I'd like to learn a language.

[Ruby]

I agree with you, goldenquagsire, but perhaps you ought to have made it extra clear that, of course, all state schools should be well-funded and, conversely, none should be bought more computers than it needs. These two things seem obvious, but in your fervour you almost give the impression you deny them, when I know you accept them completely.

 

[Tailsy]

The UK is one of the most divided societies in the western world, wtf! 80% of the marketable wealth is owned by the wealthiest 20% of the population (although that's not exactly new).

 

[opaltiger]

Sorry, I forgot: how dare anybody remotely intelligent get a penny in funding, just because of perceived class divides (those perceptions in fact being bullshit in my experience)? How dare we encourage anybody who actually shows promise? No - just neglect them during education, and then tax them silly when they're doing the jobs that keep the country running.

I find it telling that you assume the people who run the country are those who went to grammar schools. And you say the class divide is merely perceived?

 

[Dannichu]

Downside is that Labour's vendetta against the middle class and anybody who has a chance of doing remotely well in any area means that we get severely underfunded (see: crumbling walls and severe lack of exercise books in our school while local comprehensives get state funding to build sports pitches and buy hundreds of computers).

Sorry, I forgot: how dare anybody remotely intelligent get a penny in funding, just because of perceived class divides (those perceptions in fact being bullshit in my experience)? How dare we encourage anybody who actually shows promise? No - just neglect them during education, and then tax them silly when they're doing the jobs that keep the country running

This "goes to a state school = unintelligent, has no promise, will never have any say in running the country" which, whether you realize it or not, you are implicitly saying, makes me genuinely sad. And angry. Yes, the schools I've been to weren't very good or high up the league tables, and yes, my parents don't make a lot of money or have any influence, but I and the people I went to school with don't deserve to be written off like this. You sound like a Daily Mail article.

(and if 546 came back, you'd give me over to the aliens)

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

I was going to make some sort of Vlad brand annoying reply but I'm genuinely lost for words at how spiteful that comment was, haha. As an upper-middle class person (oh god i'm actually discussing an expensive cruise with a boy who's boating around scandinavia to his six houses, the bourgeois burns me) I can assert for sure that we have extremely easy lives but the biggest hard-on for complaining than anyone could ever imagine.

I thought Britain was run by boarding school lads raised on sexual abuse and corporal punishment though, so at least I learnt something new.

edit: Hey Ruby, we can do Ancient Greek classes in my school too! Except no one does because no one cares about culture as long as they have money in my school haha

 

[goldenquagsire]

I agree with you, goldenquagsire, but perhaps you ought to have made it extra clear that, of course, all state schools should be well-funded and, conversely, none should be bought more computers than it needs. These two things seem obvious, but in your fervour you almost give the impression you deny them, when I know you accept them completely.

this is true, and it's what I was getting at with

the pupils in your local comp probably don't get all that, even if they have nice playing fields.

basically, I'm sure both schools are getting similar funding, but it might be that they're just using it in different ways.

I thought Britain was run by boarding school lads raised on sexual abuse and corporal punishment though, so at least I learnt something new.

it kinda is, 'fraid so.

 

[Lorem Ipsum]

You say all of this as if I'm some kind of discriminatory, snobbish person: which is quite far from the truth, I can guarantee. I love the way how you seem to think of the middle class as the root of all evil, as well. My argument is that education should be a route out of poverty - thus selective schools should be open for any person regardless of background to get high quality teaching in a group of high attaining peers, and go on to do the jobs, such as lawyers, doctors, teachers, etc. that I was referring to.

I believe that a dual-tiered education system would work - provided that selection for grammar schools was handled fairly and not just abused by middle class parents using private tutors, which I am firmly against. The brightest students get pushed more in a group of those of similarly high ability, thus driving them on to attain more than they would in a mixed ability group. The other students - those who don't attain as highly - get educated among their peer group at the comprehensive schools, where teachers are no longer stretched to cater for different ability groups, and the students get a better education because of that.

Take the school leaving age back down to sixteen, and bolster work partnership and apprentice funding for young people - possibly giving a tax or NI break for businesses who take 16-21 year olds on in manual labour or small business, and hey presto, we have a secondary education system which suits everyone depending on what they do best.

And that is the route from a poor background out into a well-paid, top level job, and that's why, even though it may have sounded like it, I don't believe that state school = no hoper, as Dannichu has said. And I find it very insulting that you call me "an article from the Daily Mail", especially as I haven't written people off: I was simply complaining about the funding of schools.

 

[Shiny Grimer]

You say all of this as if I'm some kind of discriminatory, snobbish person: which is quite far from the truth, I can guarantee.

Whether or not you are a discriminatory person is irrelevant to how you act. Your original posts did come off as sounding like there are no bright people going to state schools.

I love the way how you seem to think of the middle class as the root of all evil, as well.

Please quote when anybody said that the middle class is responsible for anything bad.

I believe that a dual-tiered education system would work - provided that selection for grammar schools was handled fairly

Except that we must account that, most likely, it would not be handled fairly.

The brightest students get pushed more in a group of those of similarly high ability, thus driving them on to attain more than they would in a mixed ability group. The other students - those who don't attain as highly - get educated among their peer group at the comprehensive schools, where teachers are no longer stretched to cater for different ability groups, and the students get a better education because of that.

The problem is that even bright students from poor backgrounds get to be looked over because of various reasons. Low class students, despite their intelligence, tend to do worse on tests and put less into school than middle class students because they're conditioned to believe, essentially, that they cannot get out of their situation and that school is a prelude to work. I don't know what the quality of comprehensive schools is, but state-funded schools in low-income areas tend to be poorer and have a lower quality of education, so even the bright working class kids would not have the same advantage (some might say privilege) that a middle class kid would have. I'm speaking from my knowledge of low-income schools in the U.S., so I don't know how much of this applies to low-income areas in the U.K., but I'm guessing it's a fair amount, so.

If you want an example of how testing results in the situation being stacked against non-middle/upper class children, I offer the example of testing for gifted classes in the U.S. It used to be done based on teacher recommendations, but now that it is done through testing the amount of poor black and Hispanic children entering the gifted program in NYC has dropped by 27%, even though 66% of the city's kindergarteners are black or Hispanic.

Like I said, I don't know much about how grammar schools work or how admittance is based.

And of course, as you said, middle class parents will continue to tutor their children so that they can get in. Parents tutor their children for everything (even for gifted tests, which is the equivalent of studying for an IQ test). Of course, tutoring requires paying money for tests and tutors, which I'm guessing most poor families can't afford, so... yeah, it's not very fair.

And that is the route from a poor background out into a well-paid, top level job

Except for that people from poor backgrounds don't have the same advantages that middle class kids do. The playing field is not level so that smart poor children will have more difficulty competing with smart middle class children through no fault of their own.

 

[Dannichu]

...'s absolutely right about tutoring for grammar schools - three people from my primary school applied to the nearest grammar school. The two whose parents could afford extra tuition got in, and the one who couldn't (also the cleverest person in our class) didn't. Passing tests is a terrible way of judging a person's intelligence, especially since there are huge class discrepancies.

When I took my maths GCSE, there were three tiers; higher, intermediate and I forget the name of the 'lower' one, but the highest mark you could get on it was a D. It was a paper that was impossible to pass. Those who are grouped together and labelled 'less able' aren't going to do well because they've been written off by everybody. Back in th' day, if you passed your 11+, you'd go to a grammar school and if not, you'd go to the local comp. One test, taken when you're eleven years old, pretty much set out the course for the rest of your life - being told "If you work hard, maybe you'll make something of yourself" is completely different from it being assumed that you'll be successful and go on to do all those things that society says successful people do (ie. go to university, make contacts, graduate and have a career).

Invisible privilege is everywhere in the education system - when you apply to university, it's emphasised that good grades aren't enough and they're looking for applicants with "extra" skills and interests - not many working-class people can afford music or dance lessons for their kids. I was only allowed to do an afterschool language because the course was free and I could stay over at my friend's house - the bus from where the lessons were held to my town were was £4, and no way could I afford that twice a week.

You know why state schools need computers? Because lots of kids at state schools don't have computers at home and wouldn't be able to use them otherwise. I had a friend who'd stay for hours afterschool in the library typing up her coursework because it was a requirement that it be typed, but she didn't have a computer at home.
And you try finding any kind of employment in today's society when you don't know how to turn a computer on.