I am working class and went to a grammar school as Trafford still has the 11+ system. I was bone idle and did not do a lot of homework or revision but managed to pass my GCSEs with As and Bs. I worked hard in class I just hated homework!
I decided to go to a mixed ability college and it was the worst mistake I have ever made as I could not believe how disruptive it was having to hear different pupils asking the teacher the same basic questions over and over. The majority of them used to talk over the teachers which is not something I had experienced since primary.
I knew then that there is absolutely no way I would have passed my GCSEs if I had gone to a comprehensive as I would have switched off in lessons.
Another difference was at grammar my teachers actually cared whether we attended or not and would not have tolerated a lot of the class room stories you read about nearly everyday.
David Cameron is a toff who wants to be seen as "street" but he doesn't have a clue.
He wants to focus on issues that make a difference to youngsters though it's been proved that working class children in grammars do better than they would at comprehensives. The major problem is there is a reverse snobbery nowadays and a lot of children don't want to better themselves, but there are still a lot who do and they should not ignored.
The only time grammar schools should become obsolete is when secondary schools start providing all pupils with an excellent education which I find increasingly hard to believe will happen.

Chump24, just out iof interest did your parents pay for you to attend or did you receive a scholarship. The fact of the matter is, there are only a few scholarships available to poorer parents whose children are bright. What about the parents who can't afford the 5K plus a year to send their kids to school. I would love to be able to send my kids to a grammar school, but the chances of them getting a scholarship or me being able to afford it are slim. Why shopuld only rich people get a good education? Grammar Schools should scrap the pay to learn scheme and just be available to the kids who are genuinely bright enough to go, regardless of what their mum & dad earns.

Jodie, but you don't need to be wealthy to get a grammar school education in Trafford. This is what Chump24 pointed out. We need more grammar schools to stretch the bright kids, rather than stifle them in so-called 'City Academys' where they are lumped together wtih kids who aren't as willing and/or interested and will undoubtedly hold them back.

In all grammer school debates,there is always the point raised,that there are working class people who do go to grammer schools.Fine,no one is denying that.The truth is though,that these schools are overwhelmingly dominated by the middle classes.In any class ridden society,the better off parents ensure that their kids get every advantage they can,whether it's through moving home to get into the catchment area of a good school,top up tuition etc.Grammer schools are a part of the middle class plan,and survey after survey shows that they make a bad situation worse.Cream off the brightest working class kids(which legitimises the myth that it's the brightest not the poshest who get into grammer school) ,leave the rest in substandard schools,to pursue those lower social positions. What their opponents often ask for is a system built on equality of opportunity,that each child regardless of background receives an education which helps them ,develop their full potential.This is very different to a one size fits all,type education.The Daily Mail brigade,don't really want this fairness though,it may mean their childs potential is below that of the child of a factory worker.On a level playing field,their child may not come out as what they see as a high acheiver.If they valued manual work a bit more,then it wouldn't matter.But they presume that those jobs are for the children of lower class people.Grammer schools exacerbate the waste of talent of the brightest kids,and ensures that talent matters less than class.But then the defenders of grammers,often don't want fairness,in fact it's the last thing they want.I'm glad those Tory right wingers are upset,they are people serving a narrow class ridden agenda.They fear the binmans daughter's genius,far outstripping that of their own offspring,educationally and in career terms.She may be one of the millions of kids,who were very bright,but didn't get to grammer school.But went on to beleive she wasn't smart,because everyone had such low expectations for her,at the secondary modern.Such a waste of talent,but who cares about her,and about the loss of her talent to society?.

BlueGorilla, I don't know what you have been reading lately, but it sounds like you have a very large chip on your shoulder. You do not need to be afraid of either the middle classes nor grammar schools. I am one of those parents who spent my money on getting my child into a grammar school, rather than spending it on a Sky subscription and an annual holiday in The Canaries. It's a question of personal choice. I am not middle class, and my child's school is not dominated by the middle classes. Nor is it part of a greater consiparacy to supress the hoi-polloi. Nor are any of the parents at my child's school afraid of the binman's daughter. It's quite simple - if there were more grammar schools then all of the bright children - regardless of class - would get the education they deserve.

Although 'working class', my husband and I both attended grammar school as did the younger of our 2 daughters. Our elder daughter did not pass the 11+ and went to the girls' 'secondary modern' where she excelled and is now at University, studying Economics. Much of a young person's achievements are due to their own self-motivation and a desire to do well but sadly many of the country's secondary schools are unable to encourage this ethos due to the large number of disruptive pupils and disinterested parents. The grammar schools must be doing something right because where they are still an option, a large number of 'ordinary' parents are willing to pay for 11+ coaching (we did not!)to increase the chances of their child getting into grammar school. If all children are to have an equal education then all schools should be offering equal opportunities and until the private, public and grammar schools are all replaced by true comprehensives that will never happen. I don't see any politician or party ever being brave enough to even make that suggestion sadly!

GRammar schools work, but should be on ability to the ability to pay. Trafford works well because it is a reasonable Tory run borough, whereas neighbouring Manchester cant even decide how many times to empty the bins

Blip, my husband and i both work full-time. I do not have a sky subscription, not do i have an annual holiday in the canaries or anywhere else for that matter and i still can't afford to send my children to grammar school. It seems to me that you are the one with the chip on your shoulder. Do you think most parents can actually afford to pay for their kids to go to grammar school but choose not to? Don't be so silly and don't speak on behalf of everyone at your childs school regarding the binmans daughter!

I was't bright enough to get into grammar school but I don't see why kids who are should be dragged down. It's the ones getting into university getting full grants when their parents are loaded that goad me.

Thank you Jodie...and the answer to other writers,who assume I have a chip on my shoulder..is no.My dad was a skilled manual worker,and my mum worked hard also as a factory worker mostly.We weren't poor,and I never failed or took the eleven plus.It doesn't really matter whether I am a public school boy,or attended the worst school in Britain..the fact is people should recognise unfairness when they see it.The same chances should be there for the binman's daughter,as anyone else's kid,it's as simple as that. The people I knew at grammer school, needed their parents to buy uniforms and sports equiptment,which must have cost loads.I was staggered..plus they didn't even play football... If their parents were in low paid jobs or unemployed,they would have had no chance..where is the fairness in that?It's a fact that a much lower proportion of kids at grammers get free school meals than in the general school population.Such a situation is just wrong..and clearly shows who benefits most from grammers.Additionally,if there are limmited places in a high status institution,leading to better life-chances,then better off parents can give their kid a helping hand,some parents can afford top-up home schooling to boost their kid's chances of passing the eleven plus..Also parents can help with 11 plus preparation,as a disproportionate number of kids who get into grammer, have parents who did likewise..this is about passing a particular test,not being brighter.Please no more anecdotal evidence to the contrary,I am talking generally,not about each and every single person.There are always exceptions,but it's the bigger picture that matters.Each case of a working class grammer school student is used to create a false picture.I have said consistently that I favour education that brings the best out of each and every child,I think grammers are the opposite of that...and leave many to a lesser education,because they either weren't entered for,or didn't pass one exam.Or simply couldn't afford to go to grammer school..which is just criminal.Equality of opportunity can nurture the most talent,wherever it comes from.The grammer system runs contrary to this reasonable aim.