Parental hypocrisy
The Telegraph on Sunday was happy about a government U-Turn:[It] has dropped an outrageous rule that meant that parents had to name a first-choice school before their child sat the 11-plus. This was a devious means of pressuring them into choosing a comprehensive ahead of a grammar school, in case their child failed the entrance examination.
It adds:
The about-turn comes after The Sunday Telegraph highlighted the plight of parents who wanted to send their children to grammar school but instead had to "play safe". Hundreds had to list comprehensives on their admission forms because they feared that if they put grammar schools first and their child failed the selection test, they would be left with a place in a sink school.
In other words what happened was that the child failed the 11-plus, and was made to attend a secondary modern, not one of the comprehensive schools in the area. Admittedly attending a secondary modern is a rather horrible thing to happen at age 11, and will probably forver blight the child's education, and therefore quite likely, life.
Nevertheless how exactly do parents believe their children can go to a selective school, and yet other parent's childrens won't have to go to a secondary modern? How can one believe in an 11-plus and grammar schools, without accepting the consequences if their child fails? Why does the Telegraph call for more grammar schools, when it describes the schools that the majority under such a system will go to as 'sink schools'?
posted by Matthew @ 8/16/2005 06:46:00 PM
Comments: 0
