Talk:Debates on the grammar school

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 December 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Argument in support

The article said that grammar schools give the best education to the best pupils. This is very perjorative, and inaccurately describes the aim of the system. It is intended by the tripartite system, which includes the grammar school, that the grammar school gives an appropriate education to the most academically able pupils, but that the system also gives an appropriate and good education to pupils with other abilities. 'Best education' is an issue of how this aim is carried out (in practice, unfairly), but that is a resource failing, not a system one. Sandpiper

"The article said that grammar schools give the best education to the best pupils. This is very perjorative, and inaccurately describes the aim of the system". I'm afraid this is the truth though! The Grammar School system worked and Harold Wilson, hypocritically a Grammar School student himself, got shot of them! 193.113.57.161 17:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Name me a Labour party leader that came from a Comprehensive and I'll back down. The fact is, now that the Grammar-School generation has left the Labour party, they now rely on Public-school students (ie Blair). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-2191023.html --Albert 23:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

well I have read some more about the tripartite system since commenting above, so it would appear my own experience was really a bipartite educational system. Anyway, the system seems to have been criticised for teaching students attending grammar schools, chosen for their existing academic ability, to exhibit further good academic ability. To be blunt, stick someone dim in my class at school and he would have been playing up all the time because the education would have been wholly inapporpriate and in no way the best for him. Although I suspect it is correct that grammar schools enjoyed a disproportionate share of the cash, the actual syllabus would not have been well designed for those that 'failed' the entrance exams. So I come back to this issue of criticising grammar schools for providing the 'best' education for those attending, and the meaning of best in context. Sandpiper 18:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

This last para seems to think that children are either "dim", or not. I live in an area where Grammar Schools are still the norm. My three children have attended them, some having started in a Comp. To say that a child who fails the Kent Test would "play up" as it couldn't cope really shows no understanding of children or education. Take the majority of an average Comp, place them in a Grammar and they will do very well indeed. The fact remains, Grammar Schools supply an excellent education for the children lucky enough to attend them. But does Great Britain want a handful of well educated adults, or does it require something more ? Selecting at age eleven means a very raw deal for many naturally bright children . Milo 193.113.57.161 17:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but not selecting means a very raw deal for any bright people! Dewarw (talk) 00:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General standard

My term report for this article would be, 'tries hard, could do better'. This is a big big subject and I am not convinced the article currently is either as well organised as it could be, nor does the arguments justice. Sandpiper

It's crap. There is a point by point debate, which seems to have longer points against grammar schools, and then a 'wider implications' section. Which doesn't discuss any wider implications, simply makes some points again, but from a pro-tripartite point of view.

It is a disgrace to Wikipedia. It is mass of WP:original research from start to finish. I have tagged the obvious claims but it seems to me that it is inescapabably biased. Two opposing biases don't make a neutral article. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

An excellent article, in my opinion. Richardpd (talk) 14:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)