‘They don’t work’: Experts criticize Liz Truss’ plan for grammar schools | Grammar schools


Academics, education unions, and politicians of every degree have attacked the government’s plans for more grammar schools, He warned that the choice does not improve social mobility and will not solve the challenges facing schools in the next decade.

After confirmation from the new Minister of Education, Kate Malthusthat the Prime Minister had tasked him with looking into which regions of England wished to open new grammar schools, as well as those which wished to expand existing grammars.


In an interview with Yorkshire Post During a university visit this week, Malthouse said: “The PM made it clear during the leadership contest that she wanted to see work in grammar schools, mainly because there is a desire from parents in some parts of the country to get it.

“We are in the process of choosing parents, everyone should be able to choose for their children. So we are looking at this policy very seriously and looking at the areas that we would like to have or actually grammar schools that would like to expand.”

Les Trusswho had sent her daughters to grammar school, however would face widespread opposition, including from modernists within her party who got rid of A previous attempt to revive grammar schools More broadly in 2016 when Theresa May was prime minister.

Only 163 grammar schools remain in England and there has been a ban on any new schools opening since 1998. Any lifting of this ban, introduced by the Labor government, would require basic legislation. Although the government has a large majority in the House of Commons, it will face strong opposition in the House of Lords.

Sir Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 Committee of Conservative Party Members and a longtime supporter of grammar schools, is She mentioned that she plans to schedule an adjustment The latest government school bill to try to lift the ban.

David Johnston, Conservative MP for Wantage and former president of the Social Mobility Foundation, warned that bringing back grammar schools would lead to a deep split in the country and within the Conservative Party.

writing in spectator, He said, “I know grammar schools are popular with membership and my opinion wouldn’t be. But bringing them back would be a dangerous misstep for education policy. They are a distraction from what we should be doing, they serve the rich not the poor—and they don’t work.”

Steve Mastin, the former head of history at a public high school and vice president of the Conservative Education Association, said he would speak out against grammar schools at the Conservative Party convention. “Grammar schools reduce the choice of parents. It is the school that chooses, not the parents. 80% of the pupils in the country will be refused to go to grammar school.”

Shadow Education Minister Bridget Phillipson said grammar schools were a “distraction tactic” from a government out of ideas. “Grammars make up a small minority of schools, they don’t improve educational outcomes and parents don’t want them – they want the Secretary of Education to raise standards across our comprehensive schools.”

Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman Munira Wilson said it was a “desperate attempt” by the Conservative Party to hide their failures. “Instead of supporting children who are working hard to make up for lost education, conservatives Prefer to enforce top-down rules about the kinds of schools that can be built in communities.”

Lee Elliott Major, Professor of Social Mobility at the University of Exeter, warned that introducing new base schools without strong measures to ensure access for children of all backgrounds would create an “exclusive cadre of middle-class schools, certainly not drivers of social mobility in any way whatsoever”. .

John Andrews, head of analysis at the Education Policy Institute, said it was an “old debate” that detracted from the real problems schools face. “Whether it’s to reduce inequality in education, combat teacher shortages, or even just support schools in the face of dramatically increasing operational costs, grammar schools are not the answer.”

Dr Noala Burgess, Chair of the Inclusive Future campaign group, said: “It is of great concern that a new government that has not tried it could choose to ignore all cause and weigh the evidence showing the very limited value of grammar schools for very few children.

“Ask any parent what they want their children to learn and definitely not ‘more grammar schools.’ Parents want well-funded and resourced schools.”

Jeff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the expansion of grammar schools was “purely ideological.” He said the important issues facing the education sector remain funding and teacher shortages. “Tackling these issues would make a huge difference in improving outcomes for all students and is certainly what any government should make their priority.”

case studies

Sally Will, Education Reporter

As the government makes plans for more grammar schools in England, a new website has been launched to give voice to parents, pupils and teachers with first-hand experience of the 11 plus test and its impact.

About 100,000 children currently sit 11 or older each year for a place in one of 163 grammar schools. Here are some comments from 11+ anonymous The site set up by the Comprehensive Future campaigns group.

About the stress of the test, one father in Kent, where the rules system still works, said: “A few nights before the test, I looked at the search history on my daughter’s tablet. The last research read, ‘How do you deal with panic about something.’” 10 years! “

Regarding tuition fees, a mum from Sevenoaks said: “We’ve spent £2,000 in tuition fees over the past year. Everyone I know does this. I envy friends who live in areas where there is only a good understanding. No pressure on an adult child from 10 years old, no sense of failure, only good free education he is entitled to.”

An 11-year-old teacher in Trafford, Greater Manchester, where there is grammar, said: “I’ve seen many smart kids who don’t pass the test because of the nerves of the exam and less able kids get lucky on the day and pass. For many kids with very similar ability The test becomes little more than a lucky lottery rather than an ability test.”

A mother in Trafford said she knew many children had fallen ill under the weight of expectations. Children who do not pass often suffer significant, sometimes lifelong damage to their self-esteem. No child should be subjected to this in order to get a good education and no child should be classified as a failure at the age of 10 or 11.”

Regarding the long-term effect of 11+, a 63-year-old grandmother said: “The 11+ test had a negative impact on me and created self-esteem issues that persist to this day. I’m not stupid. But I have problems with low Self-esteem in relation to my intelligence and my worth since I “failed” a terrible test back in 1969.”