Topics / Education, work and society
Should selective grammar schools be expanded?
Should England lift its 1998 ban on new selective state schools and expand grammar school places, keep the existing grammar schools without expansion, or phase out academic selection at 11 altogether? The question turns both on contested evidence about attainment and social mobility and on differing values about fairness, parental choice and equal treatment.
Positions
- Yes: New grammar schools should be allowed to open, and existing ones to expand, where there is local demand. Academic selection gives able children, including those from poorer families who cannot buy a house near a top comprehensive, a demanding academic education.
- No, abolish them: Academic selection at 11 should be phased out and the remaining grammar schools moved to non-selective admissions. Selection sorts children too early, its benefits go mainly to the already advantaged, and it does not raise attainment for children overall.
- Keep existing ones, no expansion: The existing grammar schools should be retained, with stronger duties to widen access, but the ban on new selective schools should stay. The evidence justifies neither expanding selection nor the disruption of abolishing it.