Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:40 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:00 pm
Posts: 5423
Location: RBK
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28066081

I wonder if Prince of Wales also expressed this desire to Conservative Secretaries for Education during Mrs. Thatcher premiership. Kenneths (Baker & Clarke) might have oblidged.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 5922
Thank heavens that he wasn't listened to! I cannot imagine for one moment that he has or had a cogent grasp of the issues around such a decision, and to allow him to interfere in education policy by accident of birth would be a travesty of democracy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:56 pm
Posts: 8228
I wonder if he dared ask michael gove the same question in order to get pretty much the same answer.

It only seem to be some people in sevenoaks who are trying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 11:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:00 pm
Posts: 5423
Location: RBK
Amber wrote:
Thank heavens that he wasn't listened to! I cannot imagine for one moment that he has or had a cogent grasp of the issues around such a decision, and to allow him to interfere in education policy by accident of birth would be a travesty of democracy.


It seems that those who claimed to have 'cogent grasp' and destroyed grammars had themselves came from private schools (Tony Crossland/Shirley Williams and also Tony Blair / Ruth Kelly) or sent their own children to private schools (Ruth Kelly / Diane Abott) or to the grammars (Shirley Williams / Harriet Harman). Why they didn't follow their conviction and send their children to their nearest comprehensive school, as 'others' are supposed to do. So much double standards. So sad :cry: :cry:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 5922
tiffinboys wrote:
Amber wrote:
Thank heavens that he wasn't listened to! I cannot imagine for one moment that he has or had a cogent grasp of the issues around such a decision, and to allow him to interfere in education policy by accident of birth would be a travesty of democracy.


It seems that those who claimed to have 'cogent grasp' and destroyed grammars had themselves came from private schools (Tony Crossland/Shirley Williams and also Tony Blair / Ruth Kelly) or sent their own children to private schools (Ruth Kelly / Diane Abott) or to the grammars (Shirley Williams / Harriet Harman). Why they didn't follow their conviction and send their children to their nearest comprehensive school, as 'others' are supposed to do. So much double standards. So sad :cry: :cry:
It is only a double standard if their children had that same cogent grasp and agreed with the opinions of their parents, and despite this willingly trotted off to the grammar school.

Don't suppose young Prince George needs to worry too much about passing the 11 plus. Which may be just as well if he has inherited the brains of some of his ancestors.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:00 pm
Posts: 5423
Location: RBK
Quote:
It is only a double standard if their children had that same cogent grasp and agreed with the opinions of their parents, and despite this willingly trotted off to the grammar school.


Politicians would love such twists. :lol: :lol:

Quote:
Don't suppose young Prince George needs to worry too much about passing the 11 plus. Which may be just as well if he has inherited the brains of some of his ancestors.

Perhaps not. But since Nick Clegg and Tony Blair had to find suitable state schools for their children, may be in time Prince Charles would choose a grammar for his great-grandson. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:06 pm 
Amber wrote:
Thank heavens that he wasn't listened to! I cannot imagine for one moment that he has or had a cogent grasp of the issues around such a decision, and to allow him to interfere in education policy by accident of birth would be a travesty of democracy.


I would have thought that anyone who is a fan of the 11+ ( as I assume you are ) would be very grateful of any support of it.

I for one believe that he definitely does have a 'cogent' grasp of such issues and I am thankful that such a high profile figure is trying to support the fact that Grammar schools are huge driver in social mobility.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 5922
kateJ wrote:
Amber wrote:
Thank heavens that he wasn't listened to! I cannot imagine for one moment that he has or had a cogent grasp of the issues around such a decision, and to allow him to interfere in education policy by accident of birth would be a travesty of democracy.


I would have thought that anyone who is a fan of the 11+ ( as I assume you are ) would be very grateful of any support of it. .
I am not sure what made you assume that; but to say that I am not a fan of it would be understating the matter quite spectacularly.

The role of grammar schools in social mobility is now pretty much uncontested - they are great for reducing it. And what Prince Charles knows about social mobility will probably not push back the frontiers of scholarship.

Just my view. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 10:00 pm
Posts: 5423
Location: RBK
I wonder if grammars are so bad then why even the people who are against these still send all their children to grammars. As regard to social mobility, grammars do provide the opportunity for it, but because silly politics resulted in reducing their numbers to mere 164 in over 16000 secondary schools, these are not as effective as before. Perhaps the best solution would be to increase their number to 1300 again. Margaret Thatcher and Vince Cable are good examples of social mobility. As I see it, Tiffin is full of children belonging to not wealthy families. Same seems to be case in all the grammars in greater London.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 10:28 am
Posts: 1775
I don't get the whole grammar school is for toffs bit. I agree the pure VR type was very tutorable, but the CEM format I believe, isn't. It is purely made up of questions that would have been covered by the National Curriculum at any primary school. Children should have been taught fractions, punctuation, grammar, etc, by the time they reach that age. They are difficult questions because the point is they are trying to capture the most intelligent. There should be no social engineering in grammar schools - it HAS to be about capturing the brightest as the sole criteria and nothing else. Two of my daughter's friends have free school meals - they made it there because they are intelligent, just as one of the others from a privileged background did.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016