Neil McNicholas: The system isn’t working... let’s go back to the 11-plus

When I eventually began university studies in the United States at the age of 35, it was because I wanted to and by then was in a position to pay for it – no better incentive for making every minute count!

As youngsters, as I and my friends approached and then lived with the outcome of the 11-plus examination, I don’t recall any of those who didn’t pass being psychologically damaged or feeling socially or educationally disadvantaged – as 11-plus antagonists will argue. It certainly made no difference whatsoever to the dynamics of our neighbourhood “gang”. To us, the 11-plus was just a pin on a bagatelle board. And if failing it was a fluke, you had another chance to prove the point at 13.

I felt a twinge of political correctness using the word “failing” in that last sentence because, of course, these days children aren’t allowed to fail or to feel second best in anything – everyone must win a prize. I am a firm believer in what I suppose we would call the “school of hard knocks”. I think winning and losing, indeed, competing in the first place, is part of growing up, learning about how to cope with life. But everyone having to win a prize seems to have been the basis of the move to the “one size fits all” comprehensive system that was introduced in 1965.

Previously, like it or not, the 11-plus helped to identify each person’s potential, whether academic or vocational, and the grammar/secondary school system played to pupils’ strengths. In what I’m sure was the vast majority of cases, that system worked and worked well, and no academic doors were ever closed with technical and community colleges available to those school leavers who needed them or chose to attend them, and universities for those with demonstrated potential and ability.

The cynic in me can’t help wondering whether those responsible for dreaming up the comprehensive school system were frustrated non-graduates of the 11-plus exam with a chip on their shoulders? Otherwise why would they have advocated the dismantling of a system that had been working well for the majority? “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” – but they tried to fix it anyway and, despite decades of academic decline, no one would dare admit that the emperor had no clothes on.

Now at last there is a growing voice of common sense saying what has been obvious for years: that the comprehensive system has failed, and the academic potential of far too many pupils is not being nurtured and, indeed, is being defined by mediocrity rather than superiority. Everyone can clear the bar when it’s set at a height that everyone is comfortable with, but that doesn’t test or stretch those who really can jump. And to me the current in-thing – academies – merely shuffles the pack rather than truly catering to pupils’ abilities and interests as the grammar/secondary school system used to.

In much of what Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has been saying and trying to do recently, there seems to be a move to restore that system having finally had to admit that the emperor is naked, but unfortunately our schools are increasingly staffed by a younger generation of teachers who have never known anything else.

They are, therefore, very defensive of the welfare of their pupils against what they see as on-going interference by Government, but without being more objectively critical of how well, or otherwise, the comprehensive/academy system itself is serving them.

Most of the letters to this newspaper advocating a return to a system that worked (having experienced one that patently doesn’t) are from teachers who were educated, and then taught, within that system but who, sadly, are now retired and are therefore no longer in a position to influence change (and a return to common sense) from within.

We’ve had the comprehensive school system for nearly half a century now, but it’s not working. Calling for a return to a system that was working isn’t a case of “we’ve always done it this way” because we haven’t – at least not for the last 50 years. For our children’s sake, let’s get back to that winning way.