In ‘Te Mail’ verscheen op 15 maart de bijdrage: ‘Poor pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds children ‘benefit most in a grammar school system’  Een recente studie zou wijzen op de nefaste gevolgen van nivellerende eerste graad voor onderwijskansen sociaal-benadeelde leerlingen, sociale mobiliteit... In early differentiated systems rather than comprehensive ones, primary effects of social origin express less within schools’.  In veel comprehensieve landen wordt momenteel de gemeenschappelijke lagere cyclus in vraag gesteld, niet enkel in Engeland en Frankrijk, maar ook in de Scandinavische landen.  Er komt vooral kritiek op het nivellerend karakter en op het feit dat de sociale mobiliteit wordt afgeremd.  We citeren de bijdrage en een aantal reacties van lezers.

The Mail is reporting a new study published in the European Sociological Review which suggests comprehensive schools prevent pupils from poor backgrounds achieving their potential…Researchers compared reading standards in countries which have retained grammar schools with those which have phased them out, such as the UK. They found that family wealth played next to no part in a child’s achievements when they were taught according to ability. But a disadvantaged background was more likely to count against youngsters in countries that shun selective education. British pupils were among the worst affected in Europe, with only those from Sweden lagging further behind.

The study, published in the European Sociological Review, examined the reading performance of tens of thousands of 15-year-olds across 22 nations.It cross-checked the results against the teenagers’ socio-economic status and the type of education system prevalent in their home country.

The results showed how much influence wealth had on pupils’ marks. Overall, 9.4 per cent of the variance in UK performance was explained by the student’s social background, compared with a European average of 4.5 per cent.

Scandinavian countries, which have even fewer remaining selective schools than Britain, also had high figures, with Sweden on 9.6 per cent and Norway on 8.1 per cent. However, countries which have retained selective education have virtually eliminated class disadvantage. Germany had the lowest figure at 1.4 per cent, followed by Hungary (1.5 per cent), Romania (1.6 per cent) and Austria (2.6 per cent).

The study by France’s National Institute for Demographic Studies set out to prove selective education discriminated against children from poor backgrounds. But it admitted that, against expectation, ‘in early differentiated systems rather than comprehensive ones, primary effects of social origin express less within schools’.

More at: Poor pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds children ‘benefit most in a grammar school system’

This seems to be the study in question: European Variations in Socioeconomic Inequalities in Students’ Cognitive Achievement: The Role of Educational Policies

Reacties van lezers:

 Krampus: ThIs has been totally obvious to anybody with a brain since the comprehensive system was introduced. Social mobility has never been worse.

 Rosemary,: I totally agree - it's been a terrible waste of at least 2 generations' talents and the shockwaves go on and on. Now the UK is dealing with the fall-out - large numbers of people who took up whatever job they could find - as well as all those who gave up and relied on benefits. Even the Liebour party have accepted their one-size-fits-all ideas were a mess.

 XYZ: Grammar schools, streaming, specialist schools, exams, etc. were all phased out from the 1970s because left wing governments around the World wanted to create social "equity" by developing a "one size fits all" education system. In order for children to all pass, (the thinking was that even false success would breed self esteem and therefore solve social problems), expectations were lowered considerably. The curriculum was deliberately dumbed down but not for the reasons you think. I taught from the 1960s until a few years ago so I have lived through the dismantling of formal education in the "socially progressive" West. All good teachers from the past predicted the results of "reform", but they were called "reactionary". It is actually conservative governments around the World who are now trying to restore some formal education. That is why I have abandoned the Left, they have betrayed two generation

 Shirley: Two generations have been sacrificed to social engineering,I have watched my own children and their children have very poor educations in comprehensive schools to the extent they were afraid to appear too keen as their friends would make fun of them.luckily things changed when they left school,but their school years were a waste really.I went to Grammar school and the education there was second to none,why did we ever change such an envied system which gave every child the opportunity .those that could not pass the exam often just did just as well in a technical school,as a result lumping children together has been a failure.

 Jetman:I will admit that I may not have the most subjective view on this as a kid from a council estate I passed the 11 plus, one of only two from our primary school that year and went to a Grammar School back in the 70's. That aside, the logic that selective education helps social mobility seems inescapable to me. When I took the 11 plus my answers were treated in the same way as anyone else and the place I won, I won on merit. Also on the plus side to this system I also met back up with several of my primary classmates when it came to 16 when they were given places on A level courses, on merit, because of their success in CSE courses. The important thing to all of this is that one word, MERIT. Any system, based on merit, is blind to social background and class and I would have thought that was obvious to all.

 Sally:I've been saying this for years. So many of my friends were like me....very ordinary backgrounds whose parents could never have afforded private schools, but we all benefited from a grammar school education and have done well. Provided we can provide really good technical/ arts education for the non academics, this is surely what needs to happen. Then everyone gets an education they would benefit from, develops their own talents and they...and this country...are the better for it . Not exactly rocket science. the catch will be in ensuring all schools have equal status or it won't work in 21st century Britain.

 Richard: “Selective education has a ring of being PC in this day and age, but it is a way forward to those children who are bright and capable, from poor backgrounds or otherwise. A comprehensive school suggests one size fits all and is typical of labour thinking. I cannot understand why the conservatives have such a down on reintroducing grammar schools, they helped so many high achievers into a better standard of living than their parents. If social mobility is the aim of any government then grammar schools should be there to avail every child of the opportunity to achieve their potential.