Talk:Grammar school/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions about Grammar school. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
- (content of Talk:Grammar schools in the United Kingdom when that page was merged into Grammar school in October 2008)
I've cleared the talk page since the article has been rewritten to cover all aspects of grammar school education, not only that since 1944, and to do so in more detail. If someone knowledgeable could include something more on Victorian grammar schools, they would be doing wikipedia (and indeed the entire internet, since there is literally nothing on them out there) a great service.--Evil Capitalist 19:06, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
- Historic Grammar Schools in Scotland? Brendandh 00:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Why is Kent only 'mostly selective', its fully selective surely?!?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.103.40.194 (talk) 11:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- The Admissions to secondary school 2008 booklet has a map (on page 4) showing comprehensive areas in the south and northwest of the county, as well as the Isle of Sheppey. Kanguole (talk) 22:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Only Sheppy and the Hoo peninsular are comprehensive areas (rural/isolated areas, one comp in each). the rest of kent uses the 11+ with roughly 25% going to Grammars and the rest going to "high schools". Now some of these "high schools" style themselves as comps. There are also several catholic schools that style themselves as comps, plus private schools. 84.70.62.228 (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC) (a resident of kent)
Article name
I think this article would be more conventionally named Grammar school (United Kingdom). Kanguole (talk) 10:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The name of the article is inappropriate since Scotland and Wales don't have 'Grammar schools' and even the historical stuff doesn't once mention Scotland - perhaps 'Grammar schools in England' would be a better title? (or even 'Grammar schools in England and Northern Ireland') Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 09:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The article needs more historical detail, not chopping up. NI grammar schools are clearly closely related to the history in England and Wales. Kanguole (talk) 20:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there. I agree that grammar schools in Northern Ireland are related to England and Wales, but I would suggest that the way to achieve this would be to move 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' to 'Grammar schools in England' and then make 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' a disambiguation page that can make the linkages clear. Would you be unhappy with that? Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 21:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see the benefit, as this is hardly a huge article; the cost is fragmenting the story. Certainly the article lacks historical material for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Wales no longer has grammar schools, but it did have them, and their history till the 60s and 70s is intertwined with those in England. And that history is important background for many articles on Welsh secondary schools, comprehensive though they now are. The Education (Northern Ireland) Act 1947, which defined the grammar system for Northern Ireland, mirrors the Education Act 1944 for England and Wales. The connection with Scotland is weaker, usually a case of parallel evolution with important differences. I wish I knew more about the origins of the qualifying examination and senior secondary schools, but their abolition via Circular 600 is surely connected to the same government's simultaneous Circular 10/65 for England and Wales.
- This is a smallish article with incomplete coverage. I think it ought to be expanded, not split. Kanguole (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- The legislative basis has always been 'England and Wales' - such as the Education Act of 1944 - so if anything the article should be 'Grammar schools in England and Wales'. This is all the article is about so it really is misleading for it to be called 'of the United Kingdom'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.3.70 (talk) 20:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fair point. In that case the 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' page could still become a disambiguation page as I suggested above. I know there are no grammar schools in Scotland (other than with the word 'grammar' in their name}, but there may still be a need for a historical article about 'Grammar schools in Scotland'. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well it did discuss Northern Ireland until you removed that section yesterday. I really don't see how the encyclopaedia benefits from fragmenting the article. Kanguole (talk) 00:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fair point. In that case the 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' page could still become a disambiguation page as I suggested above. I know there are no grammar schools in Scotland (other than with the word 'grammar' in their name}, but there may still be a need for a historical article about 'Grammar schools in Scotland'. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- The legislative basis has always been 'England and Wales' - such as the Education Act of 1944 - so if anything the article should be 'Grammar schools in England and Wales'. This is all the article is about so it really is misleading for it to be called 'of the United Kingdom'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.3.70 (talk) 20:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there. I agree that grammar schools in Northern Ireland are related to England and Wales, but I would suggest that the way to achieve this would be to move 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' to 'Grammar schools in England' and then make 'Grammar schools in the United Kingdom' a disambiguation page that can make the linkages clear. Would you be unhappy with that? Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 21:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I still don't understand!
I turned to Wiki to understand the difference between grammar schools, secondary modern schools, and comprehensive schools. I'm sorry to say that this article helps almost not at all. How could an article given over to English grammar schools fail to make this distinction clear? Perhaps it is only Brits who work on it, and who carry their assumptions and background with them? I went to university in England for a year; I didn't understand the distinction then (1954-1955) and I'm afraid I still don't understand it! Get back to work, lightfoot lads and rose-lipt maidens! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.34.89 (talk) 10:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- Do you find the Tripartite System article more useful in this regard? Kanguole (talk) 12:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)