Grammar school supporters optimistic' 18-year-old ban will be lifted by May Govt

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...ill-be-lifted/

Grammar School supporters optimistic’ 18-year ban will be lifted by Theresa May's new government

Prime Minister Theresa May

Theresa May's elevation to the highest office in the land has raised hopes that her new government could open a wave of grammar schools across England as part of a dramatic overhaul of state education.

The Prime Minister has expressed support for parents who want more places in academically selective schools, and backed plans for a grammar to be expanded in her own constituency.

Under a law created by Tony Blair in 1998, no new grammar schools are allowed to open in England.

Senior Tories believe Mrs May – who attended a grammar school – will be open to reviewing that ban in her drive to help more working-class children receive a high-quality education.

Such a move would delight many Conservative MPs and educational traditionalists who were disappointed when David Cameron ruled out creating new grammar schools.

There are 163 state grammars left in England, and many are regularly at the top of academic league tables, beating even top private schools.

However, they are now hugely oversubscribed. Senior sources have indicated Mrs May’s team could review the ban as part of her focus on social mobility.

Journalist and author Peter Hitchens was one of few public figures in recent years to continue pushing for selective education

Graham Brady, the MP for Altrincham and Sale West, resigned from Mr Cameron’s front bench in 2007 in protest at his refusal to support new grammars.

On Saturday night, Mr Brady, the chairman of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers, said he was “optimistic” Mrs May would end the “silly” ban.

“It was absurd that Labour legislated in 1998 to ban new grammar schools, however much people may want them in a particular area,” he said.

“I hope that the new Government will seek an opportunity to repeal this silly ban as soon as possible.”

As a local MP, Mrs May gave her support this year to plans for a grammar school to open a satellite campus in her Maidenhead constituency.

The Prime Minister also served as shadow education secretary 15 years ago when her policies included overturning Mr Blair’s ban on new grammars.

Please please please please please let this be true.

I have always had three core policies I want implemented. The first was Britain's withdrawal from the European Union (achieved), the second was the limiting of mass immigration (will be possible following EU exit and likely) and the third was reintroducing grammar school education.

By 2020, who knows, I could have all three wishes fulfilled.

Thoughts?

[Lucy]

I have no issue with grammar schools and personally think they are a good idea, seems an odd thing to ban to me :S

[dbgtz]

This means nothing if there's not adequate funding to begin with.

[-:Undertaker:-]

This means nothing if there's not adequate funding to begin with.

There's plenty of funding out there.

Sink comprehensive schools in the poorest areas of this country are constantly given huge space age style buildings, rebuilding programmes, merges, extra deprivation funding and time and time again the results do not change because the problem isn't the school books, it isn't the buildings (although architecture does have a link in terms of discipline) and it isn't the lack of a free tablet. It's the fact that comprehensive education in itself is flawed. I sat in an outer city comprehensive school of 1,300 pupils and could see for myself how it was completely unmanageable in sheer size as well as absurd to have people who were willing to listen to history, the sciences and maths sitting in the same classroom as people who had no interest/struggled/did better in a non-academic environment. The bored faces of the academic elite in my class one day in science (of which I was not a part) are still in my mind.

The real issue with social mobility in this country isn't funding, it is how wealthier areas like Kent have grammar schools where as the likes of Knowsley do not.

[dbgtz]

There's plenty of funding out there.

Sink comprehensive schools in the poorest areas of this country are constantly given huge space age style buildings, rebuilding programmes, merges, extra deprivation funding and time and time again the results do not change because the problem isn't the school books, it isn't the buildings (although architecture does have a link in terms of discipline) and it isn't the lack of a free tablet. It's the fact that comprehensive education in itself is flawed. I sat in an outer city comprehensive school of 1,300 pupils and could see for myself how it was completely unmanageable in sheer size as well as absurd to have people who were willing to listen to history, the sciences and maths sitting in the same classroom as people who had no interest/struggled/did better in a non-academic environment. The bored faces of the academic elite in my class one day in science (of which I was not a part) are still in my mind.

The real issue with social mobility in this country isn't funding, it is how wealthier areas like Kent have grammar schools where as the likes of Knowsley do not.

To be honest, when I say funding I mean to fund the actual staff, not the useless free tablets which I'm quite strongly opposed to. School books do make some difference since for some subjects you do need to keep up to date and buildings do make some difference as you said.

[Empired]

There's plenty of funding out there.

Sink comprehensive schools in the poorest areas of this country are constantly given huge space age style buildings, rebuilding programmes, merges, extra deprivation funding and time and time again the results do not change because the problem isn't the school books, it isn't the buildings (although architecture does have a link in terms of discipline) and it isn't the lack of a free tablet. It's the fact that comprehensive education in itself is flawed. I sat in an outer city comprehensive school of 1,300 pupils and could see for myself how it was completely unmanageable in sheer size as well as absurd to have people who were willing to listen to history, the sciences and maths sitting in the same classroom as people who had no interest/struggled/did better in a non-academic environment. The bored faces of the academic elite in my class one day in science (of which I was not a part) are still in my mind.

The real issue with social mobility in this country isn't funding, it is how wealthier areas like Kent have grammar schools where as the likes of Knowsley do not.

Funding was an issue at my school but my county is the lowest funded in the country so that's unsurprising and obviously isn't the case everywhere.

I do agree with everything you're saying about the education system being ineffective at the moment Dan but I really don't think reintroducing grammar schools is the answer. I wish they'd ask some goddamn teachers and normal people working in the education system what they think needs fixing rather than just shoving some reforms down their throats that they may not want.

[Red]

I went through grammar system and they are still the norm here but my area is unique in that selection is at 14 (gcses and a levels only) instead of 11. I preferred it as I had people in my class of similar ability and people who actually wanted to learn. At 14 you have a better idea if you want to go down an academic or vocational route. They are fine, as long as those who don't make it in still have a access to a good education and don't get left behind!!

[Red]

Also n.ireland always outperforms England and Wales in results. Deffo down to the grammar system being so prevalent here.

[Zak]

If a lot of them are stupidly over subscribed I guess it makes perfect sense