The British Education system is broken. Bringing back grammar schools would see further endorsement of exam-orientated achievement, which so many individuals are not suited to. We need a new solution that addresses the needs of the individual pupil. Alongside developing such a system, we need to improve the quality of teaching in the UK if we are to see any real change.
I come from an incredibly supportive family. I have always been encouraged to enjoy learning and challenge myself, and I’ve always performed well when it comes to exams. Yet I know all too well that not everybody is as fortunate as I am.
When I hear politicians or my parents debating the legitimacy of reintroducing Grammar Schools into the British education system, I am at a loss as to why they would want to.
Grammar schools are antiquated institutions that reek of social elitism. They didn’t work for us before, what evidence is there to suggest they would work now? Between the 1940s and 1960s grammar schools became the selective tier of a tripartite system of state funded education. With the move to non-selective comprehensive schools in the 1960s and 1970s, some grammar schools became fully independent and charged fees best online mattress in Dubai, while most others were abolished or became comprehensive. Grammar school pupils were given the best opportunities of any schoolchildren in the state system. They would sift out the smart kids who do well in exams from comprehensive schools across the country.
Students had to take an Eleven Plus examination in order to procure a place. Whilst supportive families like mine would be willing and able to pay for tutors to prepare me for entrance exams, such a system would not afford equal opportunity to all. Not everyone has a supportive family that would facilitate preparation for such an exam. Not only that, but not all smart people do well in exams. Some students who would thrive in a grammar school may not get the opportunity to do so, as a result of a flawed testing system. These students suffer currently; many children and parents alike are disillusioned with the UK’s exam-based learning system. We need to move away from a system whereby a student’s performance on one day may alter the course of their entire future – grammar schools would make this harder to achieve.
But if not grammar schools, what else? Well, one only has to look at Germany’s national output to see that the streaming of students according to academic or vocational education has merit. But rather than labelling students as “thinkers” or “doers”, I think the British education system needs further division. Cramming thirty individuals into a classroom who have such a broad spectrum of needs is a recipe for disaster.
Take the thinkers. You have the kids that seem to pluck the concepts out of thin air, understanding the difficult math theorems and applying them with little input from a teacher. Where’s the harm in giving them a textbook, and a quiet room where they can work through at their own pace? With them out of the room – not needling the teacher for something else to do – time can be spent ensuring those who need lots of practice get that time. In the current system, teachers move on; bored, clever kids are just as unruly as the children who don’t want to be at school at all.
Then look at the doers. You have the people who want to work as a team, are happy to make a contribution and focus on one small intricacy of a project. Then there are the perfectionists, who want to ensure their efforts are not tainted by the underperformance of others. Some of these students may thrive as part of a team for one component at a production line; others may want the freedom to roam the workshop and perform each stage themselves.
Rather than the rigid Germanic bipolar system that sees children determine their vocational course very early on in development, a flexible bipolar attitude towards the individual subjects would be far more successful. By the time it comes to making choices about which subjects to take at GCSE, students know how they work best. Y9 students should be trusted to choose what kind of classroom environment they want to be in, and attend lessons accordingly. For instance, within the sciences, if practical lessons and a more textbook orientated learning environment were offered then the thinkers and doers would migrate accordingly. I know I certainly became disillusioned with practical lessons and would’ve found sitting down with a set of correct results far more conducive to my own style of learning.
The problem with such a system is that students mature at different rates. Therefore, it would need to be regulated on a case-to-case basis. Registers should be flexible; students should be able to turn around and say “I’ve changed my mind, I would learn better this way now”. There should be cooperation between the teachers, the students and perhaps parents, to decide who would work better under whom.
Another problem with such a system is that both science teachers would need to be able to deliver quality teaching. The people we employ to teach our children should be inspiring, they should command respect and wield authority, but they should also know their subject inside out. If children don’t receive quality teaching then how can we expect them to do well?
Teachers are such a vital part of the infrastructure of our country. Yet there is too much variation in proficiency. Too many of them have responsibilities that exceed their abilities. What teaching needs is greater regulation at the point of entry. If you don’t really want to teach, they you shouldn’t be able to. How do you expect students to engage if the person in charge is thinking about their cup of coffee at break-time, and doesn’t really care what Joshua thinks of To Kill a Mockingbird?
There should be less red tape protecting those currently within the system that are ill-equipped to do their job. We need to root out the ‘bad’ teachers. Moving forward, teaching needs greater incentives to attract those most suited to the vocation. Perhaps an opportunity to be earning £60 000 after a two year period (subject to evaluation) would see this. An expression that has sadly become commonplace in recent years is “those who can’t, teach”. But the hard line that the UK needs to take in order to see any real change is to turn around and say “those who can’t, shan’t”.
Rethinking who we employ to teach our kids and simultaneously fine-tuning the way they go about doing so would instigate real, positive change.
Words by Beth Kirkbride