John Bolt of the SEA writes:
Teresa May’s decision to re-open the issue of grammar schools – and secondary moderns - has trained a spotlight directly on the entire issue of selection. It is not however going the way she expected. The intellectual and political case for selection has collapsed.
In today’s world, we need to give all our children, particularly those from the poorest families, every opportunity to succeed. If it is agreed that extending selection damages both social cohesion and children’s learning, there can surely be no case either for accepting its continuation anywhere in the country.
It is time therefore to challenge the long held position within successive Labour leaderships that nothing should be done about those selective areas and schools that still exist.
A contemporary resolution submitted by the SEA and a number of constituency parties to this effect has been accepted by Labour’s Conference Arrangements Committee. The motion reads:
“Conference
It now goes to a ballot of conference delegates to decide whether it will be debated. This takes place on Sunday. It is therefore really important to encourage as many conference delegates as possible to support it in that ballot.
This is the first opportunity for a long time to make the argument against all selection heard. There is a broad coalition emerging against the government plans and this is an opportunity to shift Labour policy towards a principled opposition to grammar schools both old and new.
Comments
John is right that May's
John is right that May's proposals to extend selection have put the spotlight on grammar schools. The system has been shown up for what it is: unfair, inequitable, damaging to the education system as a whole and harmful to those children living in selective areas who aren't selected (the majority). Most LAs recognised this decades ago yet the system remains in a few pockets. It's now time to say selection should go the same way as corporal punishment. All state-funded secondary schools should accept children of all abilities and not choose which taxpayers' children they will educate.
This is all very well, but
This is all very well, but why does one of the founders of this site still have selection at the school to which she is Chair of Governors?
Add new comment