11+

I was asked to write a few words on the eleven plus for the Southend Echo:

I think selective education is wrong in two aspects. Firstly, the arbitrary test at eleven is unscientific and does not recognise the concept of late developers. To think that the next five years of a child’s education is predicated on the outcome of one test as alarming as it is wrong. It cannot be a test of innate ability, else those who seek coaching would be wasting their money. It is a test of the best prepared and best resourced. I accept that by individual subject it is right to stream based on ability, and children can move about between different ability groups.

Eleven-plus ability is not relevant for all subjects; how good one’s maths and English are makes no difference at all on the school playing field, for instance. Children who are apart for maths lessons may well be able to learn other subjects together – separation at eleven does not allow for this.

My second objection lies in what selection actually achieves. I have shown that selection in Southend-on-Sea does not serve the town’s residents. Less than half the borough’s four grammar school’s intake comes from within the borough, and even when you include the two neighbouring local authorities you still find over a third of the intake coming from outside of this enlarged area. Not only that, but selection is hugely biased in favour of wealthier families. Of course, you could believe that poorer kids are more stupid, or, like me, think that money buys success. This is not what education should be about.

Schooling should not just be about exam success; it should be about equipping young people for the long journey of life that lies ahead of them. Screening the supposedly bright from those with less ability does nothing for social cohesion, and any sense of community will be damaged. Besides, it condemns the vast majority of our children to what is seen as a second-class education. I want the best for all children.