A well-known man, V. Pareto, was an original thinker. He is
well known for his 80 – 20 law. He discovered, back in 1906, that 80% of the
land in Italy was owned by 20 of the people. Would it be true that 80% of grammar school
places come from 20% of the people?
Pareto talked about:
`unknown’ incentives
`residues’ – which are
declared motives
`derivations’ or
accepted ideals.
He explained that people constantly feel the need to justify
their actions in a logical way. He further felt that because many people are
unwilling to recognise true incentives – they adopt `pseudo-logical’ residues
and derivations.
Where does this fit into eleven plus parameters? Able
children, with parents who recognise their ability and have the means to help
their children prepare, are likely to do well in the eleven plus. Some parents
will maintain that they simply want to give their children the best possible
chance. Other parents will declare that their child deserves a place in a
grammar school because their child is bright and able. All of these feelings
and thoughts appear to be entirely logical.
Do parents really have to be accountable for striving to
give their child the chance of passing the eleven plus? It does not seem fair for
their motives to be questioned – because as a number of parents say: “You only get
one chance.”
Most of us will recognise that originally the eleven plus
was designed to give bright children from poorer backgrounds a chance of being
able to enjoy an academic education. Just because some parents have the time
and the money to be able to support their children it does not mean that the
motives of these parents need to be questioned.
