Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-02-07 02:19:40 +0000, "Clive George"
said:

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...

You never answered my question about whether or not it had a
non-selective
secondary school - does it?

Sorry, missed that bit. Yes, it does... but it doesn't do mixed ability
well. I have experience of that from the other end, since I deal with
its output...

Would it be any better if it was two selective schools? Especially for
the majority who would be selected against, and who you'd potentially
still be dealing with?

I'm not really arguing against your choice of local school, I'm only
arguing with the implied premise that grammar is necessarily better.

cheers,
clive

I think that it's a question of suitability.

Somehow people seem to confuse a school focussed on delivering a good
education to those
with a strong academic ability as being "better" and one which focusses
on those with skills
in other areas as "not as good".

The outcome was therefore to socially engineer an arrangement where
everybody could be seen to get
the same, whether it was suitable or not with the net result of a loss
of more than a generation of opportunity
in most areas. Thus education falls short based on trying to be all
things to all men and not achieving excellence
in any of them.


HEAR HEAR!

Change the perception..Its good to be as good as you can be, its stupid
to try and be what you are not, and the right school to bring out YOUR
potential is the thing to aim for.