One of Theresa May’s ideas has been to lift the ban on grammar schools and give existing schools the chance to become selective. The media and even the currently disunited Labour Party have all formed a consensus of opposition against May’s proposals, which would potentially see new grammar schools open for the first time in England and Wales since the 1970s.
Alongside this are the ever-present and extremely valid concerns about access to higher education. With the first universities coming forward saying they will incrementally increase tuition fees from the academic year 2017/18, and the restructuring of maintenance grants received by students from low-income families into loans, there is a lot to be worried about in terms of ensuring people from all socioeconomic backgrounds are given the opportunities they deserve to succeed academically and to boost their career prospects.
However, I believe bringing back the grammar school could be a good thing for our education system as a whole, or at least are a good starting point for a fundamental rethink of the purpose of education in this country. They could provide a more tailored system that works for pupils rather than forcing them to work in an environment in which they are bored and unhappy. They could also enable children and teenagers who are academically-minded to learn in an environment conducive to the kind of critical thinking required at university level.
Yet, I completely understand there are risks with this kind of approach. Some of the concerns aired by opponents of May’s proposals include writing off children at the age of 11 based on a single test—an incorrect assumption as the proposals give the opportunity for those who fail one year to take the test again the next year, ensuring no-one gets left behind.
Others argue that grammars are not socially inclusive and never have been. Although many of the existing grammar schools do suffer from problems when it comes to diversity of socioeconomic backgrounds, this can be explained by factors including their location, many in traditionally middle class areas, and middle class parents paying for 11+ tuition for their children.
Onto social exclusivity, there is a point to be made in that grammar schools can easily be manipulated by families who have the money to pay for tuition for their children to pass the entrance exam—at whatever age that might be. In the case of my grammar school, 35 of the Year 7 entrants in one year came from an independent preparatory school, the largest percentage of the year group. The second highest number of entrants came from a state primary school, approximately 22 of the year group. Overall, the issue here is clear. This is one aspect of the grammar school that doesn’t put it in a favourable light.
It also has something to do with the metrics by which deprivation is measured in terms of education. I have reservations about measuring the percentage of pupils from deprived backgrounds in schools based on whether or not they are eligible for Free Schools Meals, which excludes those whose parents are in low-paid work and receiving Universal Credit for instance. Most of the statistics about socioeconomic background in grammars use this metric, which isn’t to say that it doesn’t have a point, but perhaps doesn’t tell the full story. Regardless, this is, in my opinion, the most important argument against reintroducing grammar schools.
I only attended a grammar school in Years 12 and 13. I didn’t take the 11+ exam because, frankly, I would never have passed it. I knew this at the age of 11, and coming from a single-parent family on tax credits my mum certainly didn’t have the funds to afford tuition. I attended a local secondary modern school and enjoyed my time there. The pastoral support and sense of community at the secondary modern was, in my view, far superior to that of the grammar school. But that didn’t stop me from noticing how some in my year and in others years were simply not being challenged enough across the board in terms of our academic ability. Yes, there were some fantastic teachers who really did challenge us to the full, but a majority were more willing (again, understandably) to get the class one mark above a C grade at GCSE than encouraging us to enjoy and think critically about the subject in question. In my opinion, that’s a dereliction of a school’s duty, which should be to raise the attainment of all. The current system, however, means that all students are taught the same, very little is tailored to their interests, and many, but by no means all, come out of the system feeling disenfranchised and worthless.
Many people need to realise that not everyone is academically-minded, and understand that this is no bad thing. You might be a master essay writer in History, but someone else might be a technological whizz-kid who excels at Graphic Design. The introduction of a system whereby more academic pupils could attend schools that were designed as academic schools, and where more vocational pupils could attend schools designed to be more vocational, might lead to a major culture shift in Britain about the value of vocational skills and might improve issues like youth unemployment in the country.
Finally, to my point about segregation in education. Many seem to leap to attack the prospect of grammar schools returning, saying it brings about unfairness in our education system and leads to a sense of failure that stifles aspiration. But what of private schools? These are institutions which are accessible only to those whose parents have enough money to pay the fees. It is a known fact that most private schools, especially public schools, are better equipped to give children the education they need to succeed in life. Many politicians, actors, academics and the like have been educated at these schools, and many of these very people berate state schools (therefore, schools with no fees) that want to give academically-minded pupils from all backgrounds the same environment and facilities they had in their youth
Overall, if they are to be brought back, grammar schools will need reform. They cannot be the same beast they were in the mid-20th century. But I truly think they can be successful. They can also ensure that people from social backgrounds can receive the preparation needed to go to top higher education institutions. It could even spur on development in vocational subjects at top universities, allowing people who under the present system would not consider university at all the chance to develop practical skills at a higher education level. We may rightly be cautious about what the current Government has planned for the reintroduction of grammar schools, but if they’re done well then I think a shake-up of a system that is far from perfect would be no bad thing.
