Metropol

If I'm not mistaken, is "high school" not simply the term for the post secondary-modern / grammar system?

Chie wrote:Good GOD this has to be the most irritating Americanism EVER :roll:

If you live in the UK, they are not "high schools", they are 'secondary schools'. :roll:

Where do you live then? As you don't seem to like much today. You should be banned on the grounds of not liking our creamy dreamy milk chocolate that goes for Barcode too.

They're definitely secondary schools in Wiltshire and most of "Greater Wessex" in England, but I'm well aware we're in the minority with what we call them.

Pre-comprehensivisation, a high school was the same as a grammar school down here, where you went if you passed your eleven-plus.

Nick Harvey wrote:Pre-comprehensivisation, a high school was the same as a grammar school down here, where you went if you passed your eleven-plus.

Which is what we still have round here, though the Arts/Sport/etc college thing is still happening, I think the grammar schools are still being called grammar schools, but with college/specialist status. Many of the high schools are becoming colleges though.

My secondary school was formed from the merger of a secondary modern and a grammar school who were next door to each others. The merged school branded itself as a comprehensive school originally, but by the time I got there it was a 'community school' (whatever that was supposed to mean). It got 'technology college' status in 1996 which at the time did see a big improvement in resourcing (in the mid 90's we had IT provision which many schools are only just catching up to in 2008) and it was a big deal, being the only state school in the area with any sort of special status.

Now however, every state secondary school seems to be an (<insert slightly ambiguous subject name> college), and no longer makes the school particularly special, but is now only the mark of being acceptable. The kind of changes which the specialist college status makes also doesn't seem to be as big a deal as it once was.

itsrobert wrote:

Mr Q wrote:My old high school has long been called a "Secondary College". Lots of high schools renamed themselves in that vein here during the late 1980s/early 1990s, thanks to some directive from a previous government who thought it was a good idea. Politicians like renaming things - it's just one way to make them look like they're doing something. </cynical>

Very true. It's the same with all these policies that come out - Every Child Matters was one such policy published a few years ago which aimed to draw communities closer together so children wouldn't 'fall through the cracks' (it was the result of the Victoria Climbie Inquiry). So, did children not matter before? :roll:

Don't be silly. Children don't matter at all - they can't vote.

ashley b wrote: Many of the high schools are becoming colleges though.

Apart from Sale High School, of course, which was a college but now has no specialist status.

As has been said, it does just seem to be another method of getting more funding. A lot of schools are now becoming specialist schools in two areas - my sixth form included. We're now a specialist school in the Visual Arts and Science. Having said that, I haven't seen any major changes in either area.

The education system is pretty fucked up in this country. The best solution - in my opinion - is to have two different tiers of education from the age of 13. One tier would take the vocational route, and the other would take the academic route. However, I would leave the choice to the children instead of the parents. That way, you would find that most of the disrupitve children will take the vocational route, meaning that the children who want to be successful stand a better chance of getting a half-decent education.

Adders wrote:

ashley b wrote: Many of the high schools are becoming colleges though.

Apart from Sale High School, of course, which was a college but now has no specialist status.

As has been said, it does just seem to be another method of getting more funding. A lot of schools are now becoming specialist schools in two areas - my sixth form included. We're now a specialist school in the Visual Arts and Science. Having said that, I haven't seen any major changes in either area.

The education system is pretty fucked up in this country. The best solution - in my opinion - is to have two different tiers of education from the age of 13. One tier would take the vocational route, and the other would take the academic route. However, I would leave the choice to the children instead of the parents. That way, you would find that most of the disrupitve children will take the vocational route, meaning that the children who want to be successful stand a better chance of getting a half-decent education.

You mean some sort of schools that favour things like grammar and others which are a little more...comprehensive in what they offer?

The problem with Adder's solution is that everybody won't fit into that mould either.
I, for example, sat through a very academic route as I knew it was what I had to do (no choice of schools in my area and I knew I wasn't going to get my career of choice by dropping out, even though I hated nearly every moment of it!). It wasn't until I was doing my GCSEs that I realised the only way forward after passing them would be a vocational route.
I did my BTEC in General Engineering, which got me to University and then to my chosen career.

See, if I had taken the vocational route at 13, I would have probably opted for a different career and not be half as happy as I am now.

For me, a system where I got excellent academic teaching to GCSE, giving me a slight advantage for my BTEC. That in turn giving me a slight advantage over A level students at Uni, was perfect. But I wouldn't force it on anybody.

The only way to improve education is to return power to the teachers, but let students take informed decisions about their own future at key points.
But then the whole system was a lot better when I was younger, kids had respect, buses ran on time, you could buy a whole bag of sweets for 10p...

Sput wrote:You mean some sort of schools that favour things like grammar and others which are a little more...comprehensive in what they offer?

That's what he's saying, Sput, but without realising it perhaps. Students are not in a position to decide what they want to do as a career choice at 13 (I certainly wasn't).

Ebeneezer Scrooge wrote:But then the whole system was a lot better when I was younger, kids had respect, buses ran on time, you could buy a whole bag of sweets for 10p...

...and you could buy a tin of your peaches for 3½p

StuartPlymouth wrote:

Sput wrote:You mean some sort of schools that favour things like grammar and others which are a little more...comprehensive in what they offer?

That's what he's saying, Sput, but without realising it perhaps.

No shit, Sherlock.