WITH regard to the grammar schools debate, there seems to be some misunderstanding of how grammar schools operated and who benefited.

Of course, we don’t know what Theresa May has in mind for new grammar schools but I can tell you something of how such schools operated in the 1950s and 1960s.

One of the current misconceptions is that only children from the middle and upper classes went to grammar school.

That was not the case. If a child passed the 11-plus then he/ she was awarded a place at grammar school regardless of the family’s circumstances.

While failing the 11-plus was a setback to a child’s aspirations, it was not necessarily the end of the road.

In the 1950s, children were allowed two shots at the 11-plus and if failure was by a small margin, then an oral examination was held. Also, provision was made for late developers who could move to the grammar school at age 12, 13 or 14.

It is often said that poorer families could not to afford to keep a child at grammar school.

Two points here: (a) cash grants were available for pupils from less well-off families, and; (b) it does not cost more to keep a child at grammar school than it does to keep a child at a comprehensive.

Grammar schools brought together children with aspirations who were prepared to work hard.

Of course, there are lots of children in comprehensive schools who are similarly motivated.

But sadly, success in comprehensive schools is not always seen in the same light as success in grammar schools.

The high achievers in grammar schools commanded respect from their contemporaries, but in comprehensives they might be branded by their fellow pupils as swots or geeks.

Superficially, comprehensive schools appear to be achieving a great deal in terms of examination results. But that is only part of the story.

The statistics produced for GCSE and A-Level results often fail to give a true picture.

In many cases, the outstanding results are the result of private tuition rather than what was taught in school.

So if you can’t afford private tuition you are at a disadvantage. Some 40 per cent of teachers are engaged in private tuition.

Grammar schools provided a first-class free education and it was the less well-off who stood to gain the most.

DR JOHN SANDALLS

Locks Lane

Wantage