Discuss The Archers  permalink

Why not send them both to the lesser school?

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 228
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Oh, and here we are again. Two students, one bright, the other takes after his father. Rather than split them up, why not send them both to somewhere because she's "...so bright, she'll do well anywhere"?

    Um, how about because the bright one deserves to be served well by a challenging school rather than drumming her fingers alongside her less-gifted brother? You're telling me it's fairer to have her bored for 7 years because they can't bear to be separated for a third of the day?

    Always, always, *always* it's about making the intelligent dumb down rather than allowing them to shine.

    Would someone mind explaining to me why academic / intellectual excellence is such a problem in this country?

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Would someone mind explaining to me why academic / intellectual excellence is such a problem in this country?  

    That's a question I've been asking for a very long time.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Strictly-cum-Aunty (U14354015) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I thought that twins often do better if split up at school?

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by kitty buttoon (U13699996) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    My twin niece/nephew were split up at school. It was the policy of their LEA for some reason. They led completely separate (and happy)social lives there, and many of their classmates never realised they were related!

    Couldn't tell you whether it was beneficial academically, though. That's probably quite hard to measure.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Dabchick (U14374409) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    If Freddy and Lily can't bear to be split up, they are (a) not a normal brother and sister and (b) probably unhealthily close. It would probably be better by far for them to have separate school lives.

    Children who used to go to single-sex boarding schools would have been separated quite naturally, and Nigel ought to know this.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by MCBefore (U14701974) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    As far as we know Borchester Green is a good, local comprehensive school. As it takes all-comers its results in the League Tables won't be as 'good' as those of selective schools. This doesn't mean that it can't cater for bright, able children like Lily while also offering more support for the Freddies... Most comps set children into ability bands very quickly. In fact BG may offer Lily the opportunity of learning how to get on with different sorts of people (a wider range than she's met at Loxley Barrett) - a valuable life skill. After all Lily has managed to get on well at her local primary school. Sounds like snobbery to me...

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by JudithL (U14272244) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    she's "...so bright, she'll do well anywhere" 

    This is a myth, as EBGB rightly says. Not only does a bright child face hours of boredom in class; he or she also may have to contend with bullying out of class.
    Lily might well emerge from Borchester Green with a good number of A*s, but without any enjoyment of learning.
    It is just as difficult for a teacher to stimulate the brain of a really bright child as it is to help one who is always struggling, when the majority of the class clamours for attention.
    It is normal in comprehensives to concentrate on the borderline grade C passes, and neglect the top and bottom.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    There's catering, and then there's serving. I will be catered for if I go to McDonald's; I will be served properly if I go to the Fat Duck. If I am prepared to pay for the Fat Duck, I am lucky enough to be able to afford it, and I have a particular set of requirements that make me wish for it, why should I not go there?

    Call it snobbery if you will - it may well be. All I know is that I wasn't stretched enough at 2ndary school, and I've suffered ever since because I didn't need to learn how to work for my results until it was too late to develop the habit.

    Yours,

    A mature student who's gently procrastinating on here rather than getting on with an assignment that's due in very shortly indeed.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by happySarahthecook (U13768961) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    We are talking about education here. Why should the comprehensive be seen as a 'lesser' school? This makes me so angry I could spit! Education should be good and challenging for all, not just for those who can afford to opt out of the state system. I went to a comprehensive school (I am of average intelligence and have a degree, 2 postgraduate qualifications and a professsional qualification) and my daughter goes to the same one. My husband went to a state school and has a degree from Oxford and a postgrad from the LSE. I have also worked in many schools. In all of the schools I have known, the intelligent pupils do shine. Bullying and boredom can be rife in any school - it is not down to money to solve these problems. I'll shut up now, but Elizabeth and Nigel should know in their hearts what will suit their children and whether or not it is a good idea to split them up. One other point - a child scraping through an exam to attend either a grammar or a public school is not generally a good idea. Anyway, this is just my humble opinion and I am sticking to it!

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Two things, happySarah:

    1) Would you suggest that those with learning difficulties should be obliged to attend the normal comprehensive system?

    2) My point on the OP was - tho' not stated explicitly - that there is no harm in sending a child to a school that suits him intellectually. Nor his sister. Why make either of them attend the "wrong" school?

    Yep, intelligent kids will shine - we're lucky like that. Doesn't make us happy. My argument is that Lily should not be asked to submit to the English antagonism to intelligence that frequently results in the bullying of those who make an effort, and the boredom of those who do not, for whatever reason. And to which most of those I know in a similar situation to myself were subjected.

    If there was a broadly available state system for the academically gifted, I would support it over and above the private system any day. But there ain't.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Ivor Hereford-Bull (U2222879) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    In reply to EBGB message 1.

    I wholeheartedly agree! Why is it that whenever someone proposes making exams more challenging to differentiate the academically able within the population it is criticised by many commentators as being elitist? What is wrong with having an academic elite? I would like to see us celebrate excellence in all walks of life. To be excellent in later life, skills need to be recognised early and nurtured. Tests and examinations that help identify and build on individual strengths are to be welcomed.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Redbookish (U1335018) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Not only does a bright child face hours of boredom in class; he or she also may have to contend with bullying out of class. 

    Yup, been there, done that. Did OK, but it would have been nice not to have been bullied throughout school.

    Let Lily shine! Freddy will inherit Lower Loxley, but Lily will have to survive on her own merits and brains, not an inherited position. So she needs a really good education, where they'll push her.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by MCBefore (U14701974) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Absolutely agree - schools should be able to offer a suitable curriculum to meets the varied needs of students of different abilities. We've never heard of BG being a 'failing' school in any way - lots of children from Ambridge go there and they were on to Jamie pretty quickly when he started messing about. So why worry about paying fees for private ed? Both of mine went to local comps and state 6th forms and got top grades and into their chosen professions as well as keeping good friends in our local area. I kept my ear to the ground and knew lots about what went on in the schools before they went - not like Liz and Nigel who spent one morning on a little visit and were So Impressed.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by ruralsnowflakebliss (U8131914) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    You can be bullied for being a swot where ever you go... you can also be bullied for being a dumb cluck amoung the (they think anyway) bright young crowd.

    I had cousins who happened to have a very ambitious local school as their catchment. The very bright one was bullied and the not so bright one was too.....

    There are no rules on what your peer group will target you on and no nirvania to escape them.

    I learnt to be really really sarcastic and have had to spend most of my life reigning that lesson in

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Not every child is a gifted footballer, or woodworker, or ballet dancer, and it seems to be OK to say that one child is better than another at running or climbing or painting-and-drawing or looking after animals. Why is it not acceptable to say that one child may simply be better than another at maths or english or geography?

    It does seem strange to assert all the time not that all people are created equivalent but that they are all created equal, when you only have to look at them to see that they simply *aren't*.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by JudithL (U14272244) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I agree with your post, Chris.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by petal jam (U1466691) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    >>I will be served properly if I go to the Fat Duck.

    But you only get three chips at the Fat Duck. And you need extra tutoring just to go through the booking process. McD's Fries are peerless on a cold day when your breakfast was a long time ago.

    Oddly enough the offspring's community school, which officially 'has outstanding outcomes' for its pupils, keeps to mixed ability teaching for the whole of year 7. They are particularly encouraging of kids with ideas and enthusiams.

    I, OTOH, was bored witless by the amount of fact cramming required by the top stream of my top of the range girls school. Nobody wanted to hear our ideas - if ideas were needed for the exam, they would be set for homework in good time.

    School is about more than your maths score - which is exactly why Nigel is so keen for the Twins to keep a plastered-wall's distance from the sort who will grow up to dig Freddie's garden and mop the LL floors.

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by AP (U14268795) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I regret not having the confidence to commit financially to private education. Yes they did well, learnt to mix with a wide range of people and the opposite sex, but they also learnt to keep their heads down and to be wary of showing their abilities. They did not learn self confidence, they were not challenged intellectually (possibly because of keeping their heads down) and were not particularly happy or fulfilled.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    > peerless on a cold day when your breakfast was a long time ago
    And the rest of the time, when you want something out of the mainstream? That you'll remember forever with a warm glow? TFD wasn't only up with the best food I've ever had - it had far & away the nicest, most welcoming, non-judgemental restaurant staff I've encountered. And gawd knows I tend to trigger snootiness, not being dressed for the Michelin part. Hence the analogy.

    > more than your maths score
    This is England, where being bad at Maths is not only socially acceptable, but positively something of which to be proud. So realistically, the Pargetters won't give two hoots about their local pargetter's comparative calculatory qualifications. Other than Robert, how many of the characters have a genuinely non-arts, non-farming background? (Am prepared to be wrong on this, but can't think of any.)

    Nigel & Lizard should, however, be after the best for both their kids, not just the less gifted one.

    PS. I'm still waiting for anyone to admit that they'd oblige those with learning issues to admit that they'd oblige them to attend a "normal" school without any extra consideration..........anyone?

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by Lyra (U2293272) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    It depends on the school. My two went to the local comprehensive. Yes, we were lucky. The school's 'A' level results regularly come in the top 20 schools in the country (including independent schools) and results are better than the local independents at all levels. If we'd paid we'd have been paying for better sports facilities and snob value and as neither of them was particularly sporty it didn't seem worth it. As it was they've both had a first class education, got excellent exam results and gone to the universities of their choice. Our daughter is pursuing the career of her choice and our son fully expects to.

    They also learnt to mix with a wide range of people and were encouraged to express their opinions and to think for themselves with the result that they are both confident and articulate. It wasn't an overwhelmingly middle class school by any means. the intake is pretty mixed, although I admit it doesn't include inner city areas.

    I know that we were lucky and a lot of local schools aren't like that. What galls me is that we've never heard any discussion of the merits or otherwise of Borchester Green from the Pargetters. Lizzie and Nigel have taken the view that it would be disastrous for their offspring to go there, end of story and the main reason seems to be that Pargetters simply don't go to state schools.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Nigel & Lizard should, however, be after the best for both their kids, not just the less gifted one. 

    Yes, yes, YES! let them go to separate schools which meet their differing needs.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I'm still waiting for anyone to admit that they'd oblige those with learning issues to admit that they'd oblige them to attend a "normal" school without any extra consideration  

    I would argue that the very bright have learning issues just as much as those with the difficulties more usually associated with the term.

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Exactly. But those who'd oblige the very bright to subsume themselves within the rest NEVER seem prepared to admit this - they just cry snobbery and elitism.

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by maggiechow- chained to the railings (U6630370) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Seconded.

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Lydia Keith (U1474362) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    But you only get three chips at the Fat Duck 

    You must have gone on the wrong night, we got a huge bowlful.

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by cherrytree (U9175528) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    "It is normal for comprehensives to concentrate on the borderline C grade and neglect teh top and the bottom"
    Not all comprehensives Judith, not all.

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    & I've just noticed that I slightly overdid the obliging / admission motif there. Ooops. Apparently I am overexcited at venting a little overdue spleen. smiley - smiley

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Sounds like you and I have had very similar experiences EBGB. Pants, isn't it?

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by ruralsnowflakebliss (U8131914) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    A good school should be able to cater to all... otherwise it is fit for no one IMO..

    Yes extreme talent in an area such as music dance or sport may require extra faciilities and perhaps a specialist centre but the investment and culture should be there in all other areas to stretch everyone. Similarly an extrem learning need may require a different setting but more mainstream ones should not

    Of course that takes money but it also take belief by the staff and the children but even more importantly by the parents/ community.

    Just my view... I am very very elitist BTW in the sense I believe we can all do better.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Yerst.

    Under almost all circumstances I would rather be lucky & bored / bullied than overly-challenged; post-18 there is at least time to compensate & achieve. But it still leaves one damaged & struggling in other ways.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by petal jam (U1466691) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    >>how many of the characters have a genuinely non-arts, non-farming background?

    Alice for one - Engineering degree [unspecified] but probably more than farm machinery.

    Various medical types - inc. Alistair, Amy and the various GPs, all requiring good science and maths.

    Harry came from banking, so numerate anyway. As did Nigel once upon a time, though iirc anyone with connections did Something In The City at the time.

    Usha - Law is generally described as Humanities rather than Arts. Several in Management. Or property development.

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by haseltine (U2777643) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Sorry but where is it stated that 'Freddie will inherit Lower Loxley' and Lily will have to fend for herself?? (Or words to that effect). This is Borcetshire 2010 not Downton Abbey 1914.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by Now Locking for a house (U3261819) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Jillm appeared to be voicing what many fear. the dumbing down to embrace the majority, or in her case her grandson. However, I don't want a dumbing donw but an elevation of all.

    As in the feminist debate, different seems to be confused with equal.
    Private education may respect certain traits and equip you in certain ways. These will be restricted. However, they are traits that equip ypu for a certain type of society, a society that is determined by those that attend the schools that equip them for it!

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by maggiechow- chained to the railings (U6630370) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Yes, but Nigel is stuck in a timewarp where LL is concerned.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    <quote> A good school should be able to cater to all...<.quote>

    Theoretically yes. But I think we are all agreed that those with learning difficulties need teachers with special training/skills/talent. All I am saying is the very bright/able also need teachers with training/skills/talents which meet their needs. And that takes money. In a world where education budgets are limited everyone is happy to spend on specialist teachers for those with "learning difficulties", while making the assumption that the more academically gifted students will survive and help to improve the school's standing in the league tables. No thought is ever given to how happy the bright children are, or more importantly (IMHO) whether they have become so bored that they have given up entirerly and are getting results far below their potential.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Petal - Thank you, I knew I'd have overlooked people.

    Alice - I am embarrassed, from an engineering b/gd I should have remembered her at least.

    Medical - Alistair & Amy, yep, given, FAIL on my part again. Tho' when *did* we last have a GP in the village?

    Harry - well, client facing retail desk. I've met them. Numerate's not first on the list so much as good at charming the punter ! And didn't he get made redundant?

    Nigel. Less said the better. Isn't that where we came in?

    Usha - again, fair enough in that there's logic involved.

    Management, property development - if we ever heard them number crunching, I'd be up for that. But we don't. Only successful developer got done for being a crook; the rest seem to just get to throw money at projects & see what sticks.

    OTOH, one could easily argue that this pathetic representation of the sciences / engineering is perfectly in line with RL. Crap, innit?

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Alice is not from an engineering background, though: she is from a farming background, which she has left to take a degree in engineering.

    Does anyone happen to know what Adam read when he did his degree at Newcastle? I think it was Agricultural Economics, which isn't straight farming either, and more sciences than arts I would have thought.

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by ruralsnowflakebliss (U8131914) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I sent a lot of my school time reading under the desk tabby. I also kept just enough focus to keep up and answer questions when asked. Oddly I stretched myself in everything except maths :-
    Unless we see streaming as a beneficial thing.... studies are mixed on that then we will always have different levels in our education.

    Give a school the resources, the expectation and the motivation and they can stretch anyone is my personal view.

    Don't tell a school 'they are not good enough' for your child. My mother view was, and I suppose try to live it, that if the school was not good enough for her child then it was not good enough for any body elses.

    So they went on the PTA.. and fund raised and took extra curricular activities...

    We get the schools that reflect our sense of communities IMO... but then I went to a rural school with a lot less divide and compete

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Now Locking for a house (U3261819) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    What a wonderful maxim of your Mother's rural. I see why you are like you are.

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    > she is from a farming background, which she has left to take a degree in engineering.

    Which means - to my (often accused of being over-literal) way of thinking - that she is now of an engineering background.

    E.g. my father was a stockbroker. But you wouldn't want me to run your pension, as you'd probably rather Alice fixed your F15's control algorithms than decide your wheat variety.

    And before everyone goes bonkers at me for being excessively middle-class, I am (ironically) now retraining from engineering / IT to farming.

    Still grumpy about being under-served at school, however.

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by stolenkisses (U6230663) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I wonder if Nigel would have been so concerned to have extra tuition if it were Lily having trouble with the entrance exams instead of Freddie?

    sk

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Once-a-Ginge (U1486077) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Don't tell a school 'they are not good enough' for your child 

    It's not a question of "good enough". That's the problem. Under the old grammar school/secondary modern system those who went to secondary moderns were viewed as not good enough, while those who had a working class background and went to a grammar school were viewed as snooty. Lose/lose It's a matter of "meeting the needs" if the secondary moderns had been promoted as meeting the needs of those with particular skills then they would have been seen as a desirable place to be. There should be no "good enough" "better" or "worse" in education. Only equal but different.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by EBGB (U2613853) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    FWIW, Tabby, that was my first instinct on reading that post.

    But then I re-read it, & realised that (if I'm getting the right vibe) the principal is about fighting to make the school meet one's needs rather than dismissing it out of hand. So changing the system from within. OK, it requires being trapped within it - which of course might be preferable to avoid from a timing perspective - but it's a damned healthy approach to fixing a situation that isn't right.

    I should point out here that I'm one of those annoying DON'T COMPLAIN IF YOU'RE NOT PREPARED TO FIGHT types.

    It's a miracle no-one's strangled me yet...

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by maggiechow- chained to the railings (U6630370) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    That was the original idea, it's just that parents thought the grammar schools were better.
    Of me and my brothers and sister, 2 went to grammar and 2 to secondary mod, and none of us felt we were different 'class', just we were 'good' at different things.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    She may now be *of* an engineering background but she isn't *from* one, because that is the place where your roots are, not where you branch out into!

    (coo, what a metaphor!)

    Seriously, having a this or that background is always about what you have as the basis of yourself, not the bits you have bolted on later. Kate has a farming background, not an international relations background, for example. I am from an academic background, That being what my parents were and the milieu I grew up in, whether or not I decided to be a silversmith when I left home. That sort of thing.

    The phrase I used was "from an engineering background", and I shall stick by my contention that Alice does not come from such.

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by ruralsnowflakebliss (U8131914) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Ah but Tabby that equal but different has not and I don't think ever will chime with our societies need to rank in heirarchy.

    It sounds lovely doesn't it. A multiplicity of educational establishments all different and equally valued (a very urban view BTW because it doesn't happen in the cuntryside).

    I suppose I come from an older Scottish tradition that simply stated that a child should be able to become a doctor/ lawyer etc from any school and the school itself that they were sent to should not determine that choice. The old 'lad o' pairts'

    www.britannia.org/sc...

    I think as a society we will never lose our contempt for the non academic... it is too ingrained and indeed if you take the German example they are very socially structured and quite prejudiced around their streamed system.

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Lars Post (U2291030) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    EBGB

    Any country that uses the phrase "Too clever by half" is doomed to fail.

    Love your name btw, I always wanted to breed hebes so I could call one Jeeby.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 43.

    Posted by ruralsnowflakebliss (U8131914) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    I was brought up to put my money where my mouth was EBGB... the same as you by the sound of it.

    My own educational experience wasn't perfect but some of the mistakes were down to me.

    I think we all reflect that to some extent. I now know myself oh so much better than when I was a teen. It does help!

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010


    if the secondary moderns had been promoted as meeting the needs of those with particular skills then they would have been seen as a desirable place to be.
     

    The secondary moderns were under-funded. The tri-partite system as originally envisaged was not properly implemented. It was the politicians who were responsible for many of the sec-mods being `not good enough'. As for state education being under-funded - well matters won't improve till our law-makers have an interest in them - and that means their own children attending.

    I liked Rural's `if it isn't good for my child it isn't good for *any* child. In our case when OH and I were discussing it OH said `why do you think that *our* children *need* the so called advantage - our children are better than that!

    Children develop at different ages and at different rates - that is why there was a 13+ as well as an 11+. And as a teacher of adults I've seen them develop at 17+, 19+ , 35+ and *every* age! Comprehensives allow children to be good as some subjects and not others. Eg one of our daughters was good at Maths, Sciences and French - but not (then) good at English - that was catered for at School. (She passed French GCE easily but had three attempts at English Language - why - who knows?) And by the way she has now `caught up' and writes clear, concise reports in her professional work. It's not a case of `cleverness' being denigrated. Am not sure what `cleverness' is. I don't think you can separate one part of a human out and label it or measure it ..

    that's enough of my ramblings ..

    JPBS

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by joe (U13868420) on Tuesday, 7th December 2010

    Bullying and boredom can be rife in any school 

    At the local comp they might be bullied. At the private school, Nigel would probably call it "character-building"

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.