The Government should be concentrating its efforts on parental involvement and diversifying the curriculum

Ex-Comp Student, UK

The greatest factors in predicting academic success are the education levels of parents and the quality of their involvement in their children's lives. The comprehensive model is used the world over and, the statistics show, has greatly increased the likelihood of academic success for the majority. Yes, it is not perfect - no school system is - but it has improved educational outcomes for the majority. The Government should be concentrating its efforts on parental involvement and diversifying the curriculum to meet the needs of all abilities. To imply the comprehensive system has failed is a damnation of millions of students and educators - and misconstrues the reality.
Ex-Comp Student, UK

The standards for any school are set by; the teachers, the quality of pupil and the willingness of the parents to participate. No matter what you call the school if you don't change the main factors you wont change the results.
Mike, Colchester, UK

As a child from a poor background educated at Grammar School, I am only too well aware of that system's failings, but I am utterly convinced that every child deserves to receive the education that best suits their needs, whether that child is gifted academically or mechanically, or has a special artistic or sporting talent, or is blind or deaf, or comes from an underprivileged background and consequently needs more encouragement. "Comprehensive" schools could never realistically aspire to meet the diverse needs of children, so specialisation has to occur, though I think that the Government's judgement as to what specialities to foster is highly questionable.
Tim Green, UK

At the age of 10 I was written off as "Someone who will never be an academic achiever" and told that I would find secondary school difficult. At secondary school I was told that my chances of getting into the local sixth form were slim to non-existent and at sixth form I was considered "average at best".

Now I'm submitting for a PhD in chemistry and everyone tells me how intelligent I must be. I'm not the only one in this position, I would say the majority of people that I know that have succeeded in their university life were written off at primary school. Let's not make this write off a permanent matter, possibly the only reason I have succeeded thus far is that there has always been someone who has firmly believed in my ability, and hence my belief in my ability has always been with me. (Miss King, Mr Dwyer, Mr Wilkins thank you (I could name more and I could also name those that hindered, but I'm far too nice for that!) Let us not kill these kids self-belief before many of them have had a chance to develop.
Alison, England

Pay attention to what teachers are saying

Lisa, Wales

Certain of your correspondents have very strong views on the comprehensive system, but betray an abject lack of knowledge. Maybe they should talk to the people currently working in them. I am currently a Head of Department at a "true" comprehensive in South Wales, and while my job is sometimes difficult I do not think this is the fault of the system itself. From the age of 12, pupils are set according to ability for all subjects, but spend time together in (mixed ability) groups for tutor periods, Careers, IT and Personal and Social Education. This seems to me a very good system - each student's education is tailored to his or her own needs, but at the same time he/ she is encouraged to mix socially with a diverse range of people.

The difficulties faced by comprehensives are outside schools' control - to give examples from my own life, I have worked on average over 80 hours per week since the beginning of January; I am finding difficulty in recruiting a replacement for a colleague (ill with a breakdown); lack of discipline among certain groups of pupils, due mainly to the deprived conditions in which they live and the lack of parental support; the stress of suspecting that two of my best new young teachers are likely to leave the profession soon since they cannot afford to pay off their student loans, let alone buy a car or get a mortgage on their teaching salary. I could go on. Don't let Mr. Blair and friends destroy the comprehensive system - pay attention to what teachers are saying!
Lisa, Wales

At last, sanity prevails. Comprehensive schools bring everyone down to the lower level and do not encourage children to maximise their potential. The protests of the pro-comprehensive crowd never admit this, but it is pure fact. I can only be grateful that I received a grammar school education, but I feel desperately sorry for those who should have had this opportunity but were denied it by political ideologies.
AW, UK

Comprehensives tend to fail as they assume everyone to be the same, with the same level of interest and ability - which is nonsense. Also why is selection in education always scorned - but elitism in sport seen as a good thing?
Bob, UK

With all the gibberish coming from the government these days about getting more people into university it's almost as if they think there is something wrong with being a skilled tradesman rather than a qualified lawyer. I wonder how David Blunkett proposes to fix his shower in the days when nobody wants to be a plumber because they think it is somehow "beneath" them.
Dave T, UK

Comprehensive schools are all well and good in theory but these days they don't work because of the amount of kids who are a disruptive influence. Sure, there have always been disruptive kids, but when I was at (comprehensive) school they were contained in smaller groups rather than being integrated into the main classes, as they are today (and sometimes - gasp! - those kids were even booted out). Too much attention in comprehensive schools is focused on troublesome kids, which has the effect of leaving the "brighter" kids marginalised. I would love to see comprehensives work, but with the attitudes of many kids (and parents) they can only be doomed to failure.
Paul, UK

Academic performance in Northern Ireland, which retained grammar schools, appears (on the basis of governmental statistics) to be better than that of England, which introduced comprehensives. Whilst part of the difference can be explained by variations in funding, it is not obvious to me that this is the whole story. Any comments?
Iain McNaughton, England

Education is about more than grades

DCT, UK

The great success of the comprehensive system is that it does not confuse of "a good education" with "a good set of exam results". Education is about more than grades - it is about learning how to fit into a diverse society. Selection fails utterly in this respect, because it tells a two-thirds they have failed before they ever got started, and one-third that they are intellectually and socially superior because they are better at multi-choice tests. Classes are streamed in the vast majority of comprehensives, so everyone is taught at their own ability level - "all-ability" classes are a popular myth espoused by supporters of selection (except maybe in PE!). Comprehensive education is not a "social engineering experiment", but I would say that attempting to pigeonhole a child and determine their future role in society by their performance in a single test at 11 certainly is.
DCT, UK

I went to a comprehensive school and contrary to what most people have written on this site we were not all "lumped" into one big class - we were put into "sets" depending on our ability in a given subject. Education should not just be about learning facts and figures it should be about breaking down divides between people from different social/economic backgrounds and giving everyone the same opportunities.
Alison, UK

I also wonder why many of the corespondents hailing the return of grammar schools assume their children will get in?
Huw Harries, UK

A return to selective schooling will on facilitate in broadening the gap between the have and have nots. It would appear that children who do not achieve the selection criteria for "specialist school" will be severely disadvantaged in later life. Great Britain, the classless society?
Trevor B, Australia

We need a mix of vocational and academic courses

Brian, UK

The great failing of the comprehensive system was that it confused equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. Unfortunately, only last week the Government was espousing the aim that half of all children should go to university. How does that fit in with this week's principle that education should be matched to the talents and aspirations of the pupils? We need a mix of vocational and academic courses, or are all our computer technicians and plumbers to have a BA in Media Studies before they can commence their chosen profession?
Brian, UK

It is surprising that assistance to Islamic schools has precipitated such snobbish furore, when Catholic Schools and Jewish Yeshivas have benefited for a long time. Are Muslims or their Islamic principals somehow of a lower grade than those espoused by Christians or Jews? Yusuf Islam's (formerly Cat Stevens) efforts in establishing Islamic schools have yielded excellent results. Britain has to embrace the new millennium leaving behind its false sense of superiority.
Tahir Nawab, USA

If Labour's schools are not good enough for the Blair family, why should they be good enough for the rest of us? Blair's actions tell us that he considers the great comprehensive experiment a failure. What are we supposed to say to this new idea? How KIND of him to think about providing a few good schools for the rest of the population?
Anthony, UK

The last thing children need is evidence of their failure

Vaughan, UK

Let's not forget what initiated the birth of the comprehensive system. In the 50's, surveys were carried out on national conscripts to assess IQs. It was found that although intellect was not a problem, the level of achievement of a large percentage was woefully poor. It was recognised that the elitist system of the day was failing the majority of Britain's youth and this survey only accessed young males. This system clearly needed restructuring. Comprehensive education, with all its warts, at least doesn't assign young people to the scrap heap at age 11. I, myself, was a product of this unfortunate regime and left school with almost no qualifications and demolished confidence. In later life I gained a BSc and now work as a lecturer. The last thing children need is evidence of their failure and to be selected for sub-standard education.
Vaughan, UK

As a pupil at a grammar school, I find the Labour Government's previous stance on such issues ludicrous. The very people who it should be the Government's priority to educate are being used as mere pawns in the forthcoming election battle. Non-selective education is of questionable benefit to the less academically skilled, but could severely damage the prospects of those who are more skilled.
Ian Jones, England

British secondary education is a disaster. Pupils specialise far too early and thereby lose the opportunity to apply for university courses in areas they did not pursue. Also, the standard reached in the narrow A-level or Highers system is not at all better than that of their peers on the continent, who get a truly 'comprehensive' education, often doing about 10 subjects up until the age of 18 or 19. It is also quite surprising that the 11+ is considered the only possible method of selection. Again, on the Continent admission to Grammar School is done on the strength of primary school teachers' recommendations rather than a single exam. There's nothing wrong with selective schools if selection is done properly.
George, Scotland

They still haven't learnt the truth that the best way to improve education is to keep politicians as far away from the classroom as possible

Nick Weston, UK

Have they no shame, the party that has done most to destroy education in this country both at national and local levels now says it will reform the system again, without apologising for the 30 years of destroyed schools and children's educations. They still haven't learnt the truth that the best way to improve education is to keep politicians as far away from the classroom as possible. Close the DfEE and LEA and give the money directly to the Head teachers.
Nick Weston, UK

It sounds to me like the "outdated" idea of kids taking an exam at age 11 and the more gifted going to a specialist school. Those who failed got another go at 13, and if they passed they could transfer to the specialist school. Is New Labour finally going to concede that its social engineering project is a disaster and reinstate the 11-plus? It never did me or any of my classmates any harm to be taught in classes with people of similar abilities.
John B, UK

Needless to say we are back to the days of selective education no matter what this or any other government would like us to believe. In my view this is long overdue

Geoff Morris, UK

Needless to say we are back to the days of selective education no matter what this or any other government would like us to believe. In my view this is long overdue. As has been mentioned in previous comments you need to provide pupils with an atmosphere in which they want to learn. Far too many schools these days are burdened with pupils who do not wish to learn and why? In my experience through the eyes of my wife who is a teacher, those schools who have the most problems are those whose parents couldn't care less about their children and therefore discipline is extremely difficult to administer. Whatever system of schools is in place we will never get it right without proper discipline and punishment procedures established with the full consent of ALL parents.
Geoff Morris, UK

About time! It is mindless to put pupils of differing abilities into the same class. When I was at school, there were people of all abilities and the 'slower' students held up the 'brighter' students and conversely, the 'brighter' students went too fast for the 'slower' students. Each was being held back by the 'same class, same level' system that exists.
Marie Griffiths, UK

I went to a comprehensive school, and have done academically better than either of my parents did, and they were educated under the old system. Comprehensives which get good quality teaching staff and sufficient funding are as effective as any other. The problem is that this is not possible in all schools. Until they have the correct amount of support, no system will improve matters.
Lizz, UK

I am truly shocked at the hypocrisy that has been mouthed by Blair and Blunkett. The first thing they did was to demolish Grant maintained schools. GMS allowed schools to invest in areas of education that they felt they could excel at; exactly what this Labour government is proposing to do now. They launched a long held vendetta to bring down Grammar schools, yet another area which allowed parents the freedom of choice for their children. Yet what they propose is a revamped version of this choice. It seems to me that all this Labour "Government" has done since being in power has been to destroy previous Tory policy only to reinstate it later but claiming it was their idea all along.
Robin Campbell-Burt, UK

The problem, as always, is what happens to pupils who are not so bright or self-motivated

Mike, UK

Bright children and those with capable parents will find a way to get into the best schools, be they grammar, specialist, or comprehensives in a wealthy catchment area. The problem, as always, is what happens to pupils who are not so bright or self-motivated. Are they to be dumped into 3rd rate secondary moderns, or sink-comprehensive schools.
Mike, UK

This is an excellent development and a long time coming. The comprehensive system has been an unmitigated disaster leading to pupils with very different abilities being mixed into one great big messy class. I was unfortunate enough to have been through the comprehensive system and hated every minute of it. Fortunately I managed to get my real education elsewhere afterwards and gained my PhD a few years ago. Perhaps now we can start rewarding children for excellence rather than destroying them.
Tom, UK

If each pupil is streamed by ability in each subject, then a comprehensive school should be the best choice for all pupils. Meanwhile, the government is encouraging children to specialise at far too early an age. Well-rounded adults require a well-rounded education.
Dr Duncan Campbell, UK

Bring back the discipline and standards of teaching that the grammar school offered. With the standards of the comprehensive schools the teachers should have personal bodyguards to enter - they are getting more and more like the Americans every day. The 11 plus and grammar schools were the best of British products - ask any employer where he would like his employees to come from - comprehensive or grammar.
Elaine, UK

Shame that the Labour Party messed up the 1960s education system in the first place!
Mr T, UK

I went to a grammar school and it was rubbish. The teachers seemed to think that they didn't need to teach us because we were already going to get reasonable grades

Dan, UK

I went to a grammar school and it was rubbish. The teachers seemed to think that they didn't need to teach us because we were already going to get reasonable grades, whilst a lot of my colleagues were lazy because they already thought they'd won the lottery of life. For my friends who went to secondary modern schools the eleven plus exam also had the effect of demotivating them because they thought they were failures. Selection should only be an option for those at the very top and very bottom of the intellectual spectrum who would otherwise not progress.
Dan, UK

Comprehensive schools have been largely successful both academically and in breaking down some of the snobbery still unfortunately demonstrated by some of your older correspondents. As long as diversification is not done at the expense of the majority then Labour can add it to their impressive historical list of INCLUSIVE educational reforms.
Gareth Knowles,

Educated in a Scottish comprehensive, we were streamed as soon as we showed an aptitude. Once we determined our 7 or 8 exam subjects we split into classed aimed to work at the speed appropriate to our abilities. Anyone could move up or down a set if that was what they needed, but we still had an education which was comprehensive. Take 30 clones and give them a dozen subjects, they'll still have a comprehensive education. Scour the country for 30 diverse individuals and give them just a couple of subjects and their education still won't be comprehensive.
Bob Connell, Wales

Now that the government has finally recognised the success of selective schools and the demand for more selection, will it repeal the legislation introduced earlier in this parliament that threatens the remaining grammar schools in England, or indeed allow new grammar schools to be created where there is a demand from parents? If it does not many people will conclude that government education policy is hopelessly confused.
Chris, UK

Comprehensives by and large turned all schools into secondary moderns

Ken Beach, Germany

The end of rigid comprehensive education is to be applauded. We need a diverse system to meet current needs. But we don't need to go back to the old system where a minority get a good education while the rest can hardly read or write. The pre-comprehensive system failed the majority, but instead of correcting the problem, comprehensives by and large turned all schools into secondary moderns. Non-academic children should be able to have a good vocational education, and not be looked down on by the future professionals at the grammar school end. That would be real equality - everybody well educated to do what best suits them.
Ken Beach, Germany

Hopefully these new proposals will be the beginning on a new ethos for the British education system. However, stamping some schools as "specialist" won't solve all, or even many of the problems. We need a system that recognises that an academic education is not suitable for everyone. A vocational education for those who want it, and more importantly, for those who don't have academic abilities, needs to be available. Every single person should leave school with a sense that they have received a good education which both they and the outside world value. At present, too many young people leave school with no qualifications and with the perception that education isn't for them. "Education" must be seen in the widest possible sense - not simply in a handful of exam certificates. It is a process which sets the child up for life, helping them learn to exploit their own potential.
Gemma, UK

Why is it that we constantly hear calls from people demanding the return of grammar schools but never hear any pleas for the secondary modern to make a comeback? If the new proposals mean that children receive the most appropriate education for their particular needs at that particular time in their life then I think the system will work very well. Unfortunately, I don't think the resources are there to provide this and we will either get a great system for the lucky elite or muddle on as we are at the moment.
Rod Maxwell, Scotland

After attending an atrocious comprehensive in the 70's. I am pleased that my son will hopefully have a better education when he reaches secondary school. When I talk to friends who attended better schools I feel cheated of the chance of a decent education. Can I claim compensation? Who can I sue?
Mark, UK

I went to one of the largest comprehensive schools in the UK. It was an ex-grammar school and still had pupils who boarded. It was a great school for someone who was very good at one subject and borderline on another as it allowed them to be placed in the appropriate classes for each subject. The only problem was that they never really tackled what to do with those children who don't want to learn?
Caron, England

Now, at last, Labour are having to listen to their own words

Hazel, UK

In the mid 60's, when I was at grammar school, at our prize giving ceremony held at Goldsmiths College, the then Minister for Education was invited as guest speaker. It was the era when the Labour Party under Harold Wilson was elected and naturally added fuel for our Headmaster and other members of staff to harangue the minister in composed oratory and all that minister could do was to concede that he was outnumbered in view. My old school hung on tenaciously as a Voluntary aided grammar school until dire straits eventually compelled it to become a comprehensive school.
Now, at last, Labour are having tolisten to their own words. If only they had listened to those who were actually in the teaching profession to begin with.
Hazel, UK

At last - sense in the education system! The 'old' system which lumps together pupils of all abilities and with different educational needs has consistently let us down. Not only do the more academic children suffer, but the children with talents in non-academic areas also suffer from this narrow-minded vision of 'one education for all'. Hopefully now we can start to rebuild Britain as a place which takes the same pride in its artisans as it does in its academics.
katie, UK

A return to the 11-plus and grammar schools, the like of which we had in the 50's and 60's, is to be applauded, IF it ever happens. No doubt the Labour wizards are about to ruin the country even more by decimating our education system completely, finishing-off what they started with the comprehensive school system.
John C., Warwick, England

As I see education today, the comprehensives has degraded from terrible, when I was at school, to downright disastrous. Who'd be a teacher?

Alex, UK

Being in an RAF family, I had to travel a good deal around the country. So went to many schools. Some comprehensive and some grammar. The grammar schools made you want to learn simply because of the atmosphere and the strict code of conduct aimed to keep students on the rails. The comprehensives were by far, lacklustre in discipline and management, which resulted in degenerating to a truancy and lazy culture. I have to say that I feel, as I had a reprehensible education whilst in the hands of the comprehensive system, that the grammars were superior. As I see education today, the comprehensives has degraded from terrible, when I was at school, to downright disastrous. Who'd be a teacher?
Alex, UK

A great idea, but a little ironic after the recent Labour Party assault on the Grammar school system. I am keen to understand how children will be "selected" for these new specialist schools. By an exam, perhaps?
Michael, UK

For too long has the comprehensive system failed both ends of the spectrum by giving one size fits all education. Children need to be given the opportunity to specialise in what they are good at and interested in, before they get turned off by education. A class with only 20% interested students is impossible to teach.
Brian Blackmore, UK

The A-level system is inadequate in that it demands too much specialisation at an early age. Specialisation at an even earlier age will just leave too many people choosing 'popular' subjects.
Ian, UK

I sincerely hope so, along with the other Labour-inspired claptrap that has ruined Britain.
Lancelot Bate, US

The comprehensive system has served this country well

Nigel Tregoning, UK

The comprehensive system has served this country well. It has provided equal opportunities for all, one only has to look at the number of students now attending university, many of them from ordinary backgrounds. A child is no longer discriminated against because of an exam result at the age of 11. What is more worrying however, is the "single faith" schools being proposed. We should be encouraging tolerance of different beliefs, not handing the Church of England or any other religious organisation the chance to indoctrinate young people. Schools should prepare children for life, parents can introduce religon if they so desire.
Nigel Tregoning, UK

Specialist schools are all very well - but will we ever see schools specialising in the Humanities? The contributions that Geography, History and RE play in educating children for life have been undermined for too long. They teach critical analysis, and encourage pupils to consider the roles of attitudes and values in decision making. Perhaps if more significance was placed on these elements of the curriculum tomorrow's citizens would be able to understand the science and technology revolutions in a more realistic context. My fear is that the government's latest proposals will lead to a further marginalisation of these vital areas of study.
Rachel Lofthouse, UK

Thank goodness that this experiment in social engineering is coming to an end. But what a pity it is too late to give my children the same standard of education which I enjoyed in the 50s and 60s before this disastrous theory was put into practice.
Brian, UK