What are: Grammar Schools? The Novara Explainer in four minutes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 авг 2024
- In the first of our Novara Explainers, Kerem Osborne Dikerdem tackles grammar schools policy, and its effect on local performance and access.
Presenter: Kerem Osborne Dikerdem
Producer: Tom Goulding
VFX: Harry Davidson
Help us caption & translate this video!
amara.org/v/Vn2c/
Can I just say that all the Grammar Schools in Buckinghamshire are in the bottom 30 worst funded schools in the UK so your argument of resources being pushed towards them is in fact not true.
The funding formula is based on the average income of parents of students at schools so the fact you say we are full of middle class kids yet the best funded are two points which contradict. but you're right about Grammars being full of the middle class.
I think that has changed dramatically because my school is now very well funded.
Yep mate I go to AGS, we can't even afford to replace our toilet seats so we have to have people donate them. Its a shitshow
@@ghafir3 aylesbury?
Shit i go to one in bucks…
I wish the guy would look at facts. Grammar schools are funded less than other schools
True
This video is absolute nonsense 😂
“Pulls resources towards grammar schools” this is completely incorrect. I go to a grammar school and we are completely underfunded. Most departments can’t even afford lined paper. Our issue is that if we do well, we don’t need funding because we’re doing well. If we do badly, we’ll just get shut down.
Being in a grammar school I would advocate for keeping them. Many of my friends come from low income families, and would not be able to afford private education.
But there are not only grammar schools and private schools in Britain. Can't low-income families children go to state schools？
@@anonymintheworld9781 Grammar schools are state schools for smarter children. I’m in a grammar school and the only people who want them abolished are politician’s and people who didn’t get into grammar schools. I’m not rich at all but im saying it how it is.
I don't know about England but in Northern Ireland loads of "disadvantaged people" get into grammar schools and do really well.
Working class pupils CAN get into a Grammar school, just like anyone else they and their parents/carets must prioritise their education, work well and pass the exam. Do that and your efforts are rewarded.
yes, finally, a person who says that!
As a person from a working class background who went to a grammar school, I couldn't disagree more; although it is expected that a Marxist media network wants to punish those who do well. It is true that modern grammar schools are full of middle-class children; however what do you expect when you close down the majority of them and reduce the socio-economic pool of students that can gain access to these schools. Grammar schools offer excellent education to those who thrive in academia, and jealously of this academia should not prevent children from going to these schools, everybody knows that intelligent pupils are more likely to optimize their intelligence if they're surrounded by those with similar levels.
JoeyXII I totally agree 101% true. I first went to a comprehensive school and I was top of my class I had nothing to look forward to I was surrounded by people who did not care about their future. I now go to grammar school via in year exams could not be better.
Grammar schools can't be that effective if you think Britain has a "Marxist media network".
Before they closed down the vast majority of gramma schools. 60% of the pupils were of working class origin.
"Pool resources", this statement is 100% untrue for at least my area, in which there are at least three grammar schools. Torquay, the area in which my school is infamously rough(perhaps best known for having the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the UK), however it is the NON SELECTIVE schools, of which there are many near us, which pool the resources and the money. I'll give you an example, we have just now received a set of new maths textbooks, our last ones being at least 20 years old. Another example would be the appalling state of our classrooms, a few of which, in the main building have mould on the roof.
What is the main playing factor in grammar school kids achieving consistently high grades is the genuine passion and determination which teachers direct towards our learning and also the high pressures and expectations we are expected to withhold to.
It's the same for all Grammars, that argument was 100% bullshit. Hence no graph to support it
Grammar school are dammed if they do, and dammed if they don’t. Normally a state school will receive extra funding if they achieve low grades, but a grammar school will have its funding cut, or be threatened with closure. Then if we do well, we apparently don’t need funding. My school is in the south west also, and many of our departments can’t even afford lined paper. With the introduction of the new 9-1 gcse almost all the departments have been forced to buy new textbooks, which will have a knock on effect on the rest of the school.
Sounds like the answer is making public schools better! Not to getting rid of Grammar Schools that are doing a good job!
But the point is that we should be working to improve state schools instead of acting like introducing more and more grammar schools will solve the problem
Grammar schools are public schools. The opposition is to increasing their number not closing them down altogether.
Grammar schools are (selective) state schools.
Jazz O its pointless making more garmmar school there just gonna be normal school
Yeah most kids that go to comprehensive schools have under resourced things but I go to a grammar school and we really are under resources and under staffed
KnightO the steam fan same
Some information for those that like a little history of the campaigners involved in the debate. Labour have always done everything they can to split the nation into "bosses" and "workers". Anyone in a white collar job was "over privileged" and, by their definition, oppressed the "working class". Anyone in a blue collar job was "under privileged" and oppressed.
The school I attended had the son of the owners of a national bakery, one from a steel construction company, the son of a consultant in the local health authority, the son of a painter and decorator, a widows son (at first living off a small company pension and widows pension to raise the family then earning as a primary school teacher), the son of a regional TV producer and the son of a couple who worked on the factory floor and struggled to put two halfpennies together. The system was known as a "direct grant grammar school" and was set up so that children with aptitude could benefit from the best education available without going to "public school" (I've always thought that term was wrong. Private School is more suitable).
Labour MP, Ann Taylor, was a strong opponent of grammar schools and an equally strong supporter of the comprehensive system. According to the Labour doctrine, all children should take their chance on a system where talent, aptitude, intelligence, intellect, competition and a natural willingness to learn was frowned upon and should be written into (and, subsequently, out) of history. Her secondary school was the same as mine and the examples above. After setting the abolition of the grammar schools in motion, she promptly sent her children to the same school. A grammar school education for her own kids, but not a school fit for societies children.
Hypocritical? You betcha! Before condemning the grammar schools check out where our MPs went to school. I wouldn't mind a bet that those arguing eloquently against the grammar schools had a grammar school education.
As an aside, the grammar school education is not just about GCSE and A Level results, it is about developing the character of the person to bring out strengths that simply learning a curriculum cannot provide. The comprehensive system, at it's outset, was geared to improving the GCSE grades at any cost to make the numbers look good. Evidence the constant moan of business that the youngsters can't do maths and struggle to put a coherent sentence together, let along write a letter or report, against twenty to thirty years of improving GCSE results. Evidence the higher numbers and improving grades of students going on to A Level and, following on to university, the lecturers having to "revise" the basics before attempting to provide the degree course material.
I'm a working class kiddie and I got in you just have to learn and be serious.
Everyone is realising to give their kids a better future u should try 11 plus. Because state schools are rubbish kids who don't learn a thing lack of teachers and I feel bad for the children who are clever who go to state schools they won't learn anything because of the kids who don't care
As a grammar school student (in the Midlands) I can say they benefit me a lot. At primary school I was bored as hell because it was all too easy. Yes, I had to work hard to get in but the work paid off as I feel like I'm achieving a lot more than if I was in a mixed ability school because the work is geared towards faster learners. Furthermore, state schools in London are of a significantly higher standard than the Midlands and North. Whereas in London you might have 3 Ofsted Rated Outstanding schools to pick from, where I live, the only good school is the Grammar. Yeah, it's not ideal for everyone but given the government doesn't care about the Midlands and Black Country, I'll take whatever option I can to advance and do well for myself. That's why I worked my backside off to get to where I am.
Exactly fellow grammar schooler
I was lucky enough to have had family who sent me to private school in my primary school years, however secondary school was state, but I still had outside tutoring, let me tell you now I wish I did go to a grammar school, because my school was filled with disruptive and negative students who simply didn’t want to learn, they didn’t even want to vocational learning they just wanted to annoy the hell out of us, why should bright students be forced learn with people who couldn’t give a shit, it’s unreasonable to say the least, what they should have is vocational type schools for those who cannot handle with traditional state school learning
I agree.
Grammar school pushes the students to put in their best. Very good 👍
as if… they say that i should do good and ignore u just cuz u did ur 11+
I am currently in year 8 at a Grammar school and the non selective school gets more funding than us and has a lower GCSE average score. I am in the Top set for all of my STEM activities and my year 11 cousin can't do half of the stuff that my class does.Also a sixth of the people in my form group are eligible for free school meals and there is one girl (its an all girls school) that travels to school on the trains for an hour and a half every morning.
I go to a grammar school in Gloucestershire and personally I feel like its more of a place where people go because they want to learn. I am not wealthy, precisely no money was spent on me getting into where I am now. At 11 you can tell the difference between people who actively want to learn and for those whom it is not such a priority and thats what the test is for. I agree that it is not perfect but they are working to improve it. My school gave a person like me who likely would have been bullied or out of place in a regular comprehensive to be with people like me and give me a better chance at achieving what i wanted to.
And for that matter, resources are not pooled towards schools like mine, there are constant appeals for grants, donations and the heating does not go on until months into the winter. Instead of getting rid of grammar schools, shouldnt we be working to improve our entire education system?
And you may say that Grammar school are in higher income areas but mine is actually in a very poor area of a city and has no catchment area, so where you live doesnt affect you!
Thank you for sharing this.I also live in Gloucestershire. May I ask which grammar school you are in? Because my son is going to grade 6 soon, he has no tutor. I don't know if he can pass the exam. My husband and his family are against to children going to grammar school, but the is very smart and likes learning. In the current school, he seems out of place. He feels that the school is very boring. He will soon complete the task given by the teacher, I think grammar school will suit for him. I have signed him up, but I don't know if he can get an offer.
@@anonymintheworld9781 sorry but I am not comfortable sharing my school on the Internet! but it's the the top mixed one, so that might help. Honestly the passion for learning is key and my advice is to just let him do the test and see! maybe have a look at the type of question and do a couple practise questions but I don't personally see the point in going crazy with tutors! I'm starting the sixth form in a week and honestly I wouldn't want to be anywhere else!!
Grammar schools are good because the more intelligent diligent children are able to make the most of their potential without the unruly time-sapping thickos holding them back. There's absolutely no reason to claim that resources are concentrated on the grammar schools at the cost of the other state schools - it's just another jealous Lefty argument aimed at holding everyone down to the lowest common denominator. When I was at school the classes were streamed by ability after the first year of secondary school and I can tell you it was a lot easier to concentrate without the disruptive low-IQ students taking up the teacher's time having to re-explain everything twice whilst the more capable looked at the ceiling waiting to move on. The streamed classes were able to explore the subjects in greater depth as we could understand it all more quickly. This is what a grammar school does on a larger scale. It makes the best of the smartest kids and allows the less capable to be taught in schools better suited to their speed of learning. The Left need to stop trying to tell us that every child is the same with the same potential. The fact is, some are more suited to being doctors and others to working in retail
***** the video in question sums up my criticisms.
HatingOnHomework 98 Great points there. Our edgy anarchist friend just hates excellence and people striving to do their best who end up with a good salary. Basically he's the kind of resentful wretch who would rather everyone was poor and held back rather than allowed to make the best of their potential. Probably thinks inequality of outcome comes from oppression too...
Greg Thompson oh like those public school boys like Boris and Gove?
***** so Grammar School are exempt from bullying and are havens for bright kids? That's interesting, because the Grammar School in my area has a serious problem with both bullying and drugs. www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2015/03/eleven-grammar-school-myths-and-the-actual-facts
***** again, not true, the kids from this Grammar school are arrogant and snobbish and will pick on kids who are from a lower class even though they are intelligent.
I attended a grammar school and I broadly agree with your assessment.
For the class element, there's also the fact that property prices in catchment area for grammar schools tend to be higher.
As another Grammar pupil it's because the middle class push the prices up by moving into the catchment
Actually Grammar often have a larger catchment area than academically successful non religious comprehensive schools. In the area where I come from Fortismere Comprensive which is the affluent part of the borough of Harringay has a small catchment area from which selects its pupils and the house prices have increased for the properties near the school. Where the Latymer Grammar school which is actually in the poorer East Side of Borough of Enfield, has a large catchment area.
Also in big cities children of non indigenous parents are heavily represented in Grammar Schools. These are children of Jewish, Asian and African background.
Super selective state comprehensive schools which are favoured by the political elite such as Blair, Gove and Cameroon are very popular with pupils of African background.
Lol u are so stupid grammar schools dont have catchment areas; entry is based on performance in the grammar test
i had no tutoring an got into a grammar school from a state school... I hate the amount of comparing there is
Can you tell me what is a grammar school lol IDK what it is
I go to a grammar school i under estimate how well my school is
If only you'd had a good grammar school education, like my kids have, then you'd have known that what you described was not the situation in Britain, as you said in your introduction, but the situation in England and Wales.
Damn this was biased
It was fiction tbh
Secondary modern results aren't much different from comps (about 50% vs 58% GCSE A-C rate for 2015). Kids from poorer backgrounds currently have no chance of getting into the better comps, as the house prices in the catchment areas of better comps increases, pricing poorer families out.
The current comp system effectively discriminates on wealth. Grammars discriminate by ability. A nationwide system of grammars would give more poorer children the chance of a better education, rather than being condemned to a poor comp.
In NI, where they have grammar schools nationwide, 50% of the top 62 grammar schools have 13%+ children on FSM, which is the average of FSM children in state schools in England. They have GCSE A-C rate from 81-100%.
The reason very few disadvantaged kids get into grammar schools in England is because there are so few of them, they're concentrated in wealthier areas, so naturally, wealthier kids are going to get into them.
Grammar schools may unite politicians against them, yet plenty of them go through hoops to get their own kids a selective education, and plenty were selectively educated themselves. The fact that these people unite against grammar schools while sending their own kids to selective schools, and benefitting from them themselves, is a disgrace.
"Bright kids" I'm not bright. But got in.
I passed the Kent test a couple weeks ago
Same 375
And when there were thousands of these schools, they were much less selective, and 25 % of children got in. Because there are only 163 left, they are a lot of selective than they originally needed to be.
Great video! The only point I would make is that the argument that grammar schools give parents and children more choice is misleading because it's the grammar schools that select the children, they get the choic, not the families. Only10% of pupils will go to grammar schools so what about the other 90%'s choices? I can only imagine that people in favour of grammar schools assume their children will all get in; obviously, this is never going to happen.
Really good explanation. Thanks for your work. - - In this video, however, we're still talking about education as a vehicle for "social mobility," that is, competitive individualism in a liberal, capitalist society. And the criticism seems to be that grammar schools don't yield a competitive edge to everyone, usually measured in the first instance with test scores. But is this really the purpose of education, higher test scores, more atomization and competition, and more money for the winners? To encourage people to fight a war of all against all? - - There is a deeper criticism to be made, even before we judge grammar schools in the UK (or charter schools in the US) by their own sordid, degraded standards.
I don't like the way the 11+ works
Particularly Non-verbal reasoning because some of the options which are apparently wrong you could argue are correct and perhaps the pattern spotted would be indicative of a higher level of thinking.
I luckily passed without private tutoring
TDLGaming _ me too congratulations fellow grammar school student.
Samee ^^
The word 'Monged' that I was using in the 1980's (and possibly invented?) was originally a synonym of 'Othered' - i.e. it was a reaction against the politically incorrect slur 'Mongol' that was commonly used in the 1980's. "Why does that twat keep calling me a 'Mongol' all the time?" "I don't know? He does it to everybody - we're all 'Monged' now because of it :P" ....Thus I feel 'Othered' - I feel 'Monged'.
The people who really benefit are working class and the lower- middle middle class. Labour is against this because if these people are better educated and move up the social ladder, they won’t vote for Labour.
This is stupid for many reasons but the main one being that many people who do attend grammer schools and get a degree still only earn average money, the average entry level graduate salary is only 24,000. The only people who vote for conservatives are rich people and those who buy into their propaganda.
Most Grammar schools aren’t funded very well but that doesn’t mean all of them. My grammar school is quite well funded because of all the parents giving large donations.
You mentioned ability classes. What do you think of comprehensives that stream pupils by performance in internal exams?
It is literally no different, you do as well as how hard you work, no matter where you go.
haha no your wrong, grammar schools are extremely under funded because we do well without extra help, if we do bad our school gets shut down, i would know because i go to one
Explains why your spelling is messy lol.
Agree with the first comment though.
And are they strict and what makes it so gooad
This has always puzzled me. Is there anyone out there who knows the answer. Back in the day when baby boomers were reaching the age of 11 and were required to sit the 11 plus there were so many of us, new schools had to be built to accommodate us. My secondary modern had an intake into the first year classes (A B & C streams) x 30. That's 90 kids, girls and boys. All the other Non Grammar schools had about the same intake. Our local Grammar school (I am reliably informed) had classes A to G X 30, that's 210 kids, girls and boys. The junior schools in our area where the 11 plus was sat numbered about 20. If too many boys passed for the Grammar school, were a few dropped off the list to accommodate a few girls and vice versa? If the catholic schools did really well were a few Catholics dropped off the list to accommodate some Protestants and vice versa. Was there any favoritism? Was there any pressure to select some kids from all the junior schools? Was it the 210 highest scoring kids that were selected or was there some adjustments?
So this is the question: How did they manage to get select the final 210 kids?
"In UK education you have immense underfunding". According to OECD 6.3% of GDP in the UK was spent on education, compared to the top spender, Norway, with 6.6%. Terrible statement. This video needs citation, it's nonsense.
Maybe a large part of them are invested in excellent universities. As for primary schools, I don't think so.Several primary schools my children have been to are seriously underfunded
How many kids take the 11+ exam? I don't recall taking it.
Grammar school where I am from is okay, lots of bright people but also the school was in a total dump and had to have a catchment area. School was full of the local council kids, I would like to say they were fine but they just weren't.
But Harrow swamps all grammar schools
I went to one of the worst state comprehensives in the country but still managed to get mostly A's and nothing below a C. i went on to study a Masters in Engineering. I'm not sure I would've had anything in common with anyone at a grammar school though? I had the chance to go to a private college but I didn't have a quiff and hadn't been skiing. - so felt I didn't really fit in. I was achieving better results than my privately educted peers at university and leading group work on engineering projects. I excelled at Art, Maths, Technology and Science but I was no teachers pet. There was a revolt among pupils at my school about the way their technology coursework was being assessed and I supported them - it seemed bright pupils were gaming the marking criteria. As a result of this pressure from pupils, the marking criteria for my exam board changed and the grades for those just superficially working to the old marking criteria fell dramatically. My Technology coursework at school as it turned out was of a first or second year degree standard, and many of the other pupils at my school followed my lead - because I helped them out (I had no help myself - I guess that makes me a genius?). I inspired many disadvataged kids at my school to go into art college.
Thanks for the reply. Pick a book or a film or a game or a tune - because that's all we are going to be on social media soon (a la fahrenheit 451) :P ...edit; although having said that, the 1987 'Predator' is an intellectual tour de force - Mac to Dillon: "Over here" - quantum physics obviously.. followed by Mac to Dillon: "Any time" - Einstein's relativity... followed by a demonstration of entropy and evolotion as the predator uses it's heat vision to observe the dying scorpion, that Mac had just stabbed off Dillon's shoulder, cooling in it's in-human clawed hand (when I say in-human I mean like the trend for girls nails at the moment...).
How do you know so much about grammar school
"Social mobility is extremely low"
No it isn't, according to the global social mobility (GSM) index the UK scores 74.4, that's ranked 21 worldwide. That's not great , but it's definitely not "extremely low".
That being said, who is responsible for GSM indexing? It's the World Economic Forum, an NGO based in Switzerland. The top 5? Scandinavia, then follows a political road map from Switzerland. Take a look at the methodology of their indexing, compare it the 'coincidental' relationship with their political neighbours, and then stop using GSM indexing as anything more than industrial confidence building propaganda.
Just this flippant remark discredits your video, sorry, its total nonsense.
I think what he said about low social mobility means that it is very difficult to cross classes in Britain. It is rarely used to change life because of education. This is really very difficult in Britain
My grammar school is funded much less than other state schools in the area. They think that because we are doing well, we don’t need any more resources when in fact we really do.
I also think that primary schools should bring back sets because I'm a clever kid and have been held back several times because of other kids
let's try to reach 500 subs I think it’s just ur school that doesn’t have sets
Clever kids don't boast about how clever they are. Humility is key.
Novara media is brilliant. Keep the videos comings.
how many points did you get ?? i got 222
Which test?? Kent??
@@31oise isn’t Kent max 443 or something?? 222 is hella low if so, I got into Dartford grammar school, is that better then normal schools?……. I just realised your comment is 2 years old… I’d still appreciate a response tho lol
Yes, a small percentage of those in grammar schools are hugely disadvantaged, but u need to understand that those who go to grammar schools tend to be high achievers, often with family supporting their education. I know students from other schools who celebrate a pass (grade 4) in GCSEs compared to those in grammar schools who would feel completely defeated with a grade 7. People have different standards. My father was raised by his parents who immigrated into the UK and had nothing. He can now afford me going to private school.
The assumption that is underpinned is that school success is proportional to the school budget. More than there is money more than the success rate is important. It is a very curious postulate from the left, everything would depend on money, rather than ideas, the devotion of teachers, the spirit of a school or social class solidarity. Parents' family income should not be confused as a predictor of success with the school's budget.
This assumption reflects a technocratic mind: a problem has a solution in a bigger budget.
In the 1960s, a large American study had shown that school makes a difference over social class origin. The small Catholic parish schools, which were home to modest children of immigrants from poor European backgrounds, despite the limited means, sent more graduates to college than comparable public secondary schools. Why? Because of the coherence of the institution. Several British sociologists demonstrated the same in the 1990s. What makes a school successful is institutional cohesion. Basically, a good school is a whole with a common vision rather than a soulless bureaucracy.
GB needs pragmatism and should let alive schools that work fine.
So apparently my teacher said that I’m in Grammar school ?! I don’t really know what type of school I’m in well I do but not in English
Most exams are put into the wrong context we are taught to fear them like they are the enemy when their intent is for us to gauge our progress.
Tiny percentage of working class children got into grammar schools.
Less than 5% are eligible for free school meals.
Children who get to grammar school have often been to fed paying primary school, plus hired tutors get many children through the 11 plus.
Why can’t we provide opportunities for all children, educate them together, rather than failing at just 11 years old??
He's gorgeous
Thanks!
how much of the success of grammer school pupils is due to them being more bright than comprehensive school kids in the first place? you suggest the school makes a pupil successful or not, I would argue that most of the success of a grammer school child is due to them being brighter in the first place as well as having parents who encourage them to succeed. This is how they get into the grammer school in the first place! this whole paradigm is born out of left wing socialist thought based around taking responsibility away from the individual and pushing it onto the state. So a good example is the benefits system which says that if a person doesn't earn their own living they should be given housing and funds as its not their fault. if people don't save for their retirement they should be given a state pension, carers, perhaps a home, as again its not their fault. this outsourcing of personal responsibility creates a rot in a society as everyone expects a free lunch and therefore do not drive to succeed instead relying on a state which is often inefficiently run by self serving idiots in government. I personally went to a mix of private and grammer schools through my education, I didn't do particularly well especially at a later age. Since the state expects all to follow a national curriculum anyway, in theory all the resources such as books are the same whether you go to a state or grammar or private school! a clever child can learn themselves from the books! the teacher is just a facilitator of the whole process. the funny thing is private schools have become big business now and obviously sell themselves as providing something special, don't believe the hype!
See! The Labour Party are biased against the middle class. These people were once also working class, grammar schools helped them move up.
I don't get your point, also Labour party aren't Biased, and Grammar schools are for the people who are up for the challenge and the loss that Grammar schools bring, this type of videos demoralize kids and make them not want to take the exam
Do you people also argue against sets in high school?
I see your point, but sets within secondary schools are pretty fluid: If a student performs well/struggles, the teachers can easily move the student up or down accordingly, but it’s difficult to do that with state/grammar schools. Furthermore, unlike grammar vs state schools, sets (I assume anyway) receive equal levels of funding and resources whether they are high or low sets. Grammar/state schools meanwhile typically receive higher levels of funding and attract the better teachers. Also, I want to point out that here in France (where I am currently based) typical state funded schools don't employ the set system, students here are allocated to classes randomly. Although France isn't perfect (at all!) it's education system does produce greater social mobility than Britain's.
Anyone who has Oswald Mosley as their profile picture shouldn't be taken seriously.
I'm not by any means argueing that all you said is wrong, but points like getting more funding, maybe were once in practise, but as I'm witnessing our schools struggling dramatically to keep our ex 1960s tec school from falling down, from lack of funds. A year ago our PTA fund went towards rebuilding toilets, it's laughable. However, I'm also witnessing comps in my immediate area receiving money for £5 million sports halls, and a £10 million redo of their whole school. Yes, we probably (well inevitably) attract the better teachers, but it's not to say all are good. One of my friends currently has roughly 5 bloody awful teachers, unless she works her balls off (which she will) she'll fail maths, physics, biology, chemistry and geography. I also disagree with the set changes, we're only set in maths, whilst the rest are mixed - comps I know are set in every subject! There are seven sets, out of which I'm in set two, if I screw up a test twice I'm more than likely going to be heading down to set three. It's still increasingly fluid, regardless of the large spam of ability in maths. That in mind, i'm still not for grammar schools; hypocritical as it is- I do attend one! I got in in the 12+, nearly everyone I know got tutoring, I did for 11+, not for 12+ though. I feel like if we had better mixed ability comps, instead of grammars, but to introduce that, that takes funding, which I don't believe our current government would suggest we have. And with no real opposition for labour or lib dems, I don't think anything will change in the near future. It's noticeable that the UK are one of the only countries where we have selective education on such a high scale, in comparison to other countries such as JApan and south Korea....
***** we dont get textbooks or paper (we now have folders we have to provide)anymore so jks
***** this is a problem for every school across the country, not just Grammar Schools.
I didn't even know that there was a way to get into grammar schools nor did I know Grammar schools were a thing :c
so basically grammar schools are the UK equivalent to charter schools?
yes, which is why they receive more autonomy compared to comprehensive schools
They put up a picture of my school 😂
Wow i am in year 3 and i am already practising i am minahil a girl
I go to The Skinners Grammar School in kent
fix sound. i can't hear you.
Such a balanced video (hahahahaha)
rubbish my child only had 4 months schooling during covid didn't take part with see saw online and smashed kent and shepway test out the ball park , i feel rather piss off that so many begged their child's way in on appeals .
I am going to grammar school and i made a big mistake
This is why we need corbyn
Doesn't actually explain what grammar schools are
Misleading title. It should be 'I don't like Grammar schools and here is why'. D minus!
The way he’s speaking u can just tell he went to a grammar skl
He’s not speaking in any way, you are just a fucking peasent and you probably go to a state school fucking slave
Steno woah don't be mean
Steno nothing is wrong with state schools
@@steno5399 You are probably mad at people who can spell, since you are too stupid to even spell "peasant".
Vid on point
Lol I watch this and I user to go to grammar schools
Oscar Vitlue same
Why you have to explain this in UNDER FIVE MINUTES.. ...WHAT'S THE BEEF HERE? We're you afraid to miss your airplane?? Pretty SILLY, if you'd ask me. And by the way....the next time you do this, you wanna watch YOUR PRONUNCIATION. For people outside the UK it is hardly decipherable!!
the presenter Kerem is so hot...
100 💯 commment
He looks Turkish.
So?
Ottoman empire entensifies
@@air8223 I just say it 🤷♂️
I didn’t pass 😭😭😭
xXpotato Xx soz man so what school u going
I don’t know.....?
LB GAMING maybe some ideas please?
xXpotato Xx don't worry
xXpotato Xx their is a exam called the 12/13+ for people who want to go grammar school in year eight or seven
The argument that Grammar schools benefit only the middle and upper classes is half baked, there's so few of them left and demand is so high for them that house prices soar in their catchment areas (the same is also true for good comprehensives) so if you can afford a house in those areas you can effectively buy your child a good education(grammar or comp), or at least a shot at one. So the area's become gentrified by virtue of having a Grammar school, it's a chicken and an egg scenario, if you had Grammar schools in Hackney, you'd have poor black kids going to them, but you don't because the left won't allow it and the children of the poorest suffer as a result.
mumblecore