The 1976 education act abolished the tripartite system in favour ответы егэ

• 

  Education Act 1944

  the ‘Butler Act’ set the structure of the post-war system of state education. This included the modern-split of primary and secondary education that we see today and is the system that I myself have gone through. The leaving age was also raised to 15.
  The ‘Tripartite system’ was also introduced. Depending on the results a child gained from taking the Eleven Plus exam.

• Policy makers are becoming more convinced of the importance of science and technology.
  The Percy Report of 1945 recommended the transformation of some technical colleges into universities, and the establishment of ‘institutes of technology’.

• The effects of the second world war and the rise in school leaving age led to a shortage of teachers. Therefore in 1945, an emergency training programme was introduced.

• The Barlow Report of 1946 on ‘Scientific Manpower’ identified a critical shortage of scientists and recommended an ‘ambitious programme of university expansion’. This would be funded by the Exchequer and would double the annual output of science graduates.

• School leaving age is raised to 15.

• The General Certificate of Education (GCE) is an academic qualification that was introduced in 1951, replacing the School Certificates. The GCE traditionally comprised two levels: the Ordinary Level (O Level) and the Advanced Level (A Level). More recently examination boards also offer an intermediate third GCE level, the Advanced Subsidiary Level (AS Level) replacing the earlier Advanced Supplementary level — All three of which I have gained during my own educational career.

• Equality and Inequality in Education PolicyPhysics Today — Women in Physics Survey
  One of the points summarised in this report includes: sixth form courses should be expanded, with more science facilities for girls. The social aspect of increasing awareness for the science subjects particularly for girls is still an issue that surrounds science today. But it is a stigma which has significantly been improved upon since the early days.

• 

  In the years following World War II, most Local Education Authorities (LEAs) paid students’ tuition fees and also provided a maintenance grant to help with living costs; this did not have to be repaid. The Education Act 1962 made it a legal obligation for all LEAs to give full time university students a maintenance grant.
  At present during my teacher training I recieve a maintenance grant, without which I would find difficult to pay for living costs and learning materials.

• 

  This is the age that I left school as it was compulsory to do so. I then sought further education elsewhere in college

• 

  The 1976 Education Act abolished the tripartite education system of grammar and secondary modern schools in England and Wales.
  I myself attended a comprehensive school as were many of the schools in my area. In fact they are so common in my area I didn’t know the difference between comprehensive or grammar as I had never been exposed to grammar schools and do not know anyone who has been to one.

• 

  This year the government introductes the National Curriculum and associated assessment procedures.
  The National Curriculum has become the main framework for learning and assessment in English Education and influenced both my education growing up and what I shall me learning to teach.

• Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) are brought in at state schools for all seven year olds. I took these at my second primary school (3 in total)

• An A* grade is invented at GCSE to help distinguish between the top candidates. SATS are also introduced for 11 year olds. I gained a double A*A* at GCSE science even though I was predicted BB. Ironically, science at school was my weakest subject, I always got the lower mark for science SATs than English or Maths. My year 11 science teacher completely changed my view on science.

• I attended three primary schools, including a private school.

• 

  The Education Act 1996 requires all maintained schools to offer courses in religious education, but parents can opt their children out of the subject. Secondary schools must also offer a sex education programme. R.E was one of my favourite subjects at school especially concerning human rights. This value has proven useful when considerering areas within science where morals and ethics should be considered.

• A third SAT exam is created for all 14 year olds in the country. More education laws also ensure all older pupils are given courses in careers education.

• A major overhaul of A-levels sees each course broken down into six modules, three of which are sat a year earlier at the new AS level.
  The A levels I took consisted of 6 modules and allowed me to keep an AS level without carrying onto A level for one subject. However six modules did mean a heavy workload consisting of coursework and exams.

• I began secondary school in 2002. Whilst here my GCSE options were Music, French, History.

• Gained very good GCSE grades especially in Science.

• I went to North East Worcestershire College. Here I took A level Maths, Physcis, Chemistry and an AS level in Environmental studies. I found the college environment completely different to school, and I had to retake a year.

• A level exam marking criteria are adapted to include a new A* grade similar to that at GCSE. I just missed out a year on this new change.

• Unpopular SATs for 14 year olds are scrapped, along with the science exam for 11 year olds

• I began University this year and graduated this year in BSc (Hons) Observational Astronomy, (originally Astronomy & Astrophysics).

• 

  The coalition announces an overhaul of the curriculum, with more focus to be placed on British history and great works of literature.

The Tripartite System was the arrangement of state-funded secondary education between 1945 and the 1970s in England and Wales, and from 1947 to 2009 in Northern Ireland. It was an administrative implementation of the Education Act 1944^[1] and the Education Act (Northern Ireland) 1947.

State-funded secondary education was to be arranged into a structure containing three types of school, namely: grammar school, secondary technical school (sometimes described as «technical grammar», or «technical high» schools) and secondary modern school. Not all education authorities implemented the tripartite system; many maintained only two types of secondary school, the grammar and the secondary modern.

Pupils were allocated to their respective types of school according to their performance in the 11-plus or the 13-plus examination. It was the prevalent system under the Conservative governments of the 1951 to 1964 period, but was actively discouraged by the Labour government after 1965. It was formally abolished in England and Wales in 1976,^{[citation needed]} giving way to the comprehensive system. However, elements of similar systems persist in several English counties such as Kent and Lincolnshire, which maintain the grammar schools alongside other less academic non-selective secondary schools. The system’s merits and demerits, in particular the need and selection for grammar schools, were contentious issues at the time and remain so.

A new design for secondary education[edit]

Origins[edit]

Prior to 1944 the British secondary education system was fundamentally an ad hoc creation. Access was not universally available, and varied greatly by region. Schools had been created by local government, private charity and religious foundations. Education was often a serious drain on family resources, and subsidies for school expenses were sporadic. Secondary education was mainly the preserve of the middle classes, and in 1938 only 13% of working class 13-year-olds were still in school.^{[citation needed]}

Many of the schools created since the 1870s were grammar schools, which offered places based on an entrance test. Places were highly desired and seen as offering a great chance at success. These schools were widely admired, and were to become a model for the tier-structured education reforms of the 1940s.

There was also a strong belief in the value and accuracy of psychometric testing. Many in the educational establishment, particularly the psychologist Sir Cyril Burt, argued that testing students was a valid way of assessing their suitability for various types of education.^[2] Similar conclusions were drawn in a number of other countries, including France, Italy, Germany and Sweden, all of which operated a state-run system of selective schools.

The 1926 Hadow Report had recommended that the education system be formally split into separate stages at the age of eleven or twelve.^[3] Before this point there had been no formal demarcation between primary and secondary education as known in modern society. The creation of this break would encourage the establishment of selection at the point when pupils were changing schools. The Spens Report of 1938 recommended the tripartite system viz. grammar, technical high and ‘modern’ secondary schools.^[4] This was the basis of the post 1944 reform

The Butler Act[edit]

The 1944 Butler Education Act radically overhauled education in England and Wales, and the Education (Northern Ireland) Act 1947 set out a similar restructuring for Northern Ireland. For the first time, secondary education was to become a right, and was to be universally provided. It would also be free, with financial assistance for poor students. This was part of the major shake-up of government welfare in the wake of the 1942 Beveridge Report.

In addition to promising universal secondary education, the act intended to improve the kind of education provided. Children would be provided with the type of education which most suited their needs and abilities. Calling their creation the Tripartite System, education officials envisaged a radical technocratic system in which skill was the major factor in deciding access to education, rather than financial resources. It would meet the needs of the economy, providing intellectuals, technicians and general workers, each with the required training.

The Act was created in the abstract, making the resultant system more idealistic than practical. In particular, it assumed that adequate resources would be allocated to implement the system fully.

Design of the system[edit]

The basic assumption of the Tripartite system was that all students, regardless of background, should be entitled to an education appropriate to their needs and abilities. It was also assumed that students with different abilities were suited to different curricula. It was believed that an IQ test was a legitimate way of determining a child’s suitability to a particular tier.

There would be three categories of state-run secondary schools. Each was designed with a specific purpose in mind, aiming to impart a range of skills appropriate to the needs and future careers of their pupils.

• Grammar schools were intended to teach a highly academic curriculum, teaching students to deal with abstract concepts. There was a strong focus on intellectual subjects, such as literature, classics and complex mathematics. In addition to wholly state-funded grammar schools, a number of schools currently receiving state grants could become direct grant grammar schools, with some pupils funded by the state and the rest paying fees.
• Secondary technical schools were designed to train children adept in mechanical and scientific subjects. The focus of the schools was on providing high academic standards in demanding subjects such as physics, chemistry, advanced mathematics and biology to create pupils that could become scientists, engineers and technicians.
• Secondary modern schools (secondary intermediate schools in Northern Ireland^[5]) would mainly train pupils in practical skills, aimed at equipping them for less skilled jobs and home management. Many secondary modern schools, however, offered academic streams to achieve CSE, «O» levels and «A» Levels in all academic subject areas (Mathematics, Geography, English Language and Literature, Physics, Biology, Economics, etc.)

It was intended for all three branches of the system to have a parity of esteem. The appropriate type of school for each student would be determined by their performance in an examination taken in the final year of primary school.

The system in operation[edit]

Implementation[edit]

The Tripartite System was arguably the least politically controversial of the great post-war welfare reforms. The Butler Act had been written by a Conservative, and had received the full backing of Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

Many in the Labour party, meanwhile, were enthusiastic about the ability of the Tripartite System to enable social mobility. A first-rate education would now be available to any capable child, not simply a rich one. The tripartite system seemed an excellent tool with which to erode class barriers.

In spite of this broad approval, the resources for implementing the system were slow in coming. The logistical difficulties of building enough secondary schools for the entire country delayed the introduction of tripartite education. It was not until 1951, and the election of a Conservative government, that the system began to be widely implemented. Some historians^[who?] have argued that tripartite education was the Conservative answer to the attractions of the Welfare state, replacing collective benefits with individual opportunities. Even so, there was still a dramatic shortfall in resources for the new education system.

Very few technical schools were opened, due to the lack of money and a shortage of suitably qualified teachers. This failure to develop the technical part of the system undermined the whole structure. The tripartite system was, in effect, a two-tier system with grammar schools for the academically gifted and secondary modern schools for the others.^[5]

Grammar schools received the lion’s share of the money, reinforcing their image as the best part of the system, and places in grammar schools were highly sought after. Around 25% of children went to a grammar school, although there was a severe regional imbalance, with many more grammar school places available in the South than in the North, and with fewer places available for girls. This was partly the result of a historical neglect of education in the north of England, which the tripartite system did much to correct. Nevertheless, in 1963 there were grammar school places for 33% of the children in Wales and only 22% of children in the Eastern region.^[6]

Secondary modern schools were correspondingly neglected, giving them the appearance of being ‘sink schools’. Although explicitly not presented as such, the secondary modern was widely perceived as the bottom tier of the tripartite system. They suffered from underinvestment and poor reputations, in spite of educating around 70% of the UK’s school children. The Newsom Report of 1963, looking at the education of average and below average children, found that secondary moderns in slum areas of London left fifteen-year-olds sitting on primary school furniture and faced teachers changing as often as once a term.^[7]

Existing beliefs about education and the failure to develop the technical schools led to the grammar schools being perceived as superior to the alternatives. The system failed to take into account the public perception of the different tiers. Whilst officially no tier was seen as better than the other, it was a generally held belief amongst the general public that the grammar schools were the best schools available, and entry into the other two types was considered a «failure».

Alongside this system existed a number of public schools and other fee-paying educational establishments. These organised their own intakes, and were not tied to the curricula of any of the above schools. In practice, most of these were educationally similar to grammar schools but with a full ability range amongst their pupils.

The 11-plus[edit]

To allocate students between the three tiers, many students sat an exam during their final year at primary school; at the age of 10 or 11 years, depending on when their birthday fell. In some areas e.g. Wisbech, Isle of Ely the test was two years later (i.e. a Thirteen-Plus to enter Wisbech Grammar School). Three tests were given; one tested mathematical ability, one set an essay on a general topic and a third examined general reasoning.

Originally, these tests were intended to decide which school would be best suited to a child’s needs – officially there was no «pass» or «fail» – the result determined which of the three tiers of schools the child went to. However, because of the lack of technical schools, the Eleven-Plus came to be seen as a pass-or-fail exam, either earning children a place at their local grammar school or consigning them to a secondary modern. As such, «passing» the 11-plus came to be seen as essential for success in later life.

The 11-plus has been accused of having a significant cultural bias. This was certainly true of early papers. «General reasoning» questions could be about classical composers, or the functions performed by domestic servants – subjects which children from working class backgrounds would be less able to answer.

Examination systems and relationship to further education[edit]

Different types of schools entered their pupils for different examinations at age 16. Grammar school students would take General Certificate of Education (GCE) O-levels, while children at secondary moderns initially took no examinations at all. Some secondary modern schools offered qualifications that were set, for example, by regional examination boards, such as the Union of Lancashire and Cheshire Institutes and the Northern Counties Technical Examinations Council. The latter exam was taken after four years at secondary school. Such examinations were comparable with the Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE) which was introduced in 1965. Less demanding than GCE O-level, results in the GCE and CSE exams were graded on the same scale, with the top CSE grade, grade 1, being equivalent to a simple pass at GCE O-level.

Secondary moderns did over time develop O-level courses for bright students, but in 1963 only 41,056 pupils sat them, roughly one in ten. Some of these pupils’ results were very good. Indeed, during the 1960s, students from secondary modern schools who took GCE ‘O’ Levels were increasingly achieving results comparable to those being achieved by students from grammar schools.^[8] This was remarkable given the disadvantages of secondary modern schools compared to grammar schools in providing education for GCE O-Level candidates. Accordingly, the entire rationale for Tripartite streaming of students based upon the 11-plus examination was called into question.

Secondary modern schools continued in existence into the 1970s, and as time progressed more attention was given to the need to provide more challenging examinations, and to adopting the same approach to mixed abilities as the modern comprehensive system which existed at the same time.

Although the Butler Act offered further education for all, including students from secondary moderns, only children who went to grammar schools had a realistic chance of getting into university. Most secondary moderns did not offer A-levels, though many in Northern Ireland in the 1970s did. Although students could obtain them elsewhere, few did and in 1963 only 318 secondary modern pupils sat the exams.^[9] Only grammar schools offered facilities for students who were preparing for the entrance examinations required to go to Oxbridge.

Decline[edit]

The fall of the meritocracy[edit]

In 1958 the sociologist Michael Young published a book entitled The Rise of the Meritocracy. A mock-historical account of British education viewed from the year 2033, it satirised the beliefs of those who supported the Tripartite System. Young argued that grammar schools were instituting a new elite, the meritocracy, and building an underclass to match. If allowed to continue, selective education would lead to renewed inequality and eventually revolution.

This reflected a growing dissatisfaction on the left with the results of the Tripartite System. Whereas the previous generation of Labour politicians had focused on the social mobility afforded to those who passed their eleven plus, now concern became focused upon those who were sent to secondary moderns. Once the Tripartite System had been implemented, the middle classes were found to be much more likely to win places at grammar schools. It was feared that society was being divided into a well-educated middle class elite and a working class trapped in the secondary modern schools, or «eggheads and serfs». To some on the left, such as Graham Savage of the LCC, it became an article of faith that the only way to bring about equality was by putting everyone through the same schools.

In July 1958 the Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell formally abandoned the Tripartite system, calling for «grammar-school education for all».^[10] The party’s fiercest opponent of the grammar school was Gaitskell’s protégé, Anthony Crosland.

Experiments with comprehensive schools had begun in 1949, and they had taken hold in a few places in the UK. Anglesey, London, Coventry, the West Riding and Leicestershire had all abolished the Tripartite System in the 50s and early 60s, for a variety of reasons. They offered an alternative to the existing system which was seized upon by its opponents. Comprehensives were held up as less divisive, and pupils were said to benefit from the abolition of selection.

Paradoxically, at the same time as Labour was attacking the Tripartite System for its inequalities, some in the middle class were increasingly upset at the social mobility it fostered.^{[citation needed]} As educational testing became more exact and subject to less class bias, an increasing proportion of middle class children were being sent to secondary moderns. The Tripartite System fell victim to its own elitism, as the traditional supporters of the grammar schools began to worry about their own children’s educational future.

Abolition in England and Wales[edit]

By 1965 the Tripartite System was on the way out. 65 local education authorities (LEAs) had plans to switch to comprehensive schools, and another 55 were considering it. Over the next few years this grassroots change would be reinforced by central government policy.

Labour had won the 1964 election, and Anthony Crosland became Secretary of State for Education in January 1965. He was an adamant critic of the tripartite system, and once remarked, «If it’s the last thing I do, I’m going to destroy every last fucking grammar school in England. And Wales. And Northern Ireland.»^[11] Soon after he came to office he issued Circular 10/65. This asked LEAs to begin planning the switch from the Tripartite System to the Comprehensive System, withholding funding for new school buildings from those that did not comply. This change would be reinforced by the Education Act 1968. By 1970, 115 LEAs had had their reorganisation plans approved. Thirteen had had theirs rejected, and a further ten had defied the Labour government and refused to submit any plans at all.

Initially the move generated little opposition. It was portrayed foremost as an effort to raise standards in secondary moderns, and Prime Minister Harold Wilson had promised that grammar schools would only be closed «over my dead body». However, some grammar schools were closed, and many were amalgamated with nearby secondary moderns.

Opposition developed, mainly on a local level in protest of the treatment of a particular grammar school. Particularly strong opposition was noted in Bristol, after the LEA ended all grammar school education in 1964.

However, there was little nationwide organisation among the defenders of the Tripartite System. The most prominent attack on the introduction of comprehensives came in the series of Black Papers (as opposed to White Papers, which are issued by the government) published in the Critical Quarterly by A.E. Dyson and Brian Cox. Comprehensivisation was accused of using schools «directly as tools to achieve social and political objectives», rather than for the education of pupils.^[12]

Debates over the Comprehensive system seemed^{[according to whom?]} about to become a major political issue, particularly with the election of a Conservative government in 1970. However many Tories were ambivalent on the issue. More grammar schools were closed under Margaret Thatcher than any other Education Secretary, but this was by now a local process, which was allowed to continue to avoid controversy. Her Circular 10/70 simply removed the compulsion of Circular 10/65, leaving it up to individual LEAs whether or not they would go comprehensive.

Aftermath and legacy[edit]

The end of the Tripartite System was reinforced by the new Labour government of 1974. One of its first actions on education was Circular 4/74, reiterating Labour’s intention to continue with comprehensivisation. The 1976 Education Act forbade selection of pupils by ability, officially ending the Tripartite System.

The abolition of the grammar schools benefitted private schools. Free, high-quality education for grammar school pupils had dramatically reduced independent school pupil numbers, from around 10% of the school population to 5.5%^{[citation needed]}. However, now that comprehensive equality had been instituted, a large number of parents were willing to pay to extricate their children from it^{[citation needed]}. Most of the direct grant grammar schools converted to fully fee-paying independent schools, retaining selection of entrants. The proportion of children opting out of the state system continued to rise until recently, standing at around 8%.^[when?]

Certain counties continued to defy the government and continued to operate a form of the Tripartite System. There are still 164 state-run grammar schools in England today, schooling 141,000 pupils.^[13]

The 1976 Act proved the high-point of the Comprehensive movement. The Thatcher government allowed selection once again in 1979, and it has been used increasingly by individual schools eager to choose those they perceive to be the best pupils. In 1984 Solihull attempted to reintroduce grammar schools, but was stopped by opposition. In 1986 the first City Technology Colleges were proposed, arguably inspired by the Technical schools, but in the 2000s most of them converted to academies. Today, no formal attempts are being made to restore the Tripartite System, but the perceived failure of the Comprehensive System led the next Labour government to propose «Beacon Schools», «Advanced Schools» and an «escalator» or «ladder» of schools.

Secondary education in the UK has not been thoroughly overhauled since 1944, and today seems^{[according to whom?]} to be a complex mixture of the Tripartite System and the Comprehensive.^[14]

Survival of the system in Northern Ireland[edit]

While vestiges of the Tripartite system persist in several English counties, the largest area where the 11-plus system remains in operation is Northern Ireland. Original proposals for switching to the Comprehensive system were put forward in 1971, but the suspension of devolution meant that they were never acted upon. As a result, each year around 16,000 pupils in the area take the 11-plus transfer test. Pupils are rated between grades A and D, with preferred access to schools being given to those with higher grades.
Until 1989, around 1/3 of pupils who took the exam, or 27% of the age group, were given places in a grammar school.^[5]

Under the «open enrolment» reform of 1989, grammar schools in Northern Ireland (unlike the remaining grammar schools in England) were required to accept pupils up to their capacity, which was also increased.^[15]
Together with falling numbers of school-age children, this has led to a significant broadening of the grammar schools’ intake.
By 2006, 42% of transferring children were admitted to grammar schools, and in only 7 of the 69 grammar schools was the intake limited to the top 30% of the cohort.^[16]

In 2001, following the publication of the Burns Report on Post Primary Education, the decision was taken to abolish the examination. The subsequent Costello Report went further, and advocated an end to all selection in Northern Ireland’s schooling.^[17] The education minister, Martin McGuinness of Sinn Féin, endorsed the Burns Report, as did the Social Democratic and Labour Party, while the Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party politicians condemned it. When devolution was suspended in 2002, the Northern Ireland Office decided to continue the policy, although the phase-out date of the eleven plus was put back from 2004 to 2008.

Opinion is divided on the wisdom of the decision. The Burns Report itself called the 11-plus system socially divisive and argued that it placed unreasonable pressures on teachers.^[18]
Critics of the status quo in Northern Ireland say that primary education is overly focused on passing the 11-plus. Half of all students receive some kind of private tuition before going to the exam. Many pupils also say that the exam is a great source of stress.^[19]

Nevertheless, the existing system has produced good results. GCSE grades are much higher than in England and Wales. The number gaining five GCSEs at grades A-C, the standard measure of a good education, is ten percentage points higher.^[20] AS and A level results are also better. Access to universities is more equitable, with 41.3% of those from the bottom four socioeconomic groups going to university, as opposed to a national average of 28.4%.^[21]

Public opinion appears divided on the question. In a 2004 poll the people of Northern Ireland supported the abolition of the 11-plus by 55% to 41%. But they opposed the abolition of selective education 31% to 67%. There is widespread agreement that whatever the failings of the existing system, it is fair.^[22]

The last eleven plus took place in 2008, for the intake of September 2009.
It is proposed that the replacement system have an additional transfer point at age 14, with the possibility of differentiated provision from that point.
A school might, for example, specialise in providing an academic pathway from age 14.
The choice of the appropriate type of school for each student is to be based on a range of measures, including performance in secondary school but excluding a separate test.^[23]

A consortium of 25 grammar schools have announced their intention to run a common entry test for 2009 admissions.^[24]
One Catholic grammar school, Lumen Christi College, has also announced its intention to run its own tests.^[25]

Debates[edit]

The debate about the tripartite system still continues years after its abolition was initiated, and has evolved into a debate about the pros and cons of selective education in general. In general, the left-wing such as the Labour Party oppose selective education, whereas the right-wing such as the Conservative Party have traditionally supported it.

See also[edit]

• Education in the United Kingdom

References[edit]

Bibliography[edit]

7 Gillard, D., ‘Us and Them: a history of pupil grouping policies in England’s schools’, (2008) (see the section ‘1945-1960: Doubts and concerns’) http://www.educationengland.org.uk/articles/27grouping.html

External links[edit]

• Overview of the situation
• General overview of the situation today
• An analysis of a contemporary radio programme on the subject

Children’s views

• Kate in Birmingham
• Jamie in Birmingham

Arguments in favour

• The National Grammar Schools Association

Arguments against

• The Campaign for State Education, including a Seminar on the topic
• Student editorial^{[permanent dead link]}

Studies of remnants of the system

• David Jesson (2000). «The Comparative Evaluation of GCSE Value-Added Performance by Type of School and LEA» (PDF). Discussion Papers in Economics 2000/52, Centre for Performance Evaluation and Resource Management, University of York. Retrieved 30 June 2015.
• Ian Schagen and Sandie Schagen (19 October 2001). «The impact of selection on pupil performance» (PDF). Council of Members Meeting. National Foundation for Educational Research. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 October 2008.
• Pischke, Jörn-Steffen; Manning, Alan (April 2006). «Comprehensive versus Selective Schooling in England in Wales: What Do We Know?». NBER Working Paper No. 12176. doi:10.3386/w12176.

The Tripartite System, known colloquially as the grammar school system, was the structure by which secondary education was organised in England and Wales between the 1944 Butler Education Act and the Education Act 1976, and in Northern Ireland since the Education (Northern Ireland) Act 1947. Secondary schools were divided into three categories, grammar schools, technical schools and modern schools. Pupils were allocated to each according to their performance in the Eleven Plus examination. It was the prevalent system under the Conservative governments of the 1950s and 60s, but was actively discouraged by the Labour government after 1965. It was formally abolished in England and Wales in 1976, giving way to the current Comprehensive System, although elements of similar systems persist in several English counties. The merits and difficulties of the system proved a contentious subject, and continue to divide public opinion in England and Wales.

A new design for secondary education

Origins

Prior to 1944 the British secondary education system was a fundamentally ad hoc creation. Access was not universally available, varying greatly by region. Schools had been created by local government, private charity and religious foundations. Education was often a serious drain on family resources, and subsidies for school expenses were sporadic. Secondary education was mainly the preserve of the middle classes, and in 1938 only 13% of working class 13 year olds were still in school.

Many of the schools created since the 1870s were grammar schools, which offered places based on an entrance test. Places were highly desired and seen as offering a great chance at success. These schools were widely admired, and were to become the model by which education would be reformed from the 1940s.

There was also a strong belief in the value and accuracy of psychometric testing. Many in the educational establishment, particularly the psychologist Sir Cyril Burt, argued that testing students was a valid way to assess their suitability for various types of education. [Hadow, W.H. » [http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/documents/hadow/24.shtml Psychological tests of educable capacity and their possible use in the public system of education] «, London: HM Stationery Office, 1924.] Similar conclusions were drawn in a number of other countries, including France, Italy, Germany and Sweden, all of whom operated a state-run system of selective schools.

The 1926 Hadow Report had recommended that the education system be formally split into separate stages at eleven or twelve. [Hadow, W.H. » [http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/documents/hadow/26.shtml The Education of the Adolescent] «, London: HM Stationery Office, 1926.] Before this point, there had been no defined barrier between what are now known as primary and secondary education. The novelty of this break would encourage the establishment of selection at the point when pupils were changing schools.

The Butler Act

The 1944 Butler Education Act radically overhauled education in England and Wales. The Education (Northern Ireland) Act 1947 set out a similar restructuring for Northern Ireland. For the first time, secondary education was to become a right, and was to be universally provided. It would also be free, with financial assistance for poor students. This was part of the major shake-up of government welfare in the wake of the Beveridge report.

In addition to promising universal secondary education, the act intended to improve the kind of education provided. Children would be provided with the type of education which most suited their needs and abilities. Calling their creation the Tripartite System, education officials envisaged a radical technocratic system in which skill was the major factor in deciding access to education, rather than financial resources. It would meet the needs of the economy, providing intellectuals, technicians and general workers, each with the required training.

The Act was created in the abstract, making the resultant system more idealistic than practical. In particular, it assumed that adequate resources would be allocated to implement the system fully.

Design of the system

The basic assumption of the Tripartite system was that all students, regardless of background, should be entitled to an education appropriate to their needs and abilities. It was also assumed that students with different abilities were suited to different curricula. It was believed that an IQ test was a legitimate way of determining a child’s suitability to a particular tier.

There were to be three categories of state-run secondary schools. Each was designed with a specific purpose in mind, aiming to impart a range of skills appropriate to the needs and future careers of their pupils.

*Grammar schools were intended to teach a highly academic curriculum, teaching students to deal with abstract concepts. There was a strong focus on intellectual subjects, such as literature, classics and complex mathematics.

*Secondary technical schools were designed to train children adept in mechanical and scientific subjects. The focus of the schools was on providing scientists, engineers and technicians.

*Secondary modern schools (secondary intermediate schools in Northern IrelandGallagher, A.M. » [http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/csc/reports/majmin1f.htm Majority Minority Review 1: Education and Religion in Northern Ireland] «, Coleraine: University of Ulster, 1989.] ) would train pupils in practical skills, aimed at equipping them for less skilled jobs and home management.

It was intended for all three branches of the system to have a parity of esteem. The appropriate type of school for each student would be determined by their performance in an examination taken in the final year of primary school.

The system in operation

Implementation

The Tripartite System was arguably the least politically controversial of the great post-war welfare reforms. It had been written by a Conservative, and had received the full backing of Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Even the most aristocratic Tories saw it as a way of reinvigorating upper class control of society.

Many in the Labour party, meanwhile, were enthusiastic about the ability of the Tripartite System to enable social mobility. A first rate education would now be available to any capable child, not simply a rich one. The tripartite system seemed an excellent tool with which to erode class barriers.

In spite of this broad approval, the resources for implementing the system were slow in coming. The logistical difficulties of building enough secondary schools for the entire country delayed the introduction of tripartite education. It was not until 1951, and the election of a Conservative government, that the system began to be widely implemented. Some Historians have argued that tripartite education was the Conservative answer to the attractions of the Welfare state, replacing collective benefits with individual opportunities.Even so, there was still a dramatic shortfall in resources for the new education system.

Very few technical schools were opened, due to the lack of money and a shortage of suitably qualified teachers.This failure to develop the technical part of the system undermined the whole structure.The tripartite system was, in effect, a two-tier system with grammar schools for the academically gifted and secondary modern schools for the others.

Grammar schools received the lion’s share of the money, reinforcing their image as the best part of the system, and places in grammar schools were highly sought after. Around 25% of children went to a grammar school, although there was a severe regional imbalance, with many more grammar school places available in the South than in the North, and with fewer places available for girls. This was partly the result of a historical neglect of education in the north of England, which the tripartite system did much to correct. Nevertheless, in 1963 there were grammar school places for 33% of the children in Wales and only 22% of children in the Eastern region. [Sampson, Anthony. «Anatomy of Britain Today», London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1965.]

Modern schools were correspondingly neglected, giving them the appearance of being ‘sink schools’. Although explicitly not presented as such, the secondary modern was widely perceived as the bottom tier of the tripartite system. They suffered from underinvestment and poor reputations, in spite of educating around 70% of the UK’s school children. The Newsom Report of 1963, looking at the education of average and below average children, found that secondary moderns in slum areas of London left fifteen year olds sitting on primary school furniture and faced teachers changing as often as once a term. [Newsom, John. » [http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/documents/docs2/newsom.shtml Half our future] «,A report of the Central Advisory Council for Education (England),London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1963.]

Existing beliefs about education and the failure to develop the technical schools led to the grammar schools being perceived as superior to the alternatives. The system failed to take into account the public perception of the different tiers. Whilst officially no tier was seen as better than the other, it was a generally held belief amongst the general public that the grammar schools were the best schools available, and entry into the other two types was considered a «failure».

Alongside this system existed a number of public schools and other fee-paying educational establishments. These organised their own intakes, and were not tied to the curricula of any of the above schools. In practice, most of these were educationally similar to grammar schools but with a full ability range amongst their pupils.

The Eleven Plus

To allocate students between the three tiers, all students were given an exam at the age of 11. Three tests were given; one tested mathematical ability, one set an essay on a general topic and a third examined general reasoning.

Originally, these tests were intended to decide which school would be best suited to a child’s needs – officially there was no «pass» or «fail» – the result determined which of the three tiers of schools the child went to. However, because of the lack of technical schools, the eleven plus came to be seen as a pass-or-fail exam, either earning children a place at their local grammar school or consigning them to a secondary modern. As such, «passing» the eleven plus came to be seen as essential for success in later life.

The eleven plus has been accused of having a significant cultural bias. This was certainly true of early papers. «General reasoning» questions could be about classical composers, or the functions performed by domestic servants – subjects which children from working class backgrounds would be less able to answer. This criticism was to become less valid as the years passed, and the science of IQ testing became more advanced and class biases decreased.

Examination systems and relationship to further education

Different types of schools entered their pupils for different examinations at age 16. Grammar school students would take General Certificate of Education (GCE) O-levels, while children at secondary moderns initially took no examinations at all. Instead, they worked for a Schools Certificate, which simply indicated they had remained at school until age 15. Then some of the secondary modern schools offered qualifications that were set, for example, by regional examination boards, such as the Union of Lancashire and Cheshire Institutes and the Northern Counties Technical Examinations Council. The latter exam was taken after four years at secondary school. Such examinations were comparable with the Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE) which was introduced in 1965. Less demanding than GCE O-level, results in the GCE and CSE exams were graded on the same scale, with the top CSE grade, grade 1, being equivalent to a simple pass at GCE O-level. Secondary moderns did develop O-level courses for brighter students, but in 1963 only 41,056 pupils sat them, roughly one in ten. Some of these pupils’ results were very good. Secondary modern schools continued in existence into the 1970s, and as time progressed more attention was given to the need to provide more challenging examinations, and to adopting the same approach to mixed abilities as the modern comprehensive system which existed at the same time.

Although the Butler Act offered further education for all, including students from secondary moderns, only children who went to grammar schools had a realistic chance of getting into university. Secondary moderns did not offer training for A-levels. Although students could obtain this elsewhere, few did and in 1963 only 318 secondary modern pupils sat the exams. [Sampson, «Anatomy», p194.] Only grammar schools offered facilities for students who were preparing for the entrance examinations required to go to Oxbridge.

The decline of the Tripartite System

The Fall of the Meritocracy

In 1958 the sociologist Michael Young published a book entitled «The Rise of the Meritocracy». A mock-historical account of British education viewed from the year 2033, it satirised the beliefs of those who supported the Tripartite System. Young argued that grammar schools were instituting a new elite, the meritocracy, and building an underclass to match. If allowed to continue, selective education would lead to renewed inequality and eventually revolution.

This reflected a growing dissatisfaction on the left with the results of the Tripartite System. Whereas the previous generation of Labour politicians had focused on the social mobility afforded to those who passed their eleven plus, now concern became focused upon those who were sent to secondary moderns. Once the Tripartite System had been implemented, the middle classes were found to be much more likely to win places at grammar schools. It was feared that society was being divided into a well-educated middle class elite and a working class trapped in the Modern schools, or «eggheads and serfs». To some on the left, such as Graham Savage of the LCC, it became an article of faith that the only way to bring about equality was by putting everyone through the same schools.

In July 1958 the Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell formally abandoned the Tripartite system, calling for «grammar-school education for all». [Gaitskell, Hugh. Letter to «The Times» 5 July 1958, quoted by Chitty.] The party’s fiercest opponent of the Grammar school was Gaitskell’s protégé, Anthony Crosland.

Experiments with comprehensive schools had begun in 1949, and had taken hold in a few places in the UK. Anglesey, London, Coventry, the West Riding and Leicestershire had all abolished the Tripartite System in the 50s and early 60s, for a variety of reasons. They offered an alternative to the existing system which was seized upon by its opponents. Comprehensives were held up as less divisive, and pupils were said to benefit from the abolition of selection.

Paradoxically, at the same time as Labour was attacking the Tripartite System for its inequalities, some in the middle class were increasingly upset at the social mobility it fostered. As educational testing became more exact and subject to less class bias, an increasing proportion of middle class children were being sent to secondary moderns. The Tripartite System fell victim to its own elitism, as the traditional supporters of the grammar schools began to worry about their own children’s educational future.

Abolition in England and Wales

By 1965 the Tripartite System was on the way out. 65 LEAs had plans to switch to comprehensive schools, and another 55 were considering it. Over the next few years this grassroots change would be reinforced by central government policy.

Labour had won the 1964 election, and Anthony Crosland became Secretary of State for Education in January 1965. He was an adamant critic of the tripartite system, and once angrily remarked, «If it’s the last thing I do, I’m going to destroy every last fucking grammar school in England. And Wales. And Northern Ireland.» [Crosland, Susan. «Tony Crosland», London : Cape, 1982.] Soon after he came to office he issued Circular 10/65. This asked Local Education Authorities to begin planning the switch from the Tripartite System to the Comprehensive System, withholding funding for new school buildings from those that did not comply. This change would be reinforced by the 1968 Education Act. By 1970, 115 LEAs had had their reorganisation plans approved. Thirteen had had theirs rejected, and a further ten had defied the Labour government and refused to submit any plans at all.

Initially the move generated little opposition. It was portrayed foremost as an effort to raise standards in secondary moderns, and Prime Minister Harold Wilson had promised that no grammar school would be closed «over my dead body». It became increasingly apparent, however, that this would not be the case. Some grammar schools were closed, and many were amalgamated with nearby secondary moderns.

The promise of grammars for all rang increasingly hollow, as it became apparent that Comprehensivisation meant levelling out standards, rather than raising them. Opposition developed, mainly on a local level in protest of the treatment of a particular grammar school. Particularly strong opposition was noted in Bristol, after the LEA ended all grammar school education in 1964.

However, there was little nationwide organisation among the defenders of the Tripartite System. The most prominent attack on the introduction of comprehensives came in the series of Black Papers (as opposed to White Papers, which are issued by the government) published in the » [http://www.criticalquarterly.com/history.asp Critical Quarterly] » by Tony Dyson and C. Brian Cox. Comprehensivisation was accused of using schools «directly as tools to achieve social and political objectives», rather than for the education of pupils. [Pedley, R.R. «Comprehensive Disaster», in C.B. Cox & A.E. Dyson (eds), «Fight for Education: a Black Paper», London: Critical Quarterly Society, 1969, pp45-48, quoted by Chitty.]

Debates over the Comprehensive system seemed about to become a major political issue, particularly with the election of a Conservative government in 1970. However many Tories were ambivalent on the issue. It is true that more grammar schools were closed under Margaret Thatcher than any other Education Secretary, but this was by now a local process, which was allowed to continue to avoid controversy. Her Circular 10/70 simply removed the compulsion of Circular 10/65, leaving it up to individual LEAs whether or not they would go comprehensive. The Tripartite System to continued to slip quietly into the night across most of the UK.

Aftermath and Legacy

The end of the Tripartite System was reinforced by the new Labour government of 1974. One of its first actions on education was Circular 4/74, reiterating Labour’s intention to continue with Comprehensivisation. The 1976 Education Act forbade selection of pupils by ability, officially ending the Tripartite System.

The abolition of the grammar schools proved a godsend to independent schools. Free, high-quality education for the brightest pupils had dramatically reduced their students, from around 10% of the school population to 5.5%. However, now that comprehensive equality had been instituted, a large number of parents were willing to pay to extricate their children from it. Some grammar schools, particularly Direct Grant Grammars, converted to fee-paying independent schools, retaining selection of entrants. The proportion of children opting out of the state system continued to rise until recently, standing at around 8%.

Certain counties continued to defy the government and continued to operate a form of the Tripartite System. In most cases, grammar schools exist more as a better tier of institutions, while other schools are seen as ordinary, rather than modern school-style «failures». There are still 164 state-run grammar schools in England today, schooling 141,000 pupils. [Chitty, Clyde. «The Right to a Comprehensive Education», [http://www.socialisteducation.org.uk/CB2.htm Caroline Benn Memorial Lecture 2002] , revised and reprinted in [http://www.wwwords.co.uk/forum/content/pdfs/45/issue45_1.asp «Forum» 45:1] (2003) pp12-16.]

The 1976 Act proved the high-point of the Comprehensive movement. The Thatcher government allowed selection once again in 1979, and it has been used increasingly by individual schools eager to choose the best pupils. In 1984 Solihull attempted to reintroduce grammar schools, but was stopped by middle class opposition. In 1986 the first City Technology Colleges were proposed, arguably inspired by the Technical schools. Today, no formal attempts are being made to restore the Tripartite System, but the perceived failure of the Comprehensive System has led the current (Labour) government to propose «Beacon Schools», «Advanced Schools» and an «escalator» or «ladder» of schools.

Secondary education in the UK has not been thoroughly overhauled since 1944, and today seems to be a complex mixture of the Tripartite System and the Comprehensive. Sir Peter Newsam, Chief Schools Adjudicator 1999–2002, has argued that English schools can be divided into 8 types (with some overlap) based on the ability range of their intake:
# super-selective: almost all of the intake from the top 10%. These are the few highly selective grammar schools that dominate school performance tables.
# selective: almost all of the intake from the top 25%. These include grammar schools in areas where the Tripartite system survives.
# comprehensive (plus): admit children of all abilities, but concentrated in the top 50%. These include partially selective schools and a few high-status faith schools in areas without selection.
# comprehensive: intake with an ability distribution matching the population. These schools are most common in rural areas and small towns with no nearby selection, but a few occur in urban areas.
# comprehensive (minus): admit children of all abilities, but with few in the top 25%. These include comprehensive schools with nearby selective schools ‘skimming’ the intake.
# secondary modern: hardly any of the intake in the top 25%, but an even distribution of the rest. These include non-selective schools in areas where the Tripartite system survives.
# secondary modern (minus): no pupils in the top 25% and 10-15% in the next 25%. These schools are most common in urban areas where alternatives of types 1-5 are available.
# sub-secondary modern: intake heavily weighted toward the low end of the ability range.This ranking is reflected in performance tables, and thus the schools’ attractiveness to parents. [Newsam, Peter. «Diversity and Admissions to English Secondary Schools», Secondary Heads Association, 28 June 2002, revised and reprinted in [http://www.wwwords.co.uk/forum/content/pdfs/45/issue45_1.asp «Forum» 45:1] (2003) pp17-18.] [Brighouse, Tim. «Comprehensive Schools Then, Now and in the Future: is it time to draw a line in the sand and create a new ideal?», [http://www.wwwords.co.uk/forum/content/pdfs/45/issue45_1.asp «Forum» 45:1] (2003) pp3-11.]

urvival of the system in Northern Ireland

While vestiges of the Tripartite system persist in several English counties, the largest area where the 11-plus system remains in operation is Northern Ireland. Original proposals for switching to the Comprehensive system were proposed in 1971, but the suspension of devolution meant that they were never acted upon. As a result, each year around 16,000 pupils in the area take the eleven plus transfer test. Pupils are rated between grades A and D, with preferred access to schools being given to those with higher grades.Until 1989, around 1/3 of pupils who took the exam, or 27% of the age group, were given places in a grammar school.

Under the «open enrolment» reform of 1989, grammar schools in Northern Ireland (unlike the remaining grammar schools in England) were required to accept pupils up to their capacity, which was also increased. [cite paper
title = Educational Effects of Widening Access to the Academic Track: A Natural Experiment
first = Eric | last = Maurin | coauthors = McNally, Sandra
publisher = Centre for the Economics of Education, London School of Economics, Discussion Paper 85
date = August 2007
url = http://cee.lse.ac.uk/cee%20dps/ceedp85.pdf
accessdate = 2008-04-04] Together with falling numbers of school-age children, this has led to a significant broadening of the grammar schools’ intake.By 2006, 42% of transferring children were admitted to grammar schools, and in only 7 of the 69 grammar schools was the intake limited to the top 30% of the cohort. [cite web
title = Education Minister’s Statement for the Stormont Education Committee
first = Caitríona | last = Ruane
date = 2008-01-31
url = http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/85-schools/6-admission-and-choice/statement_for_the_education_committee_48_kb_.pdf
accessdate = 2008-04-04]

In 2001, following the publication of the Burns Report on Post Primary Education, the decision was taken to abolish the examination. The subsequent Costello Report went further, and advocated an end to all selection in Northern Ireland’s schooling. [cite web
title = Future Post-Primary Arrangements in Northern Ireland: Advice from the Post-Primary Review Working Group
first = Steve | last = Costello
date = January 2004
url = http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/22-postprimaryarrangements-new-arrangements_pg/22-pparesearch_and_reports_pg/22-ppa-rap-cr_pg.htm
accessdate = 2008-04-04] The education minister, Martin McGuinness of Sinn Féin, endorsed the Burns Report, as did the Social Democratic and Labour Party, while the Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party politicians condemned it. When devolution was suspended in 2002, the Northern Ireland Office decided to continue the policy, although the phase-out date of the eleven plus was put back from 2004 to 2008.

Opinion is divided on the wisdom of the decision. The Burns Report itself called the eleven plus system socially divisive and argued that it placed unreasonable pressures on teachers. [cite web
title = Education for the 21st Century: Report by the Post-Primary Review Body
first = Gerry | last = Burns
date = October 2001
url = http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/22-postprimaryarrangements-new-arrangements_pg/22-pparesearch_and_reports_pg/22-ppa-rap-br_pg.htm
accessdate = 2008-04-04] Critics of the status quo in Northern Ireland say that primary education is overly focused on passing the eleven plus. Half of all students receive some kind of private tuition before going to the exam. Many pupils also say that the exam is a great source of stress. [Taggart, Maggie. » [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/1962703.stm Consensus needed over Burns Report] «, BBC News, 2 May 2002.]

Nevertheless, the existing system has produced good results. GCSE grades are much higher than in England and Wales. The number gaining five GCSEs at grades A-C, the standard measure of a good education, is ten percentage points higher. [Portillo, Michael. » [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-1715048,00.html The lesson of grammars is elitism benefits us all] «, «The Times», 31 July 2005.] AS and A level results are also better. Access to universities is more equitable, with 41.3% of those from the bottom four socioeconomic groups going to university, as opposed to a national average of 28.4%. [St John’s College JCR Committee. » [http://www.spcjcr.co.uk/files/NI_education_briefing.doc Review of Post-Primary Education in Northern Ireland: Access Issues] «, 2004.]

Public opinion appears divided on the question. In a 2004 poll the people of Northern Ireland supported the abolition of the 11-plus by 55% to 41%. But they opposed the abolition of selective education 31% to 67%. There is widespread agreement that whatever the failings of the existing system, it is fair. [Taggart, Maggie. » [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/3422835.stm Majority ‘favour academic selection’] «, BBC News, 26 January 2004.]

The last eleven plus will take place in 2008, for the intake of September 2009.It is proposed that the replacement system have an additional transfer point at age 14, with the possibility of differentiated provision from that point.A school might, for example, specialise in providing an academic pathway from age 14.The choice of the appropriate type of school for each student is to be based on a range of measures, including performance in secondary school but excluding a separate test. [cite press release
title = Minister Ruane outlines education reforms
date = 2007-12-04
publisher = Department of Education, Northern Ireland
url = http://www.northernireland.gov.uk/news/news-de/news-de-041207-minister-ruane-outlines.htm]

A consortium of 25 grammar schools have announced their intention to run a common entry test for 2009 admissions. [cite news
title = ‘Test’ schools accept D grade pupils
first = Lisa | last = Smith
date = 2007-12-17
work = Belfast Telegraph
url = http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/education/article3258563.ece] One Catholic grammar school, Lumen Christi College, has also announced its intention to run its own tests. [cite news
title = Top grammar plans own ’11-plus’
first = William | last = Allen
date = 2008-03-17
work = Belfast Telegraph
url = http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/article3532649.ece]

Debates

The debate about the tripartite system still continues years after its abolition was initiated, and has evolved into a debate about the pros and cons of selective education in general. In general, the left-wing such as the Labour Party oppose selective education, whereas the right-wing such as the Conservative Party have traditionally supported it.

ee also

* Education in the United Kingdom

References

External links

* [http://www.politics.co.uk/issues/grammar-schools-$3320487.htm Overview of the situation]
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1618277.stm General overview of the situation today]
* [http://xanadu.bournemouth.ac.uk:591/analysis/AnalysisOnline/reviews/comprehensive.html An analysis of a contemporary radio programme on the subject]

«Children’s views»
* [http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/teens/2003/02/grammar1.shtml Kate in Birmingham]
* [http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/teens/2003/02/grammar_jamie.shtml Jamie in Birmingham]

«Arguments in favour»
* [http://www.ngsa.org.uk/index.htm The National Grammar Schools Association]

«Arguments against»
* [http://www.casenet.org.uk The Campaign for State Education] , including a [http://www.casenet.org.uk/edwa.html Seminar on the topic]
* [http://www.varsity.cam.ac.uk/varsity/live/2000/online.nsf/0/86ebd52c2c0e1a80802569f9003db362?OpenDocument Student editorial]

«Studies of remnants of the system»
*cite paper
title = The Comparative Evaluation of GCSE Value-Added Performance by Type of School and LEA
author = David Jesson
date = 2000
publisher = «Discussion Papers in Economics» 2000/52, Centre for Performance Evaluation and Resource Management, University of York
url = http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/econ/documents/dp/0052.pdf
accessdate = 2008-03-19
*cite conference
title = The impact of selection on pupil performance
author = Ian Schagen and Sandie Schagen
date = 2001-10-19
booktitle = Council of Members Meeting
publisher = National Foundation for Educational Research
url = http://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/other-publications/conference-papers/pdf_docs/schagen01.PDF
*cite paper
author = Jörn-Steffen Pischke
coauthors = Alan Manning
title = Comprehensive versus Selective Schooling in England in Wales: What Do We Know?
date = April 2006
publisher = Working Paper No. 12176, National Bureau of Economic Research
url = http://www.nber.org/papers/w12176
accessdate = 2008-03-19

21.
In the United
Kingdom, the 11-plus or Eleven
plus is an examination
administered to some students in their last year of primary
education, governing admission to various
types of secondary school. The name derives from the age group for
secondary entry: 11–12 years. The Eleven Plus examination
was once used throughout the UK but is now only used in a number of
counties and boroughs in England. The Transfer Test is
especially associated with the Tripartite
System which was in use from 1944 to 1976.

The
Transfer Test examination tests a student’s ability to solve
problems using, verbal reasoning and mathematics. The intention was
that it should be a general test for intelligence. Introduced in
1944, the examination was used to determine which type of school the
student should attend after primary
education: a grammar
school, a secondary
modern school, or a technical
school. The base of the Tripartite System
was the idea that for this purpose skills were more important than
financial resources: different skills required different schooling.

The
Eleven Plus was created by the 1944 Butler
Education Act. This established a Tripartite
System of education, with an academic, a
technical and a functional strand. Prevailing educational thought at
the time was that testing was an effective way to discover to which
strand a child was most suited. The results of the exam would be used
to match a child’s secondary school to their abilities and future
career needs.

When
the system was implemented, the technical
schools did not appear on the scale
envisaged. Instead, the Tripartite System came to be characterised by
fierce competition for places at the prestigious grammar
schools. As such, the Eleven Plus
took on a particular significance. Rather than allocating according
to need or ability, it became seen as a question of passing or
failing. This led to the exam becoming widely resented by some
although strongly supported by others.^{[citation
needed]}

Structure

The
structure of the Eleven Plus examination varied over time, and
among the different counties which used it. Usually, it consisted of
three papers:

• Arithmetic — A mental
  arithmetic test.

• Writing — An
  essay question on a general subject.

• General
  Problem Solving — A test of general knowledge, assessing the
  ability to apply logic to simple problems.

Most
children took the Eleven Plus transfer test examination in
their final year of primary school: usually at age 10 or 11. In
certain counties (Berkshire,
Buckinghamshire)
it also was possible to sit the test a year early — a process named
the Ten Plus; recently, the Buckinghamshire test was called
the Twelve Plus and taken a year later than usual.

Originally,
the transfer test was voluntary; currently, some 30% of students in
Northern Ireland do not sit for it.^[1]

In
Northern Ireland, pupils were awarded grades in the following ratios
to pupils sitting the exam: A (25%), B1 (5%), B2 (5%), C1 (5%), C2
(5%), D (55%) and there was no official distinction between pass
grades and fail grades.

Current practice

There
are 164 remaining grammar
schools in various parts of England, and 69
in Northern Ireland. In counties in which vestiges of the Tripartite
System still survive, the Eleven Plus continues to exist.
Today it is generally used as an entrance test to a specific group of
schools, rather than a blanket exam for all pupils, and is taken
voluntarily. For more information on these, see the main article on
grammar
schools. The largest area still operating
the Eleven Plus after the system was phased out in Northern
Ireland in 2008^[2]
is the county of Lincolnshire (although the test is optional, the
education system is completely Tripartite- every major town has
Grammar and Comprehensive/ Technical Schools). Kent students can take
the test though generally only those who are expected to pass will do
so.

Eleven
plus and similar exams vary around the country but will use some or
all of the following components:

• Verbal
  reasoning (VR)

• Non-Verbal
  reasoning (NVR)

• Mathematics
  (MA)

• English
  (EN)

In
Buckinghamshire
children sit just two verbal reasoning papers. In Kent
children will sit all four of the above disciplines, however the
English paper will only be used in circumstances of appeal. However,
in the London
Borough of Bexley from September 2008,
following a public consultation, pupils sitting the Eleven Plus
exam will only be required to do a Mathematics and Verbal reasoning
paper. In Essex,
where the examination is optional, children sit Verbal Reasoning,
Mathematics and English. Other areas use different combinations. Some
authorities/areas operate an opt-in system, whilst others (such as
Buckinghamshire) operate an opt-out system where all pupils are
entered unless parents decide to opt out. In North
Yorkshire, Harrogate/York
area, children are only required to sit two tests: Verbal and
Non-Verbal reasoning.

The
Eleven Plus was a result of the major changes which took place
in British education in the years up to 1944. In particular, the
Hadow
report of 1926 called for the division of
primary and secondary education, to take place on the cusp of
adolescence at 11 or 12. The implementation of this break by the
Butler Act seemed to offer an ideal opportunity to implement
streaming, since all children would be changing school anyway. Thus
testing at 11 emerged largely as an historical accident, without
other specific reasons for testing at that age.

Criticism
of the Eleven Plus arose on a number of grounds, though many
related more to the wider education system than to academic selection
generally or the Eleven Plus specifically. The proportions of
schoolchildren gaining a place at a Grammar School varied by location
and gender. 35% of pupils in the South
West secured grammar school places as
opposed to 10% in Nottinghamshire.^[6]
Due to the continuance of single-sex
schooling, there were fewer places for girls
than boys.

Critics
of the Eleven Plus also claimed that there was a strong class
bias in the exam. JWB
Douglas, studying the question in 1957,
found that children on the borderline of passing were more likely to
get grammar school places if they came from middle class families.^[7]
For example, questions about the role of household servants or
classical composers were easier for middle class children to answer
but far less familiar to those from less wealthy or less educated
backgrounds. This criticism was certainly true of the earlier forms
of the exam, and as a result the Eleven Plus was redesigned
during the 1960s to be more like an IQ test.

22.
The Ulster
Unionist Labour Association
was an association of trade
unionists founded by Edward
Carson in June 1918, aligned with the Ulster
Unionists in Northern
Ireland. Members were known as Labour
Unionists.
1918 and 1919 were the years of intense class
conflict throughout Britain. This period also saw a large
increase in trade union membership and a series of strikes. These
union activities raised fears in a section of the Ulster
Unionist leadership, principally Edward Carson and R.
Dawson Bates. Carson at this time was president of the British
Empire Union, and had been predisposed to amplify the danger of a
Bolshevik
outbreak in Britain.^[1]

Founding

The
Ulster Unionist Labour Association was made up of trade
unionists and Ulster
Unionists and was founded by Carson along with John
Miller Andrews^[2][3]
as a means of instigating a purge from the local trade union movement
of ‘Bolsheviks’ and republicans.
Both Carson and Bates
feared this class conflict and the development of a militant Sinn
Féin would threaten the class alliance with dissolution which
had been embodied in the old Ulster
Volunteer Force. By sounding the counter-revolutionary alarm, it
would be a call to ‘loyal workers’ against the twin threats of
socialism
and republicanism.^[4]

The
grouping adopted as formal policy an opposition to socialism,
but was seen by many as an attempt to show that the Unionist Party
had the interests of the working
class at heart.^[5]
Members included Tommy
Henderson, later an independent Unionist M
C

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #