Grammar schools

Those dread words ‘Grammar schools’ are back in the news again. The education secretary, Damian Hinds, has today announced a new fund that will allow established academically selective schools, i.e. the 163 grammars clustered around the country, to found new ‘satellite’ schools. The proposal could increase pupil numbers at grammar schools by 16,000 over the next four years. The news has been met with the typical mixture of surprise and outrage; amidst the tried-and-tested to-and-fro, it is hard to find much reasoned and sustained argument. Everyone, it seems, knows where they – and everyone else – stand. But, dig a little deeper into the issues at stake, and Hinds is

On the Today programme a month ago, Education Secretary Justine Greening was asked whether she could name any ‘respected figure or institution’ in favour of more grammar schools. She declined to answer, which was taken to mean that she couldn’t, and that there wasn’t. I’ve been travelling a lot this year, so wasn’t around to offer my support. I’m back now. Assuming that a professor of education at a Russell Group university is respectable enough, let me wade into the debate: yes, I’m in favour of more grammar schools. Educational experts against more grammar schools — of which there are plenty — point to the current evidence from England and

I’m not surprised the Chancellor allocated more money for the free schools policy in the Budget. It’s not an exaggeration to say it’s the most successful education policy of the last 25 years. To begin with, free schools have proved to be a cost-effective way of meeting the need for additional places. This was underlined in the National Audit Office’s recent report on school capital, which said that on a like-for-like basis, they cost 29 per cent less than new schools built under Labour’s ‘Building Schools for the Future’ programme. Given that the Department for Education has estimated that we will need 420,000 additional places between 2016 and 2021, it

It has become customary in the great grammar school debate to declare where you went to school. I attended the boys’ grammar school in Canterbury, which was mentioned by Ysenda Maxtone Graham in her piece in this week’s magazine. Ysenda chose not to make such a declaration herself, so I will do it for her: she attended the King’s School, the poshest of the three public schools in Canterbury, which inhabits the precincts of the cathedral. I wouldn’t normally make an issue of someone’s schooling, but it is rather relevant in this case because Ysenda appears to be disturbed by what she sees as the social apartheid between Kent’s grammar

A typical Kentish town, with its grammar school at one end and its secondary school at the other, is a throwback to the Bad Old Days, or the Good Old Days, depending on what your views are on academically selective state education. If Theresa May’s plans go ahead, the whole country might look something like this. In my childhood home town of Sandwich, Kent, the two schools, Sir Roger Manwood’s grammar school and the Sandwich Technology School, have staggered going-home times to avoid the fights on the station platform that used to happen every afternoon. Their uniforms are tellingly different: the Manwood’s students wear smart blazers and ties, the Tech

I’ve been thinking about poor Shami Chakrabarti and the drubbing she’s suffered since it was revealed she’s sending her son to Dulwich College. She joins a long line of Labour hypocrites who are opposed to grammar schools but choose to send their own children to selective schools. The list includes Harold Wilson, James Callaghan, Tony Crosland, Polly Toynbee, Diane Abbott, Harriet Harman and Seumus Milne. My issue with these Labour grandees is not so much the double standards, although that does stick in the craw, obviously, but the stupidity. Why risk their political credibility and, for those that go private, beggar themselves, when there’s little reason to suppose that their

As a Conservative, when I look at where we’ve had the biggest impact in government, there’s one area that really stands out. And that’s education. Through a lot of hard work, not least from teachers… ….we have come a very, very long way. Thanks to the reforms carried out by Michael Gove and Nicky Morgan… … we’ve seen standards raised and 1.4m more children in good or outstanding schools. In higher education, the global rankings now show our universities right at the very top… ….with record numbers of our young people applying. Crucially, over the last six and a half years we’ve also seen a renaissance in apprenticeships…. … well

You know the figures: seven per cent of children in the UK attend fee-paying schools but they win 42 per cent of Oxbridge places and 70 per cent of jobs in private equity banking; they also make up 30 per cent of places in the cabinet. This is a significant decrease from previous cabinets – 50 per cent of David Cameron’s, 70 per cent of Sir John Major’s and 90 per cent of Margaret Thatcher’s were privately educated – but it is still worryingly high. Grammar schools are suggested by some as a solution, but they have a poor record of improving social mobility. Children with educated, comparatively wealthy parents

It is almost mandatory, if you want to discuss grammar schools, to swap personal histories. Here’s mine: I am the beneficiary of three generations of social mobility, three generations of academic selection. My grandfather won a free scholarship to a public school (Christ’s Hospital) and left school at 16: his family needed him to work. But his education allowed him to become achartered surveyor. Both of my parents enjoyed free, selective education in schools that now charge about £16,000 a year. My brothers and I won scholarships to private secondaries. The alternative comprehensives were poor quality and a bit scary — my parents were faced with terrible state-school options. Then