish's Grammar School, Taunton, Somerset. A pathetic establishment that tried to pretend it was a public school and didn't have much time for the sons of lorry drivers who happened to have passed what it still called 'the scholarship'. I left as soon as I was 15 with no qualifications of any sort and got an apprenticeship in the newspaper trade. That was when my education really began. Many years later, the Open University. Thank heavens for Harold Wilson and Jennie Lee.
|
It often feels as if we all went to the same school, and have come back together here for an old boys' reunion.
|
>> It often feels as if we all went to the same school, and have come
>> back together here for an old boys' reunion.
>>
>>
Most of us did a few terms at the Honest John Academy before we graduated to this college of further education.
|
"Most of us did a few terms at the Honest John Academy before we graduated to this college of further education."
I though we were all expelled
|
>> I though we were all expelled
>>
They had a strict uniform policy, and the headmaster was rather dogmatic and inflexible.
|
>> Every lad had a job lined up so no-one in the last year bothered much.
Of course farmers' sons tend to go into farming, and skills like carpentry are willingly passed on by fathers to interested children. But the only people I was at school with who had 'jobs lined up' were at public school: they were going to inherit their fathers' businesses and carry on being rich. Some of course had professional careers in law or academia, articled clerk, PhD... I was at school with one or two cats who were already pipe-smoking caricatures of what they would become in middle age. Struck a frivolous person like me as sad and bizarre.
There was a notorious hooligan at Beaumont who a few years later was a slightly louche banker in the City, butter wouldn't melt in his mouth.
|
|
Biggest criminal in my sixth form left - to join the police. We thought it well funny.
|
Botwell House Primary, Hayes Middx
St. Marks Secondary (formally Archbishop Myers), Hounslow Middx.
|
I had no idea that I'd taken the 11+ until my parents gave me a new camera for passing. The only thing that I can remember about the exam is that I struggled with the difference between 'breath' and 'breathe' in the English bit.
The Grammar school that I went to is in a small town that featured in a Top Gear episode.
The 3 amigos copied what schoolboys have done for donkey's years and removed/painted-over the last four letters of the town's name.
A virtual beer to the first to name it.
|
The 3 amigos copied what schoolboys have done for donkey's years and removed/painted-over the last
>> four letters of the town's name.
>>
>> A virtual beer to the first to name it.
>>
Tha' wouldn't be talking about "Penistone", would tha' lad?
|
>Tha' wouldn't be talking about "Penistone", would tha' lad?
Too easy?
|
I got a clue.
I was just saying to the missus "Look at that d***head on the telly".
She said to me "That's not the telly you old fool! Put your glasses back on and come away from that mirror".
Last edited by: Londoner on Fri 17 Jul 15 at 00:11
|
>> I had no idea that I'd taken the 11+ until my parents gave me a
>> new camera for passing. The only thing that I can remember about the exam is
>> that I struggled with the difference between 'breath' and 'breathe' in the English bit.
>>
I didn't take the 11+ or Common Entrance, the school had its own entrance exams, plus an interview.
I was baffled by the poem I was asked to comment on at the interview, about children playing cricket in the street using a pillar box. It's probably quite famous.
Never having taken any interest in games I had no idea what cricket was. They probably let me in as a novelty.
|
Well I can't find the poem, but I did find this - pretty sure this isn't used for the 11+ now!
www.poemhunter.com/best-poems/katherine-mansfield/the-pillar-box/
|
Bradford Boys Grammar School from 1970 on. Hated it with a vengeance. Worst days of my life, apart from chatting up the girls at nearby St Joseph's College
Never been back, nor do I intend to. A black tie dinner held annually by the Old Boys Association would be my biggest nightmare.
|
I left school early (they forgot to lock the gates)
But "school" is the right word in it.
Schooled to accept the inequality in our society.
Schooled to accept our humble position within it.
Schooled not to question authority.
Schooled not to think beyond what they told us.
|
Orton Longueville Grammar school and I can disprove Bromps theory that you only get one chance at the 11+.
I had to take it twice as there was 4 of us on the same marks the first time, and only two places available at grammar school.
The second time around the two with the highest marks got them and I was one of them.
I'd also disagree with Dog even though I left at 15 which was a year early it taught me so many things above the comprehensive.
It taught me to be proud of who I was.
It taught me to question and rebel to learn more.
It taught me elocution and social skills.
Probably the best was it gave me the courage to do so many things I would never have done.
....it also taught me I could sit and gaze at the pages of an Atlas and be anywhere I wanted to be in the world and I still do that today!
Pat
|
>>I'd also disagree with Dog even though I left at 15 which was a year early it taught me so many things above the comprehensive.
That little bit I posted was actually from my leftie friend in Plymouth. I learnt quite a lot at school, when I attended.
Mainly history and geography, with a bit of English thrown in for good measure. less than useless at maths though, mainly because I just wasn't interested in the subject.
|
>> I had to take it twice as there was 4 of us on the same
>> marks the first time, and only two places available at grammar school.
To be honest Pat the need for a tie break process simply reinforces my point about the random and destructive nature of the test. You succeeded but two others who's 'ability' was identical were denied the opportunities you had.
Any idea how it affected your respective lives?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 08:25
|
>>You succeeded but two others who's 'ability' was identical were denied the opportunities you had.
<<
Look upon it as a race with heats to decide the winner....I would say in the second exam the abilities of the winning two were superior.
How can you come to any other conclusion?
Pat
|
>> Look upon it as a race with heats to decide the winner....I would say in
>> the second exam the abilities of the winning two were superior.
I don't think kid's life chances should be determined by such a narrow margin of superiority determined in what? three papers over a day or so? An all ability comprehensive would have been able to handle all four of you appropriately.
And as you surely understand the point about second chances didn't relate to breaking a tied result but to fact that there was no further opportunity for late developers or those who'd had an 'off' day.
Quite different from the A level>Uni entrance scenario WP suggested was similar.
|
Some kids pass the 11+ and go to Grammar School. Other kids don't get the opportunity / change / call it whatever.
Bromp's position seems to be that nobody should get the opportunity so that the majority don't feel bad.
And that is the much beloved Lowest Common Denominator approach. As applied by left wing political organisations to school sports day.
Surely each child should go to the best school environment for them. Not be forced into a system so that others don't feel bad.
Now I detested my Grammar School. Hated every dying moment and it was bad for me. But others, int hat very same school, did very well.
Children are not all the same. Different attitutudes, different aptitudes, different characters and different capabilities and levels of intelligence.
Of what conceivable value is ignoring that and forcing everybody through the same system because it suits your political beliefs?
Standard left wing "I want education like this, so you and everybody else has to have education like this".
Life is competitive and so it should be. Whether we compete with a colleague, a peer or ourselves, it improves us.
I was top of my Maths class every year from when I was 7. I was a total chump at biology and sports. My mate Matt became a successful sportsman and Helena became a surgeon.
My mate Mike was a waster at school and a waster ever since.
Children are different and should all strive to be better.
Long may we have a not-labour Government.
|
"Children are not all the same. Different attitudes, different aptitudes, different characters and different capabilities and levels of intelligence."
Of course they are but to apply an inaccurate and unreliable test at the age of 11 to ascertain the 10% of the population who will have a superior education from the 90% who will have to make do with second best is unfair, inefficient wasteful and in my opinion just plain wrong.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 20:26
|
But you don't drag the 10% down to the 90%, you improve the education that the 90% are getting.
Which is why I pay £30k a year for private education when we're in the UK to shield my children from such nonsense.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 20:30
|
Yes you give then all an equal opportunity and share of resources
|
But not identical, not all rammed into the same.
I don't know one size of anything which fits all children, and that includes schools and education.
|
Oh, and within schools there should be streaming.
Rather than the leftie need to put everybody in a mixed class thus converging on uniform mediocrity.
|
And what's wrong with an exam at 11?
Because its just one shot? In that case have them annually. There you go.
|
>> Because its just one shot? In that case have them annually. There you go.
>>
I don't think that would work. You mean change schools later on after your in high school?
|
Neither do I.
The truth is all assessment, however its done, is a moment in time thing. That's inevitable.
Its not a good reason for stopping it, unless one can think of a better spot measure.
I hate this need for grey mediocrity.
As for pressure, I didn't even know I was taking an 11+, nor did I know what one was. When my parents received a letter telling me I was going to Grammar School I walked around to my teachers house in the idle of the holidays to find out what it meant.
|
>> The truth is all assessment, however its done, is a moment in time thing. That's
>> inevitable.
>>
>> Its not a good reason for stopping it, unless one can think of a better
>> spot measure.
Like continuous assessment?
I don't have a problem with streaming, A single one shot moment in time might not be the best way to do it tho.
|
When I was at school streaming was assessed annually. Seemed to work, and there was up and down movement.
But if one is going to make a decision about what type of secondary school best suits a child, I can't see much alternative to an 11+.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sat 18 Jul 15 at 21:29
|
>> When I was at school streaming was assessed annually. Seemed to work, and there was
>> up and down movement.
>>
>> But if one is going to make a decision about what type of secondary school
>> best suits a child, I can't see much alternative to an 11+.
I don't see a problem with moving children between the types of school as appropriate at a later date. A decision at 11 may be too early for some.
|
|
I am not sure, but I thought there was a 13+ in my time as well. I'm sure some kids moved to the Grammar School at 13 ish.
|
>> I am not sure, but I thought there was a 13+ in my time as
>> well. I'm sure some kids moved to the Grammar School at 13 ish.
IIRC 13+ referred to 'common entrance' for public schools. The West Riding at least moderated the effects of 11+ by what was called the Thorne Scheme - continuous asessment in what we now call yr 6. There was no second bite at 13.
And of course half the children at 11+ were still only 10.
|
I was good at exams, and there was anyway an important private element in my complex and haphazard schooling.
Just as well I was adaptable and interested in things, because all that variety could have bewildered someone less sprauncy and conceited.
I have many treasured memories.
It's obvious by the way that if you screw up the 11 plus or any public exam you should be allowed to try again. Without those other chances I'd be dead in a ditch by now.
Is it in The Brothers Karamazov that there's this evil old forty-year-old undergraduate? There but for the, er, ...
|
>> Which is why I pay £30k a year for private education when we're in the
>> UK to shield my children from such nonsense.
Good for you. I'm sure you're able to Google UK median income without my help.
|
>>Good for you. I'm sure you're able to Google UK median income without my help.
Damn right its good for me.
Otherwise I too would have to deal with the non-competing, LCD, bland greyness, hoping for average, awful establishments that others have to face.
My heart goes out to parents in such a situation.
I am know some state schools are good, there is an excellent one in Aylesbury for example. But I equally know how appalling many of them are, typically run by smug, know nothing, never been in the real world, left wing teachers.
The advantage of a disposable income? You can pay to avoid inadequate busybodies who would otherwise like to tell you how to live your life.
When my children joined their UK school the Head said something along the lines of..
"We reward achievement. We will like you more because you try hard, but we will reward you because you achieve".
"And pretty much every child will represent this school at some activity before they leave us".
And this is a school where you have to pay, the parents have to pass an interview and the children have to pass tests.
Money is not normally something I gloat about, nor am particularly thankful for, although I earned every single penny, but my God it makes one's children's education a lot easier.
Bring back grammar schools, bring back tests and exams, bring back sports days with winners and losers, bring back competitiveness between children, bring back aspiration.
|
>> Bromp's position seems to be that nobody should get the opportunity so that the majority
>> don't feel bad.
With respect Mark that is a complete misrepresentation of my position.
My first point is that all children should have an education appropriate to their needs, abilities and aptitude. My second is that sorting them more or less irrevocably into sheep and goats based on a few hours examination at age 11 is a useless tool to achieving that end. That is a philosophical one rather than anything founded in (what you regard as) left wing politics.
The preferred solution is that all children progress together at age 11, to a mixed ability comprehensive school. Within that school they are streamed, or preferably setted, so that they are taught at a pace and to a level appropriate to their performance in individual subjects. They move between sets/streams on performance and teacher recommendation
And that was broadly the education my kids got here.
|
>>The preferred solution is that all children progress together at age 11, to a mixed ability comprehensive school.
"The"?? YOUR preferred situation, not mine. I prefer all children to get an education closer to their needs than simply the LCD one size fits all approach.
And sometimes that means different atmospheres, different discipline levels, etc. etc.
The main difference seems to be your need for them to all go to the same school and achieve the bland, colourless mediocrity so often preferred by certain political persuasions.
Is it driven by some fear that someone else might get something better?
>>My first point is that all children should have an education appropriate to their needs, abilities and aptitude.
No it isn't, you want them all to have the same, not the most appropriate.
Also, you are not content with determining the education that your children may have, you wish to determine the education that all other children may have to.
Now, that's not what I would call "(what you regard as) left wing politics." but it is what I see common in may supporters of left wing politics.
|
>> No it isn't, you want them all to have the same, not the most appropriate.
If you decide to represent my views as the reverse of what I say then debate is pointless.
|
>> then debate is pointless.
So quit if its too difficult.
|
>> Long may we have a not-labour Government.
>>
What is particularly galling is that they deem it necessary for us to endure the comprehensive system, yet send their own children to selective schools.
Nice.
|
>>What is particularly galling is that they deem it necessary for us to endure the comprehensive system, yet send their own children to selective schools.
They are experts on what you and yours *should* do, they do not associate that with what they and theirs wish to do.
|
>> What is particularly galling is that they deem it necessary for us to endure the
>> comprehensive system, yet send their own children to selective schools.
it's a difficult one to defend but while (a) we don't actually have a comprehensive system and (b) five years from 11 to GCSE is a one chance thing it's understandable.
I do wish though that the Blairs had sent their kids to Islington Green.
|
>>(b) five years from 11 to GCSE is a one chance thing
Oh what utter b*******.
Its an exam, not the end of life. Why wish to ban something you don't like? Why not focus on improving what you do like?
|
>>t's a difficult one to defend but while (a) we don't actually have a comprehensive system and (b) five years from 11 to GCSE is a one chance thing it's understandable.
And no, it is NOT understandable. It is crass hypocrisy.
"This is what you lot should do, but we're not doing it because we know its not good enough".
"We can force you into it because you don;t have money, but what do we care, we do".
How easy it is to sanctimoniously and self-righteously impose things that one does not have to suffer from oneself.
|
|
By the way, I am back from our fishing trip, can you tell? Hope you enjoy your French trip. Any activity/destination in particular?
|
>> By the way, I am back from our fishing trip, can you tell?
Not really, seems to me you have only changed the lure......
|
8-)
Actually I don't fish, No. 1 does. But she seemed to have a great time.
I spent a great deal of time either sat in the sun or by the campfire, depending on the hour, reading and drinking.
A b***** eagle nicked my bacon sandwich one morning, and that was the most excitement of the week.
|
and (b) five years from 11 to GCSE is a one chance thing it's
>> understandable.
Are you saying that you find it understandable for senior Labour politicians to send their children to school that they'd deny the rest of the population, unless that population could afford to go for a fee paying one?
Are you defending that gross hypocrisy?
For my part, I'd find it normal for any parent to want the best for their children, inc senior Labour people... but, if I thought like that, I wouldn't then introduce a system that denied everyone else that chance.
|
>> Are you defending that gross hypocrisy?
Not really. More a case of putting their 'defence' on record.
|
>> >> Long may we have a not-labour Government.
>> >>
>> What is particularly galling is that they deem it necessary for us to endure the
>> comprehensive system, yet send their own children to selective schools.
>>
>> Nice.
I completely fail to understand this point even disregarding that many believe comprehensive education to be superior in terms of its benefit to society as a whole, which is the only fair way to look at it.
As a government, or an education minister responsible for state education there is a duty to make the state system as good as it can be subject to all the constraints upon it. As a parent, there is a desire to get the best education one can for one's children.
That applies whether the government or the minister is Labour, Conservative, or anything else and whether the state system is comprehensive or not.
|
>> I completely fail to understand this point
The point is it's out of order to think your own children should be given the best education they can get... yet applying policies that prevent the general population doing the same damned thing...
... and if you were minded to try to twist the facts and say the system you've created (comprehensives) is in fact the best one.... you'd send your children to them, wouldn't you, because they are the best, are they not?
|
|
One thing I recall from school - "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" :-)
|
>> One thing I recall from school - "All animals are equal, but some animals are
>> more equal than others" :-)
Four legs good two legs bad better.
|
Southwell Minster Grammar School. Assembly in the minster every morning, around thirty boys in each year, education mainly skewed towards music, arts and languages, science facilities very basic and absolutely no practical stuff like woodwork. Good on sports; fuelled my enjoyment of cricket and rugby. The round ball game was only played at break times and not much then; no great loss to me. Musical participation was encouraged and I learned trumpet and piano, and also how to sing and speak in public; the latter two served me far better in later life than the instrumental prowess ever did!
Most of our teachers were of the generation who'd lived through the last war, and our French master (who passed on only recently at the ripe old age of 98) had served with distinction with SOE. The textbooks tended to be tatty and threadbare, but the quality of teaching was very high.
I have mixed memories; I wasn't a good student (probably be diagnosed borderline ADHD today) but on the other hand it wasn't a bad school. I didn't fit in very well but they did their best for me with the limited means available; I'd probably have sunk without trace at a bigger school. Overall, good memories of the school; the most lasting one being that magnificent church organ playing every morning as we walked into the cathedral.
|
I enjoyed boarding school and had we had the money would have loved to have sent our daughter to one.
We went to a #BBCQT held at Worksop College and it was noticeable how grown up and confident were the pupils who acted as guides and ushers.
My wife and I are chuffed to little meatballs to know that our grandchildren are going, in September, to a very decently rated boarding school in Yorkshire.
The facilities are out of this world; we have seen the school's DVD and we will be going up to the school later this month for uniform purchasing day.
Initial uniforms are circa £600 per child and we had managed to save enough for Grandpa & Grandma to cover that for this year. Ongoing transfers are planned, as it is our pleasure to do our limited best to help out.
|
>> I enjoyed boarding school
God, I didn't. One sort of came to terms with it though given time and a measure of stoicism, and luck actually.
The important thing isn't the boarding, which tends to be a bit traumatic at first even when well organized. It's the 'education' and attitudes imparted by the school. I was lucky on the whole in this area.
|
>> >>
>> God, I didn't. One sort of came to terms with it though given time and
>> a measure of stoicism, and luck actually.
>>
>>
I did six months at a catholic boarding school. Should I ever do a spell behind bars I'd imagine it wouldn't be much different.
|
>> I did six months at a catholic boarding school.
I was old enough to cope by the time I went to that one. The really traumatic one was the very nice Hill School in Ceylon. It wasn't it's fault, it was a good place. The trauma was being just 8 and separated from your parents for the first time ever by 100 miles of mountain road. That took a bit of getting used to.
The parents worried about me and felt a bit guilty.
|
>> I did six months at a catholic boarding school. Should I ever do a spell
>> behind bars I'd imagine it wouldn't be much different.
>>
ISTR Jeffrey Archer saying that anybody who'd survived boarding school would rapidly acclimatise to a gaol.
|
My wife and I are chuffed to little meatballs to know that our grandchildren are
>> going, in September, to a very decently rated boarding school in Yorkshire.
Is it CEA funded place? I remember you saying your son in law was in the army.
|
>> My wife and I are chuffed to little meatballs to know that our grandchildren
>> are
>> >> going, in September, to a very decently rated boarding school in Yorkshire.
>>
>>
>> Is it CEA funded place? I remember you saying your son in law was in
>> the army.
>>
Yes, but despite that and deep discounts for UK Armed Forces' nippers, it still calls for a quite substantial input from parents - a struggle for those, like my SIL who is a Senior NCO.
Luckily his speciality is in demand by the Army and he's just been offered and accepted, a two year extension to his service.
The CEA scheme is MUCH tighter now than it used to be (defence spending cuts etc.) and is by no means easy to get. Applicants jobs MUST be in demand by the Forces to receive it - it's certainly not automatic these days.
|
Yes, but despite that and deep discounts for UK Armed Forces' nippers, it still calls for a quite substantial input from parents - a struggle for those, like my SIL who is a Senior NCO.
>> Luckily his speciality is in demand by the Army and he's just been offered and accepted, a two year extension to his service.
>> The CEA scheme is MUCH tighter now than it used to be (defence spending cuts etc.) and is by no means easy to get. Applicants jobs MUST be in demand by the Forces to receive it - it's certainly not automatic these days.
No very few get CEA these days. I can't remember the figures but i think it's less than 5%. Usually the rules revolve around an expectation that they will be posted in a couple of years.
I know even with the help it costs someone i know about £3k a year in the part of the fee they are expected to pay and trips uniforms etc.
|
Rog
If your grandchildren are going to my local boarding/ day school in N Yorks ewe are more than welcome to stay at my humble abode, which is less than a mile away.
|
Did anyone else have fee paying grammar schools? There were only two grammar schools near me when i was entering high school. Not everyone did the 11+ if iirc you had to apply to take it, unlike some areas. I think the fees for one of the grammar schools in today's money was £9k. Whatever that was equivalent to when i was 11 i don't know but it may as well been £9m. No way could my parents afforded school fees like that.
The area I'm in now the local council makes every child take the 11+ and all grammar schools are free in the area.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 19 Jul 15 at 07:31
|
Up until around 1975 there was a category of grammar establishments known as Direct Grant Schools. While partly funded by fees they also had a grand directly from the Education Ministry to fund scholarship places which were, IIRC, free. The LEA may also have been allowed to purchase places but I'm not sure about that.
They were abolished by the Wilson government and most became wholly fee paying.
Bradford Grammar mentioned upthread by Legacylad was an example as was its sister establishment in Leeds.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 19 Jul 15 at 09:27
|
The grant system came back though in 1988 ? Although they were free. I did a bit reading and seems some councils block bought school places at some grammar schools for local pupils.
Grammar schools did continue and state run. In the area i live in now it was free in the 90s and all children did the entrance exam. Although i understand that was/is very unusual. I think now it's called a selective academy.
doing some reading about schools in general it does seem there is a mish mash of systems, it takes a bit of reading to get your ( mine anyway) head around all the different types of schools.
|
>> doing some reading about schools in general it does seem there is a mish mash
>> of systems, it takes a bit of reading to get your ( mine anyway) head
>> around all the different types of schools.
Mrs B is a teacher of 30yrs standing and working towards a second career as an educational academic. She struggles to recall all the permutations of funding/organisation.
Nearly all the secondaries round here are comprehensive academies. Some are stand alone while others, particularly those that OFSTED have criticised, are part of 'chains'. Most of England is the same. There is (IMHO) a massive democratic deficit in these arrangements where power previously vested in the Local Authority is now exercised from Whitehall via Commissioners appointed by the Minister.
Wales and Scotland have their own devolved set ups - Scotland's was always different even before the creation of the Holyrood Parliament.
|
Doing a bit more reading it seems there was even grammars in the area that offered boarding. They still do but call themselves selective academies. Quite unusual that i think. But lincs is one of the last counties to have the grammar system.
Not sure about the democratic oversight or lack of. Most want their kids to go to a good school. I don't think they are too worried about who controls it. I think the man in the street would rather have central gov sort it than the council. Generally thought of as a law on to themselves. Probably unfairly but there we go.
|
>> Rog
>> If your grandchildren are going to my local boarding/ day school in N Yorks ewe
>> are more than welcome to stay at my humble abode, which is less than a
>> mile away.
>>
Ta for the offer, but we are only a little over an hour and a half away and are having the family stay with us prior to a convoy of two cars leaving for the visit.
|
SQ 4 LB
>> Ta for the offer, but we are only a little over an hour and a
>> half away and are having the family stay with us prior to a convoy of
>> two cars leaving for the visit.
>>
I, think having looked at your Yorkshire location, it's a fair way south of that: nearer to York.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Jul 15 at 00:53
|
it's a fair way south of
>> that: nearer to York.
>>
>>
I thought it might be that one. I know they advertise quite a lot to the forces. I understand the school is very good.
|
They went for a "taster" day last month.
Granddaughter (8, going on 16, bookworm ) completely unfazed; "it was nice to work in a quiet classroom".
Grandson (11 and into IT & science ) somewhat overwhelmed at first, seeing a big room full of over a hundred children, but settled in fine, in class, and loved it.
Xing fingers they settle in to boarding though. Big culture shock.
|
Not Giggleswick then. I know they have a 'cadet force' because it few years ago I bought a LR 90 Defender from the school. It was used for taking the cadets to the rifle range but for insurance purposes they changed to a Disco.
Giggleswick now has part time flexi boarding...the son of a friend stays overnight 3 or 4 times a week. Good sports facilities, lots of overseas students, interesting lectures in the R Whiteley theatre which I often attend.
|
Denbigh High School, Luton
Luton VIth Form College (they seem to have demolished it since I left!)
Bedford College of Higher Education.
|
Minor public, went at 6, left at 18. Hated 99% of it, and I turned out not to be either academic or sporty or indeed anything at all.
Had I gone to the local comp I'm confident I'd have hated it even more and but turned out much the same. Spent most of my life wishing I could be just brighter, but never cared a hoot about sporty games or competition of any sort.
To this day, unasked and rejected, they still insist on sending me the termly school magazine, and it's full of depressingly smug stories about ex pupils getting the Fields medal on a Monday, running a small country in their spare time and picking up a couple of Nobel's on Wednesday on the way to be knighted whilst managing ICI. It was always like that and entirely useless to me.
|
>> magazine, and it's full of depressingly smug stories about ex pupils Cheating and getting the Fields medal
>> on a Monday, running a small country in their spare time after organising a coup and resulting genocide and picking up a
>> couple of Nobel's on Wednesday on the way to being knighted buying a knighthood whilst managing ICI into the ground
Is an alternative view you could adopt.
|
I can't tell you how much better that makes me feel. No really, I can't.
:)
|
>> I can't tell you how much better that makes me feel. No really, I can't.
>> :)
To be honest, I'd be proud of any of them.
|
>>
>> >> magazine, and it's full of depressingly smug stories about ex pupils
An unintentionally funny obituary in the old boys mag from some years ago:
"We are saddened to hear of the recent death of Binns Minor, lost while exploring in the Arabian Desert.
He read Geography at Lampeter."
Better with chaps than maps, perhaps.
|
So Where Did We All Go to School? - Zero
