News

What's going on at Oliver & Co

(Un)natural selection – the great grammar school debate

Posted on September 12th 2016

Grammar School Debate

On Friday Theresa May announced her plans to lift the existing ban on the creation of new grammar schools in England. The issue of grammar schools has always been an emotive one within education policy and the Prime Minister’s announcement immediately sparked a debate amongst politicians, journalists and the general public on whether or this not this is a policy that the government should pursue.

Those in favour, such as Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, describe grammar schools as a, “great mobiliser and liberator” which will help the “brightest children from poor homes”[1], whereas those on the other side of the divide, such as Labour’s shadow Education Secretary, Angela Raynor, declared that “bringing back Grammar schools is an abdication of responsibility for every child in our country”[2]. While it would be easy to say that, by virtue of their political affiliations, of course, Boris Johnson and Angela Raynor are at odds over this subject, it is important to make clear that the grammar school debate divides individuals within the political parties as well. This is particularly true of the Conservative Party, with prominent members, including David Cameron and the former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan (whose anti-grammar position may well have been behind her losing her office), being opposed to a reversal of the grammar schools ban. In addition to those politicians who have spoken out against plans, the outgoing Chief Inspector of Schools Sir Michael Wilshaw says the idea that it will help the disadvantaged is, “palpable tosh and nonsense”, and it would be a “profoundly retrograde step”[3].

So what are grammar schools and why are they so controversial?

Grammar schools were introduced in England and Wales in the mid-1940s. In their original form, they were selective schools established as part of a two-tier system which consisted of grammar and secondary modern schools. A grammar school was considered to be the ‘better’ of the two, and only those students who passed a test known as the 11 plus were admitted. Those who attended grammar schools were considered to be destined for university and better jobs. Children who were not considered to be academically capable enough were then sent to secondary modern schools that did not push pupils to achieve the same standards as those at grammars and these students were generally deemed destined for less-celebrated careers in labour and industry.

It is clear to see why this system of schooling is so  controversial as it effectively results in segregation at a very early age between those deemed ‘intelligent’ and ‘able’ and those considered less-so which invariably affects the individual’s opportunities in life.

In the 1950s and 60s, Labour politicians and egalitarian educationalists began to argue that grammar schools reinforced class divisions and emphasised middle-class privilege. The arguments succeeded and from 1965 onwards grammar schools were phased out and there are currently only 163 operating in England. A subsequent law put in place by Tony Blair banned any more grammar schools from being established.

What will be different about Mrs May’s new grammar schools?

Theresa May has undoubtedly anticipated the arguments that will be raised against the re-introduction of grammar schools as her proposals are considerably more sophisticated than just a return to the old 11 plus selection system. Some of the main proposals are:

  • Existing grammar schools in England will be allowed to expand and will be backed by government funding;
  • All state schools in England will be allowed to select pupils by academic ability but only “in the right circumstances”;
  • All selective schools will have to take a share of pupils from low-income backgrounds and give assistance to non-selective schools and underperforming academies; and
  • New grammars will be able to admit pupils not just at 11 but also 14 and 16. They may also take students from non-selective schools for some subjects.

The proposals for new grammars to take a share of pupils from low-income backgrounds, and the ability to admit pupils older than 11, are clearly designed to counter the arguments that grammar schools do not promote social mobility. In fact, when announcing the plans, Theresa May claimed that there is already unfair selection in schools as house prices in areas with the best schools are invariably higher; “The truth is we already have selection in our schools system – and it’s selection by house price, selection by wealth. That is simply unfair.”[4]

At present, students attending grammar schools are much more likely to come from a middle-class background. Only 2.3% of all students attending grammars in England are eligible for free school meals compared to the national average of 13% at non-grammar schools.

Statistics show that grammar schools can deliver very strong results as teachers can push pupils harder knowing that they are dealing with only the most able and the Prime Minister believes that her proposals will ensure that those from poorer backgrounds will get just as equal an opportunity as those who are better off.  However, many have argued that this is flawed logic, as those from more well-off backgrounds will still be able to afford access to expensive tutors and aids which could make them more likely to pass the rigorous entry tests.

This is not to say that only children from well-off families go to grammar schools as this piece in the Guardian demonstrates:  https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/aug/08/four-months-tutoring-wasnt-enough-readers-on-grammar-schools,  and when disadvantaged children do get into grammar schools they go on to outperform their better-off peers – in two-thirds of grammar schools in 2015, GCSE students from disadvantaged backgrounds equalled or bettered the grades of their more well-off peers in key subjects such as Maths and English.

As things stand, the return of grammar schools is far from inevitable. It is clear already that there will be significant opposition to the Prime Ministers plans from within her own party which will make passing any bill through the House of Commons a very bumpy ride and things will get even more difficult in the Lords where the government has no advantage of numbers.

When a new government comes into power it is almost inevitable that they will attempt to follow a new direction in terms of education policy. If Theresa May is to see her plans for the re-introduction of grammar schools come to fruition and not be consigned to the educational policy scrapheap then she will have to persuade people that her new wave of grammar schools really will be the engines of social mobility that she claims they will.


We have assisted many schools with converting to Academy status. If you are the head of a school considering this change please contact Tim Polding at tim.polding@oliverandco.co.uk or call 01244 312306.


References:

[1] http://www.theweek.co.uk/65930/pros-and-cons-of-grammar-schools-in-england

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/angela-rayner/grammar-schools_b_11947472.html

[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37275092

[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37311023

Call and speak to a member of our team on 01244 312306