Bart writing lines against Bush
Blair is famous for a few quotes specifically:

  • Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime
  • I do not want war. I do not believe anyone in this House wants war. But disarmament peacefully can only happen with Saddam’s active co-operation (link)
  • Education, education, education

Okay, maybe not the second but I had to point out that he lied about Iraq too…

But on the last point Blair has failed catastrophically. Education was damaged by Thatcher when she listened to the selection-obsessed and started the dismantling of the Grammar school system. Blair, however, continued it and made official the government’s disapproval of selection.

Some people may be uncomfortable with it, but it is true that everyone has a different academic capability. Whether we like it or not, some people must work harder to achieve what others can achieve with no effort. And when a more intelligent person is taught at the same time as someone who needs more assistance, both suffer. The intelligent person gets bored with the repetition and, in taking that into account, the teacher does not repeat enough for those who need more help to learn. It is far better to teach in groups of similar ability.

In some schools in the 1950s children were taught in streamed groups. These groups were based on overall ability so if you excelled in creative subjects but had more difficulty in mathematics you were placed in lower groups for both. This is crazy but is sometimes used as a parallel for the problem with the Grammar and Comprehensive system.

If at the 11+ a child is capable of obtaining an A-Level in English but has no chance of obtaining an A-Level in a science, what part of the 11+ should account for that? Should the 11+ be based on intelligence, effort or ability in specific subjects? These are not easy questions and they’re not questions that will likely be answered by consensus.

Regardless of the method chosen, however, we can be sure that there is a satisfactory way of sorting those who will be better suited to vocational or physical employment from those who will likely make a career in academia or using qualifications obtained from academia. This is the idea of the Grammar/Comprehensive system.

If a child is bright they can be educated in a grammar school where they will receive education better suited to their abilities. These children will not be disruptive because they won’t be sitting in lessons bored of the pace. Much bullying is performed by intelligent children who are not being engaged.

If a child is not exceptionally bright they can be educated at a Comprehensive school. Socialists worry that those in Comprehensives have somehow been labelled second-class citizens. For some reason it is assumed that if a child is not academically exceptional they are of no use to society. This is patently not the case. Today’s post grammar school era actually places greater emphasis on academic education. The government proposes 50% targets for the university attendance. In fact today’s shortage of plumbers, builders, electricians and many other jobs can be attributed to the government’s relative lack of focus. If the government tells children and parents that a 50% target has been set, the remaining 50% considers themselves failures.

A Comprehensive school, then, provides an institution to educate late-bloomers (who can then be taught at the grammar school if applicable) and most importantly children who are not suitable for academic education. These children can be given appropriate and relevant training without being made to feel that they are less capable than their grammar school peers.

Selection is humane and I welcome any comments on this subject particularly.


Posted In: Political, News and Politics, Labour