Which are better: Grammar or Comprehensive schools?

The common belief about grammar schools – also referred to as ‘selective’ schools – is that their quality of teaching is better and this is why grammar schools tend to show ‘better’ results at GCSE level, where they routinely top the league tables for achievement. Arguably, success is a more complicated matter than final grades. For instance, is it better for a school to have one hundred percent A*-C, or for a school’s pupils to make the greatest progress?

People struggle to look past the league tables and A*s and towards what is potentially more important. But, how impressive is it really to maintain a students’ above-average ability when, upon arriving at a grammar school doorstep, the child is already perceived to be exceptional? It is due to this exceptional academic ability, that we cannot assume, were an average student entered, that they would receive the above average results commonly achieved by grammar students. Furthermore, we cannot assume that such an experience would have positive effects at all. 

In counties such as Kent, an Eleven Plus exam is taken to determine the academic worth of a child at the age of eleven. Those that are deemed more academically able are then granted a place in a grammar school, while those who struggle with exams or academic thinking are placed in the local secondary modern.

By segregating the students into groups based on academic ability alone without regard to other factors, there is a risk that students develop a sense of self-worth relative to others, based purely on a single school test; secondary modern students may see themselves as failures, while those that attend grammar school may perceive themselves to be superior.

This is the detrimental decision counties make when they decide to open grammar schools, though the damage is not contained to the children of their county. When asked whether comprehensive students are beneath him, a life-long grammar school attendee replied, “the stereotype says you are”, before following it up with “depending on how much lower the school is than another, that’s how much lower you are perceived to be”.

This grammar school student, who asked not to be identified, evidently believed himself to be above others, merely because of the institution he attended. Is it possible that such students have been conditioned to believe that those who make the decision not to travel across counties every day are inferior? There are some students that have never taken the Eleven Plus. They may have never possessed an interest in attending a grammar school. That is not to say that they are academically incapable or even academically inferior. On the contrary, there are many students attending comprehensives who would not struggle at all in a grammar school environment and who perform just as well – sometimes better – than those attending selective schools.

Will Tweedy, a student previously attending a comprehensive but now attending a grammar school, described the greatest differences between the two secondary schools: “The main difference is the mentality of the students. People expect you to want to work.” This view opposes the common assumption that it is the teachers that make such a difference to the results of grammar schools, not the fellow students. Will confirmed this himself, claiming: “To be honest the teaching is probably better at [the comprehensive]. At [the grammar school], it’s very textbook stuff.”

According to a school comparison on Gov.uk, the progress score of the comprehensive in question was 0.5, an above average score, especially when compared to the progress made by the grammar school in the neighbouring county, which was only 0.11. So, despite grammar schools across the country having a 5+ A*-C rate of 99.1%, their progress is often nowhere near as impressive because they are gifted the students’ academic ability from the off-set. Comprehensives, however, work with students to achieve success that is personal to the pupil, whether that be an A*, B or C.

Unlike grammar schools, the success of comprehensives does not reflect only natural ability. The success of comprehensives is reliant on the quality of teaching and hard work of the students that leads to an extent of progress that is not found in grammar schools.

Emily Thompson - Heathfield Community College