英语论文网

endships nor did they widen the career aspirations of working class children.

'The notion that social structures can be changed through educational reform is a liberal myth'. (Sanderson, 1987 p 64).

The present comprehensive system made educational opportunities of working class children even worse. In theory all comprehensive schools are equal, but in reality schools situated in the more affluent catchment areas became more academically orientated as more parents expected their children to continue their education at University. As a result bright children from the deprived areas are forced to attend schools that are inadequate for their needs and unable to fulfil their potential. The only way for them to be accepted to more academically oriented school is to move to the 'leafy lane' area which is much more difficult for a child to do than to pass a 11 plus test. There is an opinion that such children would have benefited from returning to the selective system.
Should the country return to the selective system?

Clearly, present comprehensive system needs reforming, but on the other hand there is a body of evidence against the tripartite system. There are arguments in favour and against either of these systems. The selective system provided a better education but only for the minority. The comprehensive system seems to offer equal opportunities but has been accused of holding back development of more able students. In my opinion the solution lays in developing a system which would accumulate strengths of both the selective and comprehensive ideas.

Educational systems should provide all children with knowledge and skills which should help them develop their potential and should prepare them for their adult life. I believe that the best way to achieve it is not to go back to the old selective system, even though I was a product of it, nor would it be wise to keep the present 'non selective' system. In my opinion children should be selected into different groups but selection should not be made on the basis of different abilities or aptitudes, which has been proved difficult if not impossible to measure, but on basis of achievement. I can imagine a system where pupils are transferred along the educational ladder not in accordance with their age but in accordance with what they have learned. The examination system should be designed in such a way that it does not put unnecessary stress on the students but it should be clear that they could not move along before being able to show solid knowledge of the curriculum. Such a system would give a reward and encouragement to the students that are actually learning at school. It would allow the more able pupils not to repeat time after time what they already know but to study with the older students. In my opinion children that have not passed the standard test for 11 years old at the end of the primary school should not be automatically transferred into secondary school but should stay in primary school for another year. The aim of the test should not be about selecting the most able pupils but checking that every child going to a secondary school acquired a basic knowledge without which he or she would not be able to study further, surely then we would not be in the absurd position of having to support students in gaining qualifications in foundation skills and employing a selection procedure which fails to recognise GCSE's at wha