Education in the 1960's - Grammar school vs Comprehensive

Arguments against Comprehensive education 

• Comprehensive meant that the tripartite system was under one roof. 

• Comprehensives arranged pupils into sets therefore the social divide between groups of children will still exist. 

• Mixed ability classes would be taught at a pace for slower learners - slower learners will be demoralised by frequent comparisons to their faster learning peers.

• Comprehensives will undermine the higher standards of behaviour and attitude to learning. 

• Denied able children the chance to benefit from a specialist school. 

• Grammar benefits children by encouraging them to be ambitious and competitive. 

• Quality of schools depended on the area - bad areas had no alternatives as Grammar schools would be abolished. 

• Wealthy parents had the choice to move to better areas where there are better Comprehensives - poorer families could not do this. 

• Pupil's individuality will be lost because Comprehensive schools are bigger, so more classes and more pupils per class.

• Overall examination results were worse with mixed ability classes.

Arguments in favour of Comprehensive education 

• There would no longer be the need for additional exams.

• Money will be saved since the 11+ exams no longer need to be produced.

• 11+ was psychologically dubious and unreliable.

• Secondary Modern pupils were classed as being "failures."

• Comprehensive education will encourage children and give them a wider range of opportunities to match their academic ability.

• Most talented children are undermined because they fail their 11+, but begin to improve at the age of thirteen or fourteen.

• Comprehensives are better in this way because it is easier to reallocate children between sets than between schools.

• Greater share of public funds went to Grammar schools - Comprehensive schools will now provide economically for all children and have sixth form facilities. This will create a level playing field.

• Pupils performed just as good at Comprehensives.

• Grammar schools discriminated in favour of upper and middle class pupils who could afford private tuition, therefore Grammar school pupils will have higher social status and job prospects than pupils who attended Secondary Modern.

• More regular social interaction between different groups of children.

• The Comprehensive education system was simply fairer.