This is a tricky subject for me, as I went to a grammar school and certainly benefited from the education I received. I was the first person on my mother’s side of the family to go to university, so my time spent at school was certainly fruitful.
However, if you were to ask me if it is a fair system, I would have to say no. How can a system that supposedly favours the brightest ten percent of children, ever be fair?
I wasn’t tutored to pass the 11 plus but I do remember doing a practice paper every night in the months coming up to the exams. I was excited about the prospect of going to a grammar school and wanted to do well.
At age 11, you are branded a 'failure' or a 'success'
I was really excited when I learnt I had ‘passed’ but when it transpired that most of my fellow pupils had ‘failed’ the last few weeks at school were strained and I wasn’t so popular with my peers.
And I think this is the main problem. At age 11, you are branded a ‘failure’ or a ‘success’. Despite our school saying that it was just a selection process we all knew it was ‘pass’ or ‘fail’. Children learn at different rates and some children who don’t pass the 11 plus are incredibly bright.
Being deemed a failure at age 11 cannot be good for a child’s confidence and it also means that you are destined to go to a school that is not as good as a grammar school.
Equally children who are tutored for years to get into a grammar school may also find that they struggle once they start there.
The whole idea that a bright child from a less privileged background can get a good education through the grammar system is flawed. The wealthy middle classes tutor their children to ensure that they get into the best grammar schools, meaning that a poorer bright child who can’t afford tuition, could lose out on a place.
In this article in the Guardian at the beginning of the year, Peter Mortimore, a former director of the Institute of Education, says that grammar schools are fundamentally unfair:
“…Popular with parents who can afford years of coaching for their children's entrance tests, it underpins a hierarchy of status, promotes snobbery and prevents many schools from gaining a fair share of able pupils. Surely it should have no place in a country wrestling with so many other inequalities?”
He suggests that we capitalize on the success of grammar schools, rather than getting rid of them altogether and turn them into centres of A-level excellence - a sixth form college that can benefit all pupils in the education system.
Interestingly, it is not just grammar schools that are failing disadvantaged children. Top comprehensive schools take even less children from deprived income homes than grammar schools, according to a study commissioned by the Sutton Trust earlier this year.
The report argues that selection by ballot is the only fair way to allocate places to children, but this is not popular with parents or politicians. Most areas that have grammar schools value them highly. I think it may be some time before they are completely abolished. But it is also sad that in the 21st century, a child’s educational chances can still be diminished by their economic background.
Claire Winter is a member of the BBC Parent Panel.