Council tax and new ways..........

[Frank Erskine]

I passed the 11+ and went to a grammar technical school.

[John Cartmell]

Exactly. the 'selection' process was meant to find the appropriate school for each child. It didn't. If you 'passed' you had the choice of grammar or technical grammar school (if there was one).

[Derek ^]

Which has to beg the question as to why they can't pay.

Didn't work to earn the money in the first place?

Or, had it and pissed it away in Benidorm, down the Boozer,

or on the Gee-Gees?

DG

[Geoffrey]

I wouldn't go that far - we are after all supposed to live in a civilised society. Certainly no access to NHS prescriptions but as for the rest - just send a bill for the full commercial value of the service, make it a receipt if the person in question is in possession of a credit card.

[Andy Hall]

I think that most state schools would survive and some would not. People would have their choices, but simply on a broader basis than today.

[Derek ^]

It works for food.

Or would you rather we had a "National Food Service", and a truck came round twice a day, parked down the end of the street and doled out a dipper full of "Mealie Pap" (Coarse maize porridge) to everybody.

You can't say fairer than that.

DG

[Derek ^]

Agreed, but that's only a hand full of schools, Eton, Rugby, Winchester et al. Grossly unfair never the less.

Some public sector schools are also "well connected" with the best universities.

Smaller classes, yes, in infant school whilst learning to read. OTOH My daughter goes to lectures in Uni which have "classes" of 200.

When I looked around provincial schools about 8 years ago, public sector and private were equipped with identical sets of kit, topic by topic.

It's a symptom, it's not the disease. The disease is the British attitude to the people that do the actual, tangible, productive work.

DG

[Andy Hall]

A public school is an independent secondary school which is a charity (not profit-making) and which belongs to one of the public school associations.

So either you did, or you didn't. Which is it?

That's a very jaundiced view. All have become moderately to very successful in their chosen careers. That is actually what ultimately matters

That's a loaded way to describe the situation, but I see nothing whatever wrong in using a selective examination to select suitable education for each child. If the implication of that is that one form of education is more expensive to provide than another, then so be it. I don't see the need to keep attempting to equalise things all the way down the track. This would be running the same argument that everybody should be paid the same, and clearly that's just as much of a nonsense.

I do think that perhaps the age of 11 may not have been suitable as the exam age, but 12 as in other countries or 13 as here in the private sector.

That certainly does, but could have quite easily been corrected without wrecking the system for every child.

Well... where I lived there certainly was.

[Andy Hall]

There are also a wide range of fees in the private sector, so with the contribution that would be obtained by a voucher equivalent to the cost of education in a state school today, plus tax relief on fees, far more choice would be available to far more people.

There are then various other mechanisms that can be used to supplement the cost of particular forms of education that are more suited to a given child. I don't see a fundamental need to say that the same should be spent on each child.

The current system of attempting to impose a bland uniformity regardless of ability in given areas doesn't serve the needs of the child or the economy.

The vast majority of parents that I know or have known that have put their children through private school are far from wealthy and have made very substantial sacrifices to pay for education for their children. So it is far from being a preserve of the rich.

[Andy Hall]

We're talking about essentials here, and I have not suggested that there shouldn't be a safety net for those who genuinely can't afford to pay for essentials. However, I don't think that this then has to mean that the state needs to provide for everybody.

[Owain]

Because the Germans probably put their rubbish out only on the allotted day, positioned exactly five hundred millimetres from the kerb.

In the UK it would be left out weeks beforehand and people would dismantle the piles and take only the good bits, leaving a mess everywhere.

Owain

[Joe]

You seem fairly knowledgable here: how many multilaterals were there? I have only ever been aware of the one I attended and its sister girls' school. Why was the Comprehensive system used instead?

[Frank Erskine]

Sadly the grammar technical which I attended subsequently turned into a comprehensive (long after I left!), and its educational achievements are _much_ lower.

(I would say that, wouldn't I ?)!

[John Cartmell]

The 'independent' bit isn't (or at least hasn't always been) strictly essential.

[Snip]

Were told by the headteacher - in a case I'm thinking about.

Neither do I. That's what was promised - but that was never the case.

One form was given the vast bulk of the money. In education you can always use all the money you receive.

So it's OK to channel twice as much money to grammar schools 'because the kids there matter more'?

The age was chosen because there was experimental evidence to show that it worked - ie that children of 11 exhibited a fixed IQ that didn't change later in life. The 'evidence' was the work of one man who falsified the evidence.

It was implicit in the organsisation. If you happened to be in the wrong year

- either more kids that year - or a brighter set of kids - or pitted against a group that was coached (for an exam that was 'designed' not to be susceptible to coaching! !!) then you might 'fail' even though your score was identical to someone who 'passed' in another year. And 'failing' at 11 meant that your school had far inferior equipment, a narrower curriculum, and you could be automatically rejected for better jobs for life no matter how capable you might be or become.

Not on your description. How was the choice made between grammar schools and technical grammar schools? In my experience there was no system at all.

[John Cartmell]

can you explain what you mean by multi-lateral?

[John Cartmell]

Agreed. [and almost back to relevance for the group!] As a Technology teacher I had many arguments with people who thought that the subject was there to let less capable kids shine after all the clever ones had been creamed off to do academic stuff. My attitude was that the cream were the ones capable of combining skills and knowledge across the curriculum.

[John Cartmell]

Which would leave public-sector schools coping with the kids of parents who didn't care. What all schools need are parents with clout who will ensure that resources and teaching are kept up to standard.

[John Cartmell]

I've no knowledge of the individuals or their circumstances but have found that, if you reverse the 'facts' in any local paper 'story' you might get close to the truth. ;-(

[Andy Hall]

Very inappropriate. Was, is and always will be.

The solution would have been to address the issues with the system as it was, not to completely wreck it.

Yes of course. Unfortunately, spreading it equally by head doesn't produce the optimum outcome when taken across the student population as a whole.

That's a loaded and emotive way to express it.

However, if channeling twice as much money to one form of education vs. another is needed in order for it to be effective, then I think that that is entirely justified.

A five or six year course in medical school clearly costs more than a standard three year degree. There are countless other examples.

However, that is how long it takes to complete that form of education and it is deemed that that is worthwhile to "society" or to the economy or both.

I see no reason not to apply the same principle all the way through education.

It's implicit in any situation where there is competition. That's how life is. Unless one completely eliminates the notion of competition and passing and failing at things then there will always be examples where people feel hard done by.

That's a gross extrapolation which doesn't stand scrutiny.

There were grammar, selective and secondary modern schools. Initial selection was made at age 11 with further opportunities to change at

13 and 15 and again for A level.

[Andy Hall]

That happens already.

Of course, and there is no better way to have clout than for parents to be empowered with vouchers for education that can be spent at a school in either the state or private sector.

Increase or disappearance of income is an excellent way to focus the minds of suppliers of any product or service.