Selective Schools: Good or Bad? (4 Viewers)

[undalay]

Doesn't this just prove a point to the contrary? Selective schools are wasteful and are purely a political issue. Why is it that all other states in Australia have no selective schools?

The first debate about selective schools in New South Wales began in the 1950s and 1960s where the then Director of secondary education, Hedley Yelland (known for his implementation of the Wyndham Scheme), believed that selective schools were unnecessary because adequate competition was possible in a properly run large comprehensive, and wasteful because, while great students fared well in selective, the merely good fared much better in comprehensives.

I do not think there is any need for selective schools other than the need for some students to feel important just because they passed an idiotic test in year 6, comprising some of the most narrow-minded curricula in the western world.

u attend a selective school ?

 

[Continuum]

Doesn't this just prove a point to the contrary? Selective schools are wasteful and are purely a political issue. Why is it that all other states in Australia have no selective schools?

The first debate about selective schools in New South Wales began in the 1950s and 1960s where the then Director of secondary education, Hedley Yelland (known for his implementation of the Wyndham Scheme), believed that selective schools were unnecessary because adequate competition was possible in a properly run large comprehensive, and wasteful because, while great students fared well in selective, the merely good fared much better in comprehensives.

I do not think there is any need for selective schools other than the need for some students to feel important just because they passed an idiotic test in year 6, comprising some of the most narrow-minded curricula in the western world.

The existence of selective high schools have always been a political and bureaucratic article in the Australian Public school system with many academics and intelligent observers viewing this issue as purely political. The first debate about selective schools in New South Wales began in the 1950s and 1960s where the then Director of secondary education, Hedley Yelland (known for his implementation of the Wyndham Scheme), believed that selective schools were unnecessary because adequate competition was possible in a properly run large comprehensive, and wasteful because, while great students fared well in selective, the merely good fared much better in comprehensives.

primebevo, was there really a need to plagiarise from Wikipedia? It doesn't really benefit your integrity does it?

Let's continue onto the main point then...

You said that 'selective schools are wasteful and are purely a political issue', yet the only evidence you have to back that up is 'all other states in Australia have no selective schools' and some copied paragraph from Wikipedia. It seems to me that this is an extremely weak argument with no real backing, other than a pathetic regurgitation of what you figured from the opinions of other people and something you thought would make you sound smart.

While I do agree to some extent that 'adequate competition [is] possible in a properly run large comprehensive', who says that there is an adequate rate at which the curriculum is being taught to provide for those who learn faster than others? It is stupid that those who have the potential to excel are pushed back all for the sake of people who do not put effort into their learning, who do not care and whose financial situation allows them to ignore their education. Without selective schools, the education system is essentially having the same effect as America's No Child Left Behind policy, where there are policies being implemented so that everyone can reach the mandated levels of knowledge and skill (which are incidentally also very low). The drawback of such a policy is obvious in that all the programs that allow the higher performing students are cut - resulting in the increase of the general ability of students at the cost of the potential of the higher performing students.

So yes, while people in selective schools do do well at comprehensive schools, they aren't really meeting their potentials and in most cases, their own personal expectations of themselves. All they'll really be thinking is 'who cares if I can get top 10 in an average school'.

I do not think there is any need for selective schools other than the need for some students to feel important just because they passed an idiotic test in year 6, comprising some of the most narrow-minded curricula in the western world.

Want go China? Good curriculum. Good content. Maybe America? Good curriculum too. Good content too.

 

[Trebla]

Selective schools are wasteful and are purely a political issue. Why is it that all other states in Australia have no selective schools?

Are you sure about that? I think selective schools exist in Victoria as well.

I went to a semi-selective school. It had all the highs and lows of selective schools as well as the highs and lows of non-selective schools. haha

Whether a selective school is good or bad depends on the person really. There is nothing wrong with the system. It's well suited for those who want to be in one. It's your choice whether you want to go to a selective school or not.

If you're highly influenced by your peers then going to a selective school may be beneficial in terms of results, because most of your peers set good examples of work ethic and maturity. Comprehensive schools usually have more behavioural and bullying problems to deal with than selective schools.

If you tend work on your own and don't like feeling pressured, then it may be better to go to a comprehensive school. You tend to feel more relaxed, and can work at your own pace.

In terms of social life and friends, there isn't too much difference between selective and comprehensive schools. This "bad communication skills" thing is total rubbish.

Selective schools work best for 'talented' students (that's who they're meant to be for). The learning environment is much more intellectually stimulating and you have motivation and assistance from peers of similar ability to get you through complex topics which can greatly help your intellectual development. It is unfair to be dragged behind by those who show no interest in the subject area (which is quite a big issue at my former school). I mean if you're learning calculus in HSC maths (and you understand everything so far), would you allow the class to stop, slow down and revise for people who can't even do basic algebra (and consequently slow down your learning process)?

If you're not a 'talented' student then a selective school may do more harm than good.

In fact, university courses work in a similar way to the selective schools system (except on a larger scale). Given an enrolment cap of X for a certain course, they select the top X students who place that course as first preference by UAI. So essentially, all the 'top' students are bunched up together in one course.

 

[runnable]

Good for your UAI if you go to a top selective school. Its UAI factory.

 

[troongy]

Not to trying to be deliberately racist or anything, but i think that Asian parents are seriously going overboard. Some parents are getting their children tutored since kindy.
This is all because of the selective system, it has created a more competitive environment outside school than inside.

I know some of my sisters friends [yr4] who study 4hrs a night preparing for selective. This is like more than most high schoolers. They seriously need to let their children relax.

Any1 think entering selective has become more competitive than entering UNI?

 

[tkrishanthy]

<3 Ruse.

 

[Scinery]

Not to trying to be deliberately racist or anything, but i think that Asian parents are seriously going overboard. Some parents are getting their children tutored since kindy.
This is all because of the selective system, it has created a more competitive environment outside school than inside.

I know some of my sisters friends [yr4] who study 4hrs a night preparing for selective. This is like more than most high schoolers. They seriously need to let their children relax.

Any1 think entering selective has become more competitive than entering UNI?

I think the workload i put into getting into selective is much worse than the workload im going to expect next year, not because im underestimating how hard it is but because i was forced to study for selective pretty much against my will, i didnt understand why i needed to get it so any motivation was just making my parents happy. With getting into uni its all pressure im putting on myself, so theres a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction in the whole process. so yes i guess i agree with you there. even though the competititon for uni is obviously more.

 

[chichichip]

<3 Ruse.

You! come back to nsg, NOW!

And no. I love my school better than plc pymble. Yah huh.

 

[Riet]

CBF reading it but fuck you, selective schools own.

 

[Alfred.Einstein]

haha absolutely love the idea of "interview tutoring"
the only thing that makes me feel better when i get crapper marks than everyone else is that i have the added advantage of having somewhat better social and motor skills. lol

i do agree that this whole tutoring system is going way overboard.
parents are spending the same amount of money for their childs school fees for one year, in one week for tutoring. - well thats what i hear anyway.

but does anyone else realise that teachers at selective schools kinda suck?
i dont know if its just at my school, but its like they cruise along just expecting the kids to do really well beacuse they are "naturally gifted and will put in the hard work"
if they actually taught well or properly, maybe the kids wouldnt have to go to tutoring.

but then again i am one of the very few selective school asians/indians that dont do tutoring (may be the fact i dont do maths..)

- i find for alot of my subjects i am learning absolute shit in class and just getting a whole lot of sheets and textbook work to do.

is it like this anywhere else?

 

[nrs1990]

but does anyone else realise that teachers at selective schools kinda suck?
i dont know if its just at my school, but its like they cruise along just expecting the kids to do really well beacuse they are "naturally gifted and will put in the hard work"
if they actually taught well or properly, maybe the kids wouldnt have to go to tutoring.

but then again i am one of the very few selective school asians/indians that dont do tutoring (may be the fact i dont do maths..)

- i find for alot of my subjects i am learning absolute shit in class and just getting a whole lot of sheets and textbook work to do.

is it like this anywhere else?

I think it depends on the teacher, rather than the school.

I've had some teachers who are like that... But this year, I've been really lucky with my teachers. They are engaging us, trying to help us do the best we can. They try to get us to think, rather than just throwing worksheets at us.

So, it's not like that everywhere else.

 

[melanieeeee.]

bad.

 

[moll.]

I think the workload i put into getting into selective is much worse than the workload im going to expect next year, not because im underestimating how hard it is but because i was forced to study for selective pretty much against my will, i didnt understand why i needed to get it so any motivation was just making my parents happy. With getting into uni its all pressure im putting on myself, so theres a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction in the whole process. so yes i guess i agree with you there. even though the competititon for uni is obviously more.

WTF?
People study for selective schools tests?
I just rocked up to the exam.
Don't know how well i went, but i got my first choice, even if that was one of the lowest selective schools.

 

[Anus McLovin]

WTF?
People study for selective schools tests?
I just rocked up to the exam.
Don't know how well i went, but i got my first choice, even if that was one of the lowest selective schools.

Yeah people study for the Selective School's test.
You basically can't make school's like Ruse, Sydney Boys/Girls, North Sydney
Boys/Girls, Baulko on Natural talent. You can't "Naturally" know how to do more difficult maths, you've gotta learn and study it a little at least.

You know how people say most Selective School kids are socially awkward? totally true.
It's because of this I reckon Selective schools are good. These kids are naturally more reclusive, and at a Selective school, there aren't nearly as many kids who will give them a hard time. Over time they'll become more and more confident, and will "fit in" with society, but at non-selective schools they'll be bullied to a point of irreversible psychological damage.

And to those who reckon Selective School's are bad simply because they make you feel stupid, find yourself some thicker skin. If you let stuff like that get to you, good luck in life as an Adult. There will be shitloads of things worse to come you gotta be prepared for, and if tiny things like some "gifted kids" being smarter than you get to you, well....you're kinda screwed.

 

[lionking1191]

WTF?
People study for selective schools tests?
I just rocked up to the exam.
Don't know how well i went, but i got my first choice, even if that was one of the lowest selective schools.

some people studied hard and didn't get into any while some who didn't study got their first choice. the point is people are willing to make the effort to maximise their chance of getting into their first choice.

on the whole i think selective schools allow students to reach their potential by creating an atmosphere more conducive to studying that may not be avaialable at comprehensive schools. however like just about everything else it has its drawbacks. a very pronouced fault seems to be those "poorer performing kids" who has low self-esteem because everyone else seems to be sooo much smarter than them.

on the other hand, i do think over-drawn generalisations about selective school kids being 'socially awkard' is quite cliched, and frankly, lame. there often seems to be confusion between correlation and cause. selective schools do not create socially kids. more often than not, selective schools students have a more active extra-curriculum than their comprehensive, and even private counterparts. of course there will be less social kids who seems to, pardon the stereotype, 'study their ass off because they dont know what else to do with their lives' but that happens anywhere.

 

[Scinery]

Where i was going with the socially awkward was more the concept of
"zOmg its a white person" "zOmg its a dumb person"
but maybe thats just baulko x 100

 

[Anus McLovin]

Where i was going with the socially awkward was more the concept of
"zOmg its a white person" "zOmg its a dumb person"
but maybe thats just baulko x 100

Yeah, basically nerdy Asian kids. They make the cool Asian kids look bad, but when they try to be "cool" they end up (more often than not) just looking like, as the name suggests Try-Hards.

I guess you can't teach being awesome

 

[lionking1191]

Yeah, basically nerdy Asian kids. They make the cool Asian kids look bad, but when they try to be "cool" they end up (more often than not) just looking like, as the name suggests Try-Hards.

I guess you can't teach being awesome

spoken like a true cool selective schools person

 

[AkaiHanabi]

Yeah people study for the Selective School's test.
You basically can't make school's like Ruse, Sydney Boys/Girls, North Sydney
Boys/Girls, Baulko on Natural talent. You can't "Naturally" know how to do more difficult maths, you've gotta learn and study it a little at least.

You know how people say most Selective School kids are socially awkward? totally true.
It's because of this I reckon Selective schools are good. These kids are naturally more reclusive, and at a Selective school, there aren't nearly as many kids who will give them a hard time. Over time they'll become more and more confident, and will "fit in" with society, but at non-selective schools they'll be bullied to a point of irreversible psychological damage.

Hey, I got into Baulko on natural talent baby ;p

and about the socially awkward thing, you get all kinds. you get everyone from people who go out every week, to pretty normal, to really weird boys who won't even talk to girls. I bet it's like that at a lot of school.

i think my school has offered plenty of opportunities to improve social skills and what not, i mean just by joining the various clubs, you're kind of forced to talk to and get to know a variety of people.

 

[nirvanafreak02]

i love baulko
i love the smart people
i love the conditioning it provides from the outside world

selective schools are the best
i would go as far to say that being around such a smart group of people makes you enjoy learning