THERE has been much controversy prompted by reports that Theresa May wants to see a return to selective education and the grammar school system.
It is important to point out – because you would not know this if you only read national newspapers or watch the national TV news – that any such proposals would only apply in England.
The Welsh Government runs education in Wales and the chances of a Labour administration straying from the comprehensive school system are less than zero.
But why does the prime minister apparently want to lift the ban on the creation of grammar schools?
Well, if reports are to be believed (and there has been no denial from the government) Mrs May thinks selective education “benefits social mobility and (makes) sure that people have the opportunity to capitalise on all of their talents”.
Education secretary Justine Greening says the subject is in her ‘in-tray’ but has also said lifting the ban would not necessarily mean a return to the old days of the 11-plus exam, and traditional grammar and secondary modern schools.
Ms Greening says that is because education is no longer a ‘binary world’ – whatever that means.
I have a particular perspective on this subject because I attended both grammar and comprehensive schools.
I grew up in Cwmbran and attended Fairwater Comprehensive School in the late Seventies before moving to Worcestershire and taking a 12-plus exam to gain entrance to the Royal Grammar School in the city.
After two years I begged my parents to move me to our local comprehensive such was my dislike of what, to me, seemed like an antiquated system even then.
That is a purely personal view, of course, and I wouldn't advocate using it as a basis for education policy.
There are many people who will have achieved much through the grammar school system, just as there are many who have done so via the comprehensive school system.
I just fear that a return to selective education at the age of 11 will further expand some of the inequalities we already have in our state schools.
Everyone knows there are secondary schools deemed to be ‘better’ than others, whether by virtue of location or academic performance.
The result is parents doing whatever they can to ensure their children are in the catchment area of the ‘better’ schools.
Inevitably, that means those with the money to do so are able to move to those areas.
Those with less money have to stay where they are.
It is that imbalance I would rather see addressed before a return to selective education is mooted.
Let’s get the current system working properly first.
For me, that means ensuring every child has an equal chance no matter where they live or how much their parents earn.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel