11-Plus Proposal

[Guillem2]

 

[milltown row]

so the soloution to having no transfer test is to have them all go to the nearest school, and that will solve all the problems? what a load of balls. so a kid that lives in Hamil Street in Belast Divis area is to go to school at Inst.? now thats all good if the lad has ability but if he's lacking good primary education before going to a grammer school it will only hinder this lads education further.

kids that normally go to secondary education (oh and i did) should be taught in smaller classes. more attention on the three 'R's reading, arithmetic and writting. the rest of the time should be spent on Vocational skills

having worked in an area that deals with kids when they leave school i sometimes wonder what they have been doing for the past 5 years!!!!!!! working out area is a major stumbling block, simple writting is a no no. every thing is text speak and hand writting, well, we'll just not go there.

kids should be put in a level of where they are at. and a means/transfer test is the only way

[pintsofguinness]

kids should be put in a level of where they are at. and a means/transfer test is the only way

How can a test for a child at 11 years of age determine the level they are at for the rest of their lives?

[ardmhachaabu]

Pints, I know where milltown is coming from and what he says has a lot of validity in it.  I agree with him that some kinds of means/transfer test is essential because then a child's ability and needs can be determined, in the most tangible way that there is at the moment.  Some people are geared towards vocational areas moreso than others, those that are wouldn't be shy in telling anyone so.

The suggestions from Sinn Fein are ludicrous in the extreme and will have a serious detrimental effect on the education of children.  Lumping every child in to one stream will ultimately dilute education, imo.

[pintsofguinness]

Pints, I know where milltown is coming from and what he says has a lot of validity in it.  I agree with him that some kinds of means/transfer test is essential because then a child's ability and needs can be determined, in the most tangible way that there is at the moment.  Some people are geared towards vocational areas moreso than others, those that are wouldn't be shy in telling anyone so.

I agree some people are geared towards vocational stuff but how can you tell at 11 years of age?
I'm sure milltown will correct me if I'm wrong but what he's advocating is a test at 11 determining a child's life. 
A test doesn't determine a child's ability - a child can be coached for 2 years to pass a test just like a child can have an off day and fail a test. 
I don't see why all schools can not have the system that's in place in high schools.  You enter the school you're put in a group - either a top academic group or a lower one (which hopefully in the future will provide more vocational opportunites) and as a child develops they can be moved to groups/classes which best suit them. 

[ardmhachaabu]

Maybe it shouldn't be held at 11.  It should maybe be later, say 13/14 direction as generally, kids are more mature then than they are at 10. 

Alongside some kind of transfer test should be the means for any student to opt out of it and go directly to a vocational route.  Whether the right place for that is a school or a training centre of some kind remains to be seen.

Streaming doesn't work pints, it never has and it never will.  It just reinforces in some kids that they are more stupid than others, that's not healthy. 

[ardmhachaabu]

Incidentally, the point milltown has about reading, writing and maths can not be refuted.

[pintsofguinness]

I agree 13/14 may be a good age for kids to decide what sort of route to take. 

Streaming doesn't work pints, it never has and it never will. It just reinforces in some kids that they are more stupid than others, that's not healthy.

No it's not streaming that does that it's people and their snobbery.  There should be as much emphasis on learning trades as their is on passing exams and going to College but there's not, it should be also stressed that a trade is as good as a degree.  Now if a child isn't academic they may fail the 11+, go to a high school be placed in a low group, piss about for 5years and leave school barely fit to write their name when it doesn't need to be like that.  They should be taught in the area that suits them and not deemed to be stupid because their not interested in learning a pile of stuff out of a text book. 

[imtommygunn]

It is high time that people realised that university is not the be all and end all too.

If you look at people coming out of university now I wonder what percentage a year are better off having done a degree than not. There are only so many careers that a degree lends itself as being beneficial to. I think that point could also be made about A levels too to be honest.

Don't get me wrong I have done well out of university but it's not everyone's cup of tea. The direction of someone's life should not be dictated by an exam at 11 but the current system doesn't do that really. If you don't go to a grammar school you can still do well and the choice can be made at 16, GCSE stage, where to advance to whether it be A levels or a trade.

I think the system is ok as is with regards to the 11 plus. I do think further on it is flawed.

The 11 plus will only be replaced by either another form of academic selection or the stupid system where you've to live in the area to go to the school.

Leave the thing as is - sure what harm did it ever do any of us?? There is no viable alternative that I can see. Changed the exams to 13/14 would change the fundamental structures of our school system and is not viable IMO.

[thewobbler]

What Ruane, the Shinners and all the 11-plus abolishionists can't seem to get into their heads is that selection will always exist. There will always be better schools than others. There were always be a "market" for perfectionism in schools and there will always be a "market" for doing the bare minimum.

In Northern Ireland for the past 40 years, places in the better schools have been determined by a simple IQ test. Perhaps not the most elegant or egalitarian of systems - but, regardless of religion, social status or background, every child in Northern Ireland has had a chance of attaining a top education.

Remove academic selection, and it will be replaced by financial selection. Perhaps not overnight, but over a period of years it will certainly happen. Elite schools will be able to charge elite fees, and top schools will be able to charge top fees. Parents will pay, just as they do for school in England, and for college in the USA, to send their kids to these schools. Even if they aren't bright kids, just walking in these circles will open doors for them in life.

Sending your offspring to these schools will be an easy option for the rich, and a passable option for the middle classes, but simply not an option for the working classes. I'll digress for a second and state that this will, in effect, become another financial penalty on middle classes who want to prosper, and that it will inevitably lead to less procreation in the middle classes. Meanwhile those people who never cared for an education will continue to churn out babies and speed up the braindrain, and populate the lazydrain.

Lastly, the problem in Northern Ireland isn't academic selection, but that successive Labour Governments, and now their Stormont equivalents, do not place any value in non-academic education. If our leaders would stop branding the trades and skills as equivalent to dropping out, and instead reinforce their place, their abolsute need, in society, then students - even those as young as eleven - might not feel so "tainted" at missing out on a Grammar School place. If they then aimed a large portion of secondary/comprehensive education at teaching students key skills for life, then those school days would also be a more enjoyable, productive and fondly-remembered time.

Too many kids feel they have to go to Grammar School for the wrong reasons.

[Handy]

kids should be put in a level of where they are at. and a means/transfer test is the only way

How can a test for a child at 11 years of age determine the level they are at for the rest of their lives?

It shouldn't but at 11 you move schools - end of!

[Tony Baloney]

Academic selection at 11 is dicey as it is definitely a bit early for exams with such a big impact. However I don't think we can or should do away with selection, and something like the Dixon Plan in Portadown is probably a good alternative where everyone does an exam at 14 to determine if you go down the more academic route of grammar school or go to a secondary school and then onto tech for either vocational qualifications or A levels.
The government would be better fitted if it pumped much needed investment into secondary schools so that pupils going there get an education every bit as good those going to grammar schools albeit in a style suited to their ability. Ruane made an absolute hash of this and if we were actually playing at real politics like in the big house in London she'd have been out on her ear months ago!

[Handy]

Pints, I know where milltown is coming from and what he says has a lot of validity in it.  I agree with him that some kinds of means/transfer test is essential because then a child's ability and needs can be determined, in the most tangible way that there is at the moment.  Some people are geared towards vocational areas moreso than others, those that are wouldn't be shy in telling anyone so.

I agree some people are geared towards vocational stuff but how can you tell at 11 years of age?
I'm sure milltown will correct me if I'm wrong but what he's advocating is a test at 11 determining a child's life. 
A test doesn't determine a child's ability - a child can be coached for 2 years to pass a test just like a child can have an off day and fail a test. 
I don't see why all schools can not have the system that's in place in high schools.  You enter the school you're put in a group - either a top academic group or a lower one (which hopefully in the future will provide more vocational opportunites) and as a child develops they can be moved to groups/classes which best suit them. 

100% correct - I know parents who "coached" their kids from as young as 7 - wtf  - let the kids live a little!!

[Donagh]

kids should be put in a level of where they are at. and a means/transfer test is the only way

How can a test for a child at 11 years of age determine the level they are at for the rest of their lives?

It shouldn't but at 11 you move schools - end of!

I moved at 14.

[Handy]

kids should be put in a level of where they are at. and a means/transfer test is the only way

How can a test for a child at 11 years of age determine the level they are at for the rest of their lives?

It shouldn't but at 11 you move schools - end of!

I moved at 14.

If you were kept back - sobeit - maybe for the best.