Faith schools?

And Nick Clegg is a professed atheist!

What's wrong with Peter Hitchens?

Oh, it's all right, you don't really need to explain, Greatnan!

He will get away with it politically won't he because his wife is Catholic..I did not think Clegg was Catholic though. It is pretty selective!

Interesting letter in Guardian today re grammar schools:in the 50s the 11 plus was a test all kids took in the last year of primary. Bright 'working class' kids passed and got a Grammar school place.
Nowadays middle class families have kids coached, primary schools in 11plus areas are under pressure from middle class parents to 'prepare' kids for the exam.
The letter writer, a 'working class' kid who passed 11+, implies the middle classes would never allow social mobility whilst they have money to pay for tutors.

If parents send their kids to so-called faith schools for the discipline, I reckon that says a lot about the parents — mainly that they want someone else to do the hard stuff. Cop out.

However, I think it may be a snobbery thing as well — separate them from the hoi polloi.

And possibly they think education is mainly about passing exams.

Interesting article on the Beeb news yesterday about that millionnaire's daughter who has been sent to jail for her part in last year's riots. It seemed to be saying that parents need to wake up to the fact that constantly pushing their kids to achieve may sometimes have negative consequences.

Fat lot of good that young woman's expensive education did her anyway!

Huge amount of coaching for 11 plus where my daughter lives; there are stories that people don't even go on a summer holiday before they take it in the autumn. There are, apparently, private "prep" schools in the area that specialise in getting children into the state grammar schools - how unfair is that!
My DGDs will not be taking it.

At my catholic elementary school in 1951 a small number of girls were taken into the head nun's study for extra coaching each year. They were mainly the daughters of parents who were deeply involved in the life of the church. Some of them were clearly not able to benefit from the grammar school curriculum and left after a term or two. Grammar schools were the bastard children of public schools and often copied them, such as setting homework, (which was originally intended to keep boarders occupied in the evening), uniform, and the house system
There were many very poor grammar schools, even though they received a disproportionate amount of the resources available for education. Even the 'best' schools were socially divisive, often splitting siblings on the basis of one test. Stupid parents would 'reward' successful entrants with a bicycle or similar present - what message did that give to the ones who didn't pass?
I will take a guess that all the parents clamouring for more grammar schools have children that are likely to pass the exam, albeit with some pressurised coaching.
Most European countries manage to educate all their children in comprehensive schools but of course Britain is still bedevilled by privilege and lack of social mobility.
As long as the likes of Blair, Clegg and Abbott use their wealth to buy privilege things are unlikely to change.

The same at the convent I attended!

@anagram "What's wrong with Peter Hitchens?"

Good question. Mainly, that he isn't Christopher Hitchens, I suppose. His brother obviously got the family thinking cap!

The main thing I hold against sectarian schools is that they draw their pupils from a narrow selection of society -- but are funded by the general public, who's children would be excluded from them.

Like what Nanaej says. People judge grammar schools by what they see in the two or three places where so-called grammar schools operate today. It wasn't like that in the 50s because everyone took the 11+. It wasn't a perfect system but it did what it said on the tin and improved the life chances of many children from poor families.

Yes, and my husband was one of them. How he managed to get where he got (lol) having changed primary school 5 times and secondary 2, due to family moves and upset, I will never know.

However, the 11+ also put aside 10000s more who just failed, or were late developers, like me, who had so much to offer - labelled for life and thrown on the heap (I got through to go on to further ed and an excellent career, by the skin of my teeth).

Lily just to put the record straight I do not endorse selection at 11. I was just pointing out that nowadays, if introduced universally, it would not change the status quo re social mobility as those who have the money and inclination to manipulate the situation will do so. That was not so widespread in the 50's.

Didn't mean to misrepresent you, Nanaej. I think the good thing about the 11+ was that rich people couldn't manipulate the results. They could get extra coaching but moving house, starting to go to church and so on did no good. Rich people's children have all sorts of other advantages under any system. There were a lot of problems with the way the 11+ operated, I don't deny it, but it did give opportunities to thousands of children whatever their backgrounds. There was a lot of social mobility which, we are told, there isn't now. When my children went to the same university my DH and I went to in the 60s I was astonished to find how many of the other students were from privileged backgrounds.

When I was at Birmingham there was only a handful of the 110 students in my year who came from privileged backgrounds. The majority were from normal homes! Incidentally onl 25 of us were female!

I went to two boarding schools and worked in two more. Some of the children who came from rich families were miserable, usually from broken homes, and sent away to school, possibly with good intentions but poor judgment. I can't think of them as being 'privileged'. I don't think you can blame parents for wanting the 'best' for their children; I agree that the system is skewed in their favour but I doubt that legislation could change it. It's the family ethos, the attitude to education, the encouraging of curiosity that can make such a difference to a child's life, even before he/she starts school.