“we can all bring out experts..”
Sinn Féin’s John O’Dowd and the DUP’s Edwin Poots were on Hearts and Minds tonight discussing the vexed issue of post-primary transfer. The recent Catholic Heads Association [CHA] statement featured heavily with John O’Dowd claiming that the Association are now “opposing the Catholic Bishops” [Excommunicate them! - Ed] – I suspect he had Bishop Donal McKeown in mind. But here’s a question, with the Education Minister threatening to press ahead into the vacuum in the absence of political consensus on the way forward, why describe the degree of consensus that apparently exists between the DUP and the CHA as “a wee bit startling, if not shocking”? And I’d suspect that consensus could include the Association for Quality Education.. So much for political reality..
It seems that the DUP have quietly adopted the AQE policy on tests for grammar school admission and are attempting to pass it off as their own homework.
Unfortunately for Mervyn Storey and the slow learners of the DUP AQE is simply a facade for the GBA, the Governing Bodies Association of Voluntary Grammar Schools, the majority of whom are the Catholic Grammar Schools i.e The Catholic Heads Association.
So a confusion has bubbled to the surface. AQE have announced a test and published a specification which has been circulated to primary schools. Thirty grammar schools claim to be intent on using the AQE test. As of yesterday, no Catholic grammar had committed to use the AQE test. The Catholic Heads Aoociation announcement of support for the CCEA test ( as yet undeveloped )has created the ultimate challenge.
Which test will be chosen to unite the grammars? The “unregulated” AQE test or the “regulated” CCEA test? Answers on a postcard to Caitriona Ruane.
The public have an uncritical trust of regulation.
The DUP couldn’t negotiate their way out of a wet paper bag. It seems their St. Andrews triumph is about to result in disaster for thousands of pupils and their longsuffering parents
The DUP couldn’t negotiate their way out of a wet paper bag. It seems their St. Andrews triumph is about to result in disaster for thousands of pupils and their longsuffering parents
Posted by Essentialist on Oct 23, 2008 @ 10:39 PM
…….
so no blame for the incompetent minister of education then? Parents want to keep academic selection btw
Some parents, you mean…
Any decent middle class parent wants to keep academic selection. The alternative is horrific.
Is anyone else watching lets talk at the moment?
Talking an apalling piece of television. Shabby camera work, shabby panel, it looks like carruthers is losing control with all these butt-ins.
Oh and didnt we all feel a little squirmish when your guy Andrew was talcked by O’Dowd. Anyone who doesn’t win a skirmish with that mess O’Dowd doesn’t exactly send out a good image of his capability. Ah well, he was crap just like the whole program.
The Minister for Education has set out her stall quite clearly. Noone can complain that they are unaware of her intention to impose comprehensive schooling via the removal of academic selection. She is simply a convenient face to vent on. O’Dowd, Kelly, Adams, Gildernew; the Sinn Fein face doesn’t matter.
What does matter is the move towards compromise by the political parties who claimed opposition to the removal of academic selection and the preservation of a reliable and valid method of determining entry into grammar schools.
I merely point out that when the possibility of compromise is raised the losers are those who move towards the comprehensive model. Many grammar school heads have demonstrated willingness out of self interest or self preservation including many non-Catholic schools.
How can anyone promote a CCEA test that hasn’t been developed unless you know that it will have no purpose other than to be “regulated”?
Touching the tar baby of a three year phase out of academic selection shows the ineptness of the DUP leadership. They deserve criticism.
The Minister for Education has set out her stall quite clearly. Noone can complain that they are unaware of her intention to impose comprehensive schooling via the removal of academic selection. She is simply a convenient face to vent on. O’Dowd, Kelly, Adams, Gildernew; the Sinn Fein face doesn’t matter.
What does matter is the move towards compromise by the political parties who claimed opposition to the removal of academic selection and the preservation of a reliable and valid mrthod of determining entry into grammar schools.
I merely point out that when the possibility of compromise is raised the losers are those who move towards the comprehensive model. Many grammar school heads have demonstrated willingness out of self interest or self preservation including many non-Catholic schools.
How can anyone promote a CCEA test that hasn’t been developed unless you know that it will have no purpose other than to be “regulated”?
Touching the tar baby of a three year phase out of academic selection shows the ineptness of the DUP leadership. They deserve criticism.
‘The Minister for Education has set out her stall quite clearly. ‘
Ha ha, that’s the funniest thing I’ve heard in years…
Why does she never appear on H&M;herself these days? because she is totally imcompetant perhaps?
#
Some parents, you mean…
Posted by The Raven on Oct 23, 2008 @ 11:11 PM
a majority of parents have been shown to be in favour of selection. What ever happened to choice?
TFBTFO
Consider your spinal cord reflex reaction to the Sinn Fein minister. She is merely the lightning rod for policy developed by educationalists from all communities. Their common characteristic is that they are unelected and seemingly unaccountable. Stay focussed on the crucial issue. Equality of opportunity to seek a place in a grammar school is to be replaced by equality of result i.e. all schools admissions are to be without reference to academic ability. Comprehensive education.
Ask yourself why this is continuously referred to as a political problem. Perhaps it is because the future of the pathetic D’Hondt Assembly arrangements are of more concern than the educational needs of children.
The revised (reviled) curriculum has robbed many young children of the right to be taught early how to read spell and write. Numeracy and Literacy problems will only increase as long as this curriculum remains in place. Note that it was CCEA who produced this curricular nonsense along with the Pupil Profile and the, as yet undeveloped, new 11-plus test.
Unionist politicans hold the key. Caitriona Ruane will actively allow a descent into education chaos. Unionist representatives must not concede on this blackmail attempt by touching a “compromise”
Comprehensive education, or selection at 14? I don’t think that’s clear either.
“I merely point out that when the possibility of compromise is raised the losers are those who move towards the comprehensive model. Many grammar school heads have demonstrated willingness out of self interest or self preservation including many non-Catholic schools.”
So who are the winners?
At this point if HMG took back education, imposed a Dickson Plan type system, and properly funded school rationalisation, there would be a collective sigh of relief that at last Mummy and Daddy had sorted out the mess.
Poots versus O’Dowd?
Was the debate prefixed with ‘Dumb and Dumber’?
A collective sigh of relief from whom Willis?
You wouldn’t be slighting the Mummy and Daddy collectives such as the AQE who claim to represent parental views but find those views conveniently inherited via a letter template in their child’s schoolbag written by teachers and headmasters.
Lets not even go to the “selection v election” at 14 debate. As to funding; Northern Ireland’s education funding is the greatest in these islands.
The “winners” are those who seek to remove a choice from parents and pupils while retaining their self interests.
They don’t like it up ‘em you know Willis!
Nobody has ever given me an explanation as to why all the smart kids have to go the same school.
Smart kids for specific subjects in the same class ok – but the same school ?
My son goes to Campbell College – having gone there with a B2 and has just done superbly in his GCSEs – much better than most of his A Grade friends who went to Grammar School.
The debate about academic selection is fundamentally false.
It has nothing to do with academic selection and all about social selection.
As driftwood’s comment above highlights
“Any decent middle class parent wants to keep academic selection. The alternative is horrific”
Basically such parents dont want their children mixing with the Gobshite underclass who make teachers’ and other pupils’ lives hell. Take teachers strike in Movilla for instance – sounds like a lot of teachers are at the end of tehir tether.
And there is nothing wrong with that in one sense – such parents want what is best for their children.
However it condemns 75% of the populace to mediocrity.
The bottom line will be that if you are middle class and third level educated yourself your kids have a much better of chance of passing the 11+ than those from – for instance the Shankill Road. I am taking my youngest daughter through the last 11+ at the minute and the ability for me to coach her as well as paying £20 a week for another tutor is giving her an advantage.
You would have to be a genius to get an A in the 11+ if you were brought up in a sink housing estate.
However until we start being honest about why people want academic selection then we wont tackle the real causes of the problem.
I believe there should be a two tier education system.
One for those who want to attend schools were there is zero tolerance to discipline, lessons, respect for teachers etc and another for those who wont.
ie Enforce “grammar school” standards within one secondary sector and anyone who is disruptive goes somewhere else.
At the minute the Middle Classes are getting a standard of education all for themselves on the cheap.
However if you remove from the system the tyoe of pupil they fear then they wouldnt care if the school had a mixture of academic abilities – just like the parents in Campbell College.
Hi JEB,
“Nobody has ever given me an explanation as to why all the smart kids have to go the same school.
Smart kids for specific subjects in the same class ok – but the same school ?”
I’m surprised this needs spelt out. Peer pressure tends to drive the grammar kids to excellence. You don’t usually find kids who are brilliant at matchs but useless at say history. Plus that would be a nightmare to timetable for.
Not many people support the 11+. The debate is about selection and the rights/wrongs of it. Would you be OK with a test that selected on ability that could not be coached – like an IQ test? That’s what most people want.
On your other point you mention removing disruptive pupils. What you fail to mention is that sometimes very intelligent kids are disruptive because they are bored with the mundane lessons that are of no challenge. Remember lots of teachers wouldn’t have been top of the class when they were at school. As an example, Einstein was expelled from school.
Maths btw, not matchs… ;0)
could hardly believe my ears when o’dowd implied that the cha were ignoring the catholic bishops! s.f. used to believe that ignoring bishops was just the thing to do! does o’dowd really want head teachers to take their educational policies from the bishops? if so is it not time that that s.f. developed an’outreach programme’ for nationalista and republicans who do not takes their politics from the bishops and where does this leave their existing ‘outreach programme to unionists?’
Essentialist,
“The Minister for Education has set out her stall quite clearly”
What happens in 3 years time (after the CCEA test lapses and there is no academic selection)?
How does an oversubscribed secondary school decide which children get in and which don’t?
She has never explained that.
“On your other point you mention removing disruptive pupils. What you fail to mention is that sometimes very intelligent kids are disruptive because they are bored with the mundane lessons that are of no challenge.”
That is true, but I doubt it is a major problem post 11.
“I believe there should be a two tier education system.
One for those who want to attend schools were there is zero tolerance to discipline, lessons, respect for teachers etc and another for those who wont.”
That is how I see it also JEB.
Whithin East Belfast, Ashfield has gained a reputation for firm but fair discipline and it has done wonders for it’s reputation and intake. However it also has the advantage of not having a Grammar School next door.
Congal
I think you are way over estimating peer pressure in grammar schools – teenagers dont think like that – I have 4 kids two of whom are teenagers
As I say explain Campbell College to me which is Northern Ireland’s only real comprehensive.
All kids have different abilities – some maths & science some languagues, some the arts, some music, some sports etc – I think the difference between these – even in a grammar school is striking and gets time tabled effectively from 4th Form anyway.
A school should identify and bring out the best in every child and applaud it.
Condemning 75% of the populace at 11 as failures and then condemning them to spend the next five years of their lives with people who will eventually end up in Prison is a national scandal in this place.
Remove the problem children from our schools and educate the rest together.
Congal
I went to a highschool in Canada that all types of students good bad and indiferent. The students and their parents chose what classes they took.
they would have four streams like
Math 100 normal highschool math
Math 101 for the mathmatically challenged
math 103 for the math incompetent
math 105 advanced math for people with a gift
we all mingled in the halls and there was very little judging going on but the key is the student chose which course they took
But of course we were also from all different social stratas My dad ran a digger and I would be sitting next to the daughter of a doctor or lawyer
Its probably why we don’t have the social stratification some do
JEB
“As I say explain Campbell College to me which is Northern Ireland’s only real comprehensive.”
I’m afraid not John. Unless you were having a jest.
I’m on your side really but there is no way you can make that claim.
1. Where are the girls?
2. Where are the poor kids?
Comprehensive has to have a meaning.
“Math 100 normal highschool math
Math 101 for the mathmatically challenged
math 103 for the math incompetent
math 105 advanced math for people with a gift”
Love it
Can we organise a
Negotiation 103 for our esteemed leaders on the hill?
willis
Comprehensive in the mixed academic ability sense – ie the point I am making is there is no justification for academic selection.
sex, religion and social segregation are different issues – we are talking about the merits or otherwise of the 11+
JEB
Yes, really no argument that selection by a biased test at 11 is no way to run an education system.
The real problem is what to do with the 10 – 20% who cause disruption.
A Comprehensive system will work ok with kids who are not very smart as long as they want to learn.
That is why the Movilla situation is so important.
I really believe that we have gone too far in treating parents and children as consumers in an Education marketplace.
Maybe the “credit crunch” will make some other changes in behaviour.
I was very impressed by this comment on a BT thread:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/education/parents-of-school-strike-boy-tell-of-tragic-background-14008857.html
I have a neice who is a teacher in Canada. She at present has mostly refugees in her class, these children, she tells me, who have every reason to “act up” having survived genocide, torture, rape etc., are better behaved in class than her Canadian pupils – some have no family left at all, and watched all this happen, yet they are so glad to be in a free country and very respectful and would never dream of treating a teacher with such disrespect. Perhaps our “normal” children get too much their own way these days, and really don’t know when they are well off. I support the teachers in this case, and the solution,to the further education and well being of this boy, should lie with his parents. they are the ones who should be looking out for him and his “issues”. Sorry to “vent” but it makes me mad when I think of these other poor children alone in the world through no fault of their own
The 11-plus is a test for entry to grammar school. Those who wish to attend secondary school should have no interest in abolishing the test. Those wishing to destroy grammar schools must destroy the method of selection hence the attack on coaching,stress, etc.
Please point to a better method of selection otherwise admit your attack on the 11-plus is ideological rather than an improvement.
If you like the Canadian system – move to Canada.
No BS parent
“Please point to a better method of selection otherwise admit your attack on the 11-plus is ideological rather than an improvement.
If you like the Canadian system – move to Canada.”
Not sure if you were directing your comments to me or Steve.
I like the Dickson system. I suppose I could move to Armagh or Tandragee.
I genuinely do not oppose the 11+ on ideological grounds.
I believe in academic selection at 14.
I believe 11 is too soon to make a decision.
I believe that approx 60% of students would benefit from a “Grammar School” education.
John East Belfast’s points are well made by someone who has real experience of a “Grammar School” with a comprehensive intake.
I’m not sure what the BS in your nom-de-guerre implies. Maybe you could tell me.
Willis upon what grounds do you oppose the 11-plus?
It has not escaped the notice of mums like me that almost every pro-grammar spokesperson starts their first sentence with ” we agree that the 11-plus must go”
What do these people propose takes its place? A nod and a wink from the teacher as we used to have? That will be a clear step backwards.
What school will pupils attend at 11 Willis while you hold on to the “selection at 14″ ideal?
By your own definition a local comprehensive school for all unless you propose that the well off attend the “grammar” and to hell with the rest.
BS a la Palin stands for bull excrement. I thought it apt since there is so much spead around by education “experts”
You clearly haven’t thought this through
No BS Parent
Why do you think it is so important that kids are streamed in different schools as opposed to being subject and class streamed in the same school ?
As I can testify the latter works perfectly in Campbell College.
As you say let’s cut the Bull Shit – you favour Grammar Schools because you want your kids segregated from a particular type of kid but you are perfectly happy for 75% of the rest of the kids to deal with that.
It has got nothing to do with academic selection – that is the real Bull Shit. It is social selection and if the debate was honest we might actually start to tackle the real problem and that is the minority of children who for whatever reason should not be in the mainstream sector at all. However at present all of those kids are in the Secndary sector. It is then a viscious circle with the middle classes doing all in their power to maintain the system to keep their children apart.
What annoys me is the Pro Grammar school lobby is so dishonest about their true motives and they seem to constnatly be let off in the debate.
No Bullshit Parent – come on cut the bull shit and be honest – you dont want your children in the same school as the gob shites ??
No Sarah Palin Parent
“Willis upon what grounds do you oppose the 11-plus?”
I don’t want to be rude but are you slow on the uptake or disingenuous?
I spelled it out.
“I believe in academic selection at 14.
I believe 11 is too soon to make a decision.
I believe that approx 60% of students would benefit from a “Grammar School” education.”
“You clearly haven’t thought this through”
You think not?
You could trawl back through the Slugger Archives and check out my contributions.
You will see that I am not a looney-tunes advocate of a Bog Standard Comprehensive for all.
I went to a really good provincial Grammar School.
Our kids went to one of the best Grammar Schools in Northern Ireland.
However I am an engineer working in an industry that takes people with a variety of qualifications and I can see how people develop at different speeds.
So you are a mum wanting the best for your kids. I don’t have a problem with that.
If you have kids in P6 or 7 right now you have my sympathy. The Minister is out of her depth.
I want to see an education system on NI which delivers quality education for all.
Don’t kid yourself, the Grammar Schools are not the best schools in NI.
The best schools in NI are the ones that take kids rejected by the 11+ and turn them into high achievers.
Sarah Palin
“What do these people propose takes its place? A nod and a wink from the teacher as we used to have?”
And when was that then? Pre 1948?
The 11+ has been with us for 60 years.
But please….
You know soooo much more.
Willis. it is a pity that you have resorted to attacking me when I pose questions you find difficult to answer.
Your kids went to a grammar school – how were they admitted except by taking the 11-plus. Unless of course they attended Campbell College where a nice wad of cash means that a D grade instantly makes the boy different from the great unwashed. Same applies to Inst.
Don’t lecture me on BS since i’ve just been treated to a hugh heap of it and it stinks really bad.
I’m still waiting for your honest reply on what you want to replace the 11-plus with.
Once upon a time when kids were considered “borderline” on the 11-plus it was left up to the teacher to make a determination on who got recommended to attend the grammar. More often than not it was a case of who you knew that got you in. It seems we’re headed back to that system.
If I have read you correctly Willis you favour internal selection at 12 but not the 11-plus and selection at 14 from comprehensives. How confused are you?
NBSP
“Willis. it is a pity that you have resorted to attacking me when I pose questions you find difficult to answer.”
I am sorry if you find it an attack, but I am afraid that when I continually explain myself and you continually say I am not answering your questions I begin to wonder who it is who has the problem.
Let me ask you a question then.
What is wrong with the Dickson plan? It is a Northern Irish solution to a difficult problem. It has worked for 30+ years.
You do realise that it relies on the availability of the choice for a grammar school at age 11 as well as age 14. You propose to remove the choice at age 11 just like Caitriona Ruane. She intends to remove all choice.
“You do realise that it relies on the availability of the choice for a grammar school at age 11 as well as age 14.”
What is it? The Dickson Plan?
I’m glad Ms Ruane has explained her plans to you. She has left everyone else in the dark.
Isn’t it the Dickson Plan you were talking about? Dickson area parents have always been able to opt out just as parents could opt out of the 11-plus. If Dickson was the model answer it would have been rolled out years ago. Why do you propose silly answers – explain how Dickson would work in Derry or Belfast with their high proportion of grammars?
Now what about the performance on Let’s Talk by the Institute of Directors rep. She was talking about the pupil profile as the way of deciding transfer decisions. Note my earlier post on BS.
From your own experiences you have had an opportunity from grammars = what is wrong with retaining that choice for others? Even ruane had that choice!
Oh so you can opt out of the 11+ and have the choice of a Grammar School?
How does the Dickson Plan ‘rely’ on a choice of Grammar at 11. Do you mean that it would never have been accepted by Unionists if the opt-out clause had not been there?
I have come around to the Dickson Plan as the best option for compromise between the two main blocks of opinion. It has broad acceptance from DUP.
I’m afraid I have never put much store by the IoD especially on labour relations matters.
Much less education matters.
Compromise is neither possible nor achievable without loss/surrender of the principal of academic selection. I am interested in your claim that ” It has broad acceptance from DUP” I would suggest that you’re engaging in a bit of wishful thinking hoping that the DUP will be suckered into adopting a compromise cobbled together by those BS merchants responsible for creating the mess.
You still haven’t answered the question Willis “…on what you want to replace the 11-plus with.”
AQE test or some nonexistent CCEA test? Pupil profile or INCAS?
If no test you’re a comprehensivist.
I think Essentialist has got it right here but am willing to be proved wrong.
No I’m a “selection at 14ist”
When I say “broad acceptance by the DUP” I mean that in the Dickson Plan area the DUP are broadly happy with it.
“I think Essentialist has got it right here but am willing to be proved wrong.”
Is it not a bit weird to praise yourself in the third person?
No stranger than claiming to support academic selection but only at 14. SF and SDLP oppose academic selection but it operates successfully on the Falls Road in the shape of St. Dominics. That NBSP tied you in knots Willis. Just answer her question.
I did.
Although to be fair, I do realise that it was not the answer she wanted so she just kept asking the question over and over.
Tied in knots? You are having a laff.
So you are an admitted comprehensivist. The answers you gave NBSP are anti-academic selection.
Your statement ” I believe that approx 60% of students would benefit from a “Grammar School” education.” is the laff.
Have you ever looked at the exam results from comprehensives? Perhaps you’re one of those who don’t like quantitative assessment too
I can smell the crap coming through my computer every time Willis posts his conflicted views. I’m still trying to get over his citation of Campbell College as representative of anything other than moneyed privilege. Newton Emerson is a fan of the Dickson Plan but even he admits the impracticality of rolling it out across the whole of N. Ireland. Willis must be taking the piss. Maybe he’s a school teacher?
Oh dear Oh dear!
Being reduced to personal abuse is always an indication that you are losing the arguement. However to be fair you have cited Sarah Palin as an influence.
“Newton Emerson is a fan of the Dickson Plan but even he admits the impracticality of rolling it out across the whole of N. Ireland.”
Good, now we are getting somewhere.
I read Newt’s irish News piece and liked this quote about the impracticality of rolling it out across the whole of N.I.
“Or perhaps the Dickson Plan’s truly unforgivable sin is to call its key set of exams the 14-plus, which sounds far too much like the 11-plus for our crusading educationalists to stomach.”
Willis,
Are you one of Newt’s ” crusading educationalists ”?
You are certainly wandering all over the place in your quest to vanquish the 11-plus ( or equivalent).
The Holy Grail for comprehensivisation will remain elusive so long as parents remain alert to the dangers of compromise.
Thank you for a much more elegant reply than #20. I can see you liked the quote, even if you don’t agree with it.
If we must continue our Medieval theme (That was a laaang time ago y’all) then you have been lucky that your Dragon just sat in one place breathing fire.