Academic Selection

[An Fear Dubh]

What are the views of Forum members on Acedemic selection at a young age?

Given that the 11plus is scrapped, do we replace it with something the same but give it a new veneer and call it something nice. But essentially it is a entrance exam for schools to select pupils??

Recently a study suggested that such a selaction process actually divided society into the haves and the have nots. Giving middle-class to upper-class a better opportunity to 3rd level education.

[Jim]

I'm against academic selection, it serves no purpose to the working class. Havent got time right now to go into details on it but I will say that it does divide society, its class based and those that will get in who are working class and worked hard will not be "the same" as the others.

You don't need to go to a middle class school to go to a university, its just much easier. I went a secodnary school after failing my 11+ and got shit GCSEs because I just had no motivation to do them, it took me years to catch up and I ended up at tech and had the luck of having teachers that knew what they where talking about, ending up at university by the time I was 20/21. If I had of went to a middle class school I would have been pressured a lot more to do well in GCSEs and then A levels and would have been in university 3 years earlier.

Its not just academic selection thats going to repeat the same problems, the whole idea of GCSEs is shit and personally I think vocational courses are full of shit. A levels where the only way forward for me and I think schools in working class areas should focus on this the way the middle class do.

Doesnt help that universities are now charging 3 grand. At university there are a lot of people I've met that have their parents pay for this, AND their rent and to be honest it makes me angry sometimes that I didnt have that luck.

[earl]

Education will be extremely important to get right now that NI is on the path towards a normal society. Having the right people trained in the right areas is essential. The Irish government works very hard with private industries to make sure there are people qualified to take on certain roles in certain sectors. This information is passed down to children in secondary school and they can use it to plan what direction they want to go education-wise at third level. When I was in 6th year of secondary school, IT was the big industry. I went down that road, and it's working out pretty well so far. When my brother was in 6th year, biochemistry and pharmaceutecals were the big industries, so he's currently studing in college to go down that road. There's plenty or oppurtunities there for him when he's finished.
NI should get a system in place similar to this, as it is a forward planning system that helps the country as a whole to attract investment and employment.

[lochy]

setanta said:

Any Unionist views on this seeing as the two main parties that represent you are in favour of academic selection?

I am against removing Academic selection as are a lot of other nationalists that I know. Our parties may be for scrapping it, but a lot(not a majority though) are against it. It hasn't worked elsewhere and it wont work in NI. We will be implementing a system that INCREASES disparity. It becomes more of case of getting the education you pay for. Where I lived in West London, a house in my street cost £60000 more than house three streets away because we were in the cathcment area for Fielding School which was a very good school. The one three streets away was in the Oaklands School catchment area which included an area made up of ethnic minorities. This meant that 50% of the pupils didn't speak English when they started leading to an inevitable reduction on standards.
Therefore, if you could afford the extra £60000 to live in my street, you could have a better education for your children. What will happen without Academic selction in that house prices in areas where there are good schools will become more and more expensive, and by being able to afford the premium to live there you can simply buy a better education for your children. The rich get better educated than those who cant aford to move.

[Wasp]

Lochy very good points and I agree with you on this.

[An Fear Dubh]

I am not sure what the correct alternative is, but I have seen enough evidence that strongly suggests that the 11+ does not serve the best interests of children.

But while the point made by Lochy is to be noted it is not a reflection on the 11+ selection process. It maybe suggests that some schools are not funded or resourced in even amounts.

Everyone seems to agree that the 11+ is wrong. The arguement is what do we put in its place or do we leave the space empty. If we do that how do schools select pupils in areas that are over subscribed. Obviously in Lochy's example the selection process has become economic.

[Jim]

lochy said:

setanta said:

Any Unionist views on this seeing as the two main parties that represent you are in favour of academic selection?

I am against removing Academic selection as are a lot of other nationalists that I know. Our parties may be for scrapping it, but a lot(not a majority though) are against it. It hasn't worked elsewhere and it wont work in NI. We will be implementing a system that INCREASES disparity. It becomes more of case of getting the education you pay for. Where I lived in West London, a house in my street cost £60000 more than house three streets away because we were in the cathcment area for Fielding School which was a very good school. The one three streets away was in the Oaklands School catchment area which included an area made up of ethnic minorities. This meant that 50% of the pupils didn't speak English when they started leading to an inevitable reduction on standards.
Therefore, if you could afford the extra £60000 to live in my street, you could have a better education for your children. What will happen without Academic selction in that house prices in areas where there are good schools will become more and more expensive, and by being able to afford the premium to live there you can simply buy a better education for your children. The rich get better educated than those who cant aford to move.

To be fair, we aren't London and London is notorious for its high housing. There are also more schools right next to each other in Belfast at least then there are in London areas.

The rich get better education regardless of academic selection or not, academic selection just makes it legal for people to pay out their arse for their kids education while the rest of us go to normal schools that dont try and push you. The problem isnt just with academic selection, the whole education system is on its arse at the minute. The 11+ is crap anyway, its too much pressure on a child at 11 to be sitting an exam like that, those that do pass it usually take extra classes outside of the school which again, cost a bomb. I remember my old politics teacher having a rant about this in a class, saying that parents are training their kids like they are training a dog, just so they can get into a better school and its just not right that a child at 11 should have that bloody pressure.

[An Fear Dubh]

I agree with the general gist of what you are saying Jim. But we have to look at the overall picture and put yourself in the place of the parent.

All parents usually want the best for their child. So if we have academic selection at entrance to secondary/grammer school. Those parents that can afford it will look to get tutors to coach their kids to enable them a better opportunity. We must move away from a situation that bars children from some types of education because of financial reasons

[Wasp]

I think the 11+ is a good thing. There is no such thing now as failing, when I done it you either failed or passed, they don't use those terms now. I want all children to have the same opportunities as anyother child. But if parents make the choice to send their kids to a private school or to tutoring, then surely as parents this is entirely their choice.

[An Fear Dubh]

The 11+ is an exam designed to fail pupils. This is how it works - there are a known number of grammer school places in one area,(I do not know the number but say for explaination sake the number is 200) but the pupils sitting the 11+ in that area number 500. Then only the top 200 pupils of the 11+ exam will be able to enter grammer schools in their area, regardless whether all 500 'pass' the exam or not.
So it is not about passing the exam, but the highest grades only and these are usually achieved by middle-class children or those able to provide tutors and study areas for children.
If you come from a family that makes finding study time hard or you can not go to your bedroom to study alone because you share with siblings or you use the kitchen table as the only table in the house. Then the likelyhod of you achieving high grades is more difficult even if you are a gfted child.
So basically the 11+ or various forms of acedemic selection boil down to economic factors in your home and that poorer families are at a disadvantage.
Wealth should not be a deciding factor to education. Yes parents have a choice but some choices are forced upon us by how much money we have in your pocket.

[Jim]

anfeardubh said:

I agree with the general gist of what you are saying Jim. But we have to look at the overall picture and put yourself in the place of the parent.

All parents usually want the best for their child. So if we have academic selection at entrance to secondary/grammer school. Those parents that can afford it will look to get tutors to coach their kids to enable them a better opportunity. We must move away from a situation that bars children from some types of education because of financial reasons

Thats it though, there shouldn't be any reason parents with money SHOULD be able to do that; working class schools should be of the same quality, achieving the same results and hiring good teachers. The only thing that would set them apart would be a name. CBS or La Salle isnt a good a name as Methody, is it?

[Bilk]

I think we are confusing selection, with private education. Private education, (Education where the parents pay out of their own pocket) will always be with us whether we have selection or not. It is everyone's right to spend their money in any way they see fit.
As for selection, like many things in life, when it is taken away we have equality. But equality downwards rather than upwards. The bright, for the want of a better word, kids are dragged down to the level of the less bright, rather than the other way around. Comprehensive education has not worked in the rest of the UK and it will not work here. whether anyone likes it or not the gcse's do not command the same respect that the old gce's once did. And the reason for that is obvious, examinations have been made easier. The pass rate grows year on year, unless they are putting something in the water or our kids food, that is the only explanation for that.
I am a socialist, but I do see a need for taking the really bright kids and teaching them at a different level.

[Wasp]

I agree here with Bilk, I am working class and attended a grammar school, there were a few rich kids in my class whom we were all jealous of but there were more from working class backgrounds than middle or upper class. When I went there the classes were all graded after about four weeks of being allocated to a class alphabetically. The test we done depending on our result then placed us at various levels, there were 7 classes in all for each year. The top classes learned Latin and had alot more to learn in all subjects than lower classes. The lower you went then the smaller the workload where the teachers had more time with you to teach you on anything that you found difficult. The higher the class the less time you had to grasp something.

At the end of each year depending on exam results pupils could be moved up or down a class. IMO this worked great and it worked both ways, if you were brighter you could move up classes to learn more, if you weren't so bright you could be moved down classes where teachers had more time to help pupils who were struggling. Also those who went to secondary school had the chance to move across to grammer school if they were doing well in class.

[ulster2016]

I am just NEW to the chat, I think that it would be better for everyone if Catholic and Protestant children shared the same schools and general education, 11+ is too early for children to be confronted by this responsibility.
Todays schools are very much religion orientated.
Lets get away from that and follow the lead given by our elected politicians

[An Fear Dubh]

Welcome to the forum 'Ulster2016', everyone was new to this at sometime so we understand your position.

I can understand your position, and it would be a nice position to be in it. But we have to work with the mess we have and try and drag something better out of it. As we can not wipe away the present education and all the pupils to start with a good position.

I can only speak from my own experience and opinion. Yes the impression is that religion is too heavily involved in education. I won't go into the history or debate the pro and cons of that. I am a non religious person from a Catholic upbringing. My children go to Catholic primary and secondary schools, mainly due to local convienience at primary level and because of selected choice at secondary level as the school provides the best opportunities for my child. If a better school existed regardless of religion I would send my child there. At the moment my only restriction is financial, not religious.

At the moment our children move away from one school at 12 to another school. Those schools want to know how they select pupils, especially if the places available are less than the number of pupils who want in. Will an entrance exam be the old 11+ by another name?