In defence of Grammar Schools

In any debate about education, opinions are often formed by a person’s individual experience and those of the people around them. So it is for me. I was at Lawrence Sheriff School in Rugby, a grammar school, and have benefited richly from being there. At that time, the late sixties & early seventies, there was a mix of backgrounds of the boys I grew up with, and I can confidently say that there was a fair proportion from a working class background. We didn’t have free school meals as a measure, so I have no clear idea of how many, but I remember boys talking about their father as working in the local cement factory or as a lorry driver. I also remember visiting friend’s homes, most of which strike me now as being pretty ordinary backgrounds. Of the people I was at school with that I now recognise as having come from a poorer background, many have gone on to university and good careers, with some now involved in their own businesses in trades like plumbing and construction, others making a success in the city or large corporations. So I have seen how good teaching and mixing with other bright people has enabled the kind of social mobility that we all want.

It may be that there is a smaller proportion of working class boys there now. It is certainly harder to get into the school as my son found at age 11. He is now there in the 6th form and tells me that he does recognise friends from poorer backgrounds. One of reasons why the standards needed to achieve entry are now higher is very simply that there are fewer grammar schools in surrounding towns and aspirational parents from outside the usual catchment area, who are most likely to be middle class, support their children in their bid to get into Rugby’s grammar schools. So if there are few children from poorer backgrounds in grammar schools today, it is a consequence of there being so few such schools.

All this means that I was disappointed by David Willet’s announcement yesterday. I accept that good teaching is the key to social mobility and that we need to raise standards; and I was pleased by his confirmation that there is no proposal to abolish the remaining grammar schools which will reassure parents in Rugby who recognise the benefits of the diverse range of schools in the town but who see top quality schools on their doorstep where it is increasingly difficult for their children to get a place.

It seems to me that in neighbouring towns, where grammar schools were abolished years ago, there has been a trend for middle class parents to look to the private sector, as the original state funded grammars evolved into private schools. In the absence of a replacement for the assisted places scheme, having an increasing proportion of middle class children educated privately is potentially more socially divisive than grammar schools could ever be. Higher standards in the state sector will reduce the desire of parents to take the private route, and so Labour’s failure in their 10 years in power to address standards in education, and our need to urgently get education right in this country, becomes more important than ever.
P.S. I hope to find out more about how my school colleagues have fared later this month. This academic year we all share our 50th birthdays and one of my friends has organised a reunion where about 50 of the year entry of 90 will be there, some of who I see regularly and some I don’t think I’ve seen since leaving in 1975. More of that later.