We have been hearing a lot from the government in the last week about grammar schools. Prime Minister May has personally made the case for the reintroduction of selective schools

Are grammar schools the way forward?

We have been hearing a lot from the government in the last week about grammar schools. Prime Minister May has personally made the case for the reintroduction of selective schools, citing the example of Kent, the only place in the country where selective education has remained.

The argument goes that despite the warnings of former education ministers and the Chief of Ofsted, parents want to have this choice for their pupils and having a mix of academies, free schools, grammar schools and independent schools. It is apparently part of the Prime Ministers ‘family based’ politics, rather than the data driven politics of previous administrations i.e. give people the choices they say they want rather than what the data tells them is good for them. She stated that we currently have a ‘post code lottery’ system, where if local schools are not up to standard, parents cannot give their children the education they would like and opening up the choices helps.

What is not in dispute is that it is a controversial area with the potential to be as fundamental a change as Michael Gove’s academisation agenda. Do selective schools produce the next generation of leaders from a wider social-economic group? Or will new grammar schools simply be the home for pupils of wealthy parents able to afford tutoring so that their children can attend these schools, forcing those who cannot afford this additional help out of the running?

The old grammar school/secondary modern system was abandoned on the basis that it created a two tiered education system. In today’s education world, with league tables and results dominating  school funding, you can understand why schools are fearful of losing the ‘cream of the crop’ of their pupils which will bring down their overall results.

So on which  side do you sit? As always it comes down to a choice in terms of government priority. Should it be the priority of government to raise the poorest performing schools so that every child can be educated in a school that hits a certain threshold wherever they live? Or should the government give parents as much choice as possible, admitting that some schools are better than others and that you should be able to fight for the chance for your child to be in one of the best schools regardless of location? As ever the debate rages on.