And in the days under specific discussion a grammar school was a seriously selective option, of course. Surely you would not say 'privileged', but certainly not a 'secondary modern', would you?
Some grammar schools were full of bright kids, but the life in them could be rough all the same. Being a grammar school boy/girl did not in those days mean polite little ladies and gentlemen in any way shape or form!! A teacher in one such would have to fight his corner.
I did go to one myself (bloody awful it was too .......... if i'm allowed to say that ?)
It really is another planet though
Church music that is ................
(which doesn't make it any the less fascinating from a variety of perspectives........)
In those days? They are still around (despite Gordon Brown having said, "Watch my lips. No selection under a Labour government") and much more seriously selective. The entrance tests (no longer based purely on intelligence, i.e. non-verbal) require a knowledge of maths greater than that taught in primary schools, and verbal reasoning that gives kids from nice middle-class homes a huge advantage. So grammar schools today are not the social melting pot that once gave some kids from less advantaged homes a heave up by the boot-straps. Furthermore most have opted out of local authority control and do their own hiring and firing...particularly of pupils who are going to spoil their league tables.And in the days under specific discussion a grammar school was a seriously selective option, of course.
OK I'll lead my hobby horse back to its stable now......
I think it was the psychologist Eysenck [?] who invented the expression Intelligence Quotient. When asked exactly what I.Q. was, he replied, "It's what my tests measure".