Talk

Advanced search

To wonder what Teresa May's plans for secondary moderns are

(793 Posts)
Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 20:36:31

That's it really.
I am a bit disappointed with her tbh.

HarriettePotter Fri 10-Mar-17 20:41:25

A bit? hmm

The80sweregreat Fri 10-Mar-17 20:42:46

Lets roll it back to the 1950s!

MojoMoon Fri 10-Mar-17 20:43:35

I think anyone arguing for the expansion of grammars should be forced first to make the argument for an expansion of secondary moderns before they are allowed to extoll the supposed virtues of a grammar school system.

I assume everyone pro grammar schools is equally enthusiastic about sending their children to a secondary modern if they don't pass an arbitrary and often culturally biased exam and so should be able to be enthusiastic about the fabulous benefits of the secondary modern.

ghostyslovesheets Fri 10-Mar-17 20:44:58

everything Mojo just said

ilovesooty Fri 10-Mar-17 20:45:12

Secondary moderns will I suspect be fine for other people's children hmm

Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 20:47:02

Well exactly

"I think anyone arguing for the expansion of grammars should be forced first to make the argument for an expansion of secondary moderns before they are allowed to extoll the supposed virtues of a grammar school system."

I may start doing this on mumsnet.
I suppose the problem is that lots of people don't care about other people....

InfiniteCurve Fri 10-Mar-17 20:47:17

Yes,I'd like to know how the reintroduction of secondary moderns will benefit children and raise standards...

Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 20:50:00

Don't get me wrong I am pro streaming. Just feel I should admit that

But there should be full scope for everyone's needs in a comp.

The80sweregreat Fri 10-Mar-17 20:51:52

Ilove, exactly as it was in my brothers day! They didnt live in the 'right area ' and didnt pass the 11+. Their school was looked down on as only a secondary modern. They did well in life however..still wrong though.
I had a comprehensive education that wasnt great either in the70s , but at least i was saved from having to do the 11plus ( which i probably would have failed, ) and there were mixed abilities at school.

SomewhatIdiosyncratic Fri 10-Mar-17 20:53:07

I'm not opposed to an optional grammar serving a large catchment in general. It is the "secondary modern" that concerns me. I failed my 11+, but went to one of the high quality comprehensives in the town. I doubt that many areas would be so fortunate.

Tutoring and travel costs greatly erode the social mobility argument.

I doubt that complimentary tutoring, affordable transport and high quality alternative schools would be on the agenda to balance up the opportunities for brighter poor students, or those not elite enough to pass.

Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 21:00:38

I think even a few grammars drag down the rest of us.

My kids are at an excellent comp but the yearly drama about the grammar 20 miles away means that a few of his peers are missing.

angeldelightedme Fri 10-Mar-17 21:02:13

If it is an area grammar school then travel costs will be funded in the normal way they are done for any catchment school, so that is a non-issue. The tutoring argument is a load of bollocks spouted by people whose DC don't make the cut! I did my own little survey on MN a few months ago and only 40% of those with kids at a G/S had paid for tutoring.We are a poor family yet I have 4 DC (so far) at/been to a GS and one at Cambridge witout spending any money ever on tutors.

A school cannot specialise in everything! Grammar /modern split seems reasonable enough to me

Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 21:03:25

Every school specialises in academic achievement.

averylongtimeago Fri 10-Mar-17 21:28:16

I am old enough to remember the introduction of comprehensive schools.
I was in the first year intake into what had been the top grammar school in the town. With rigorous setting, I was lucky and was put in the "grammar" stream. I had excellent teachers, had a choice of modern languages, plus Latin, 3 sciences, the full range of humanities. We were pushed hard to succeed, and .mostly we did.
DH on the other hand, is a couple of years older. He failed his 11 plus. He went to the local secondary modern school. No languages. Basic science only. No literature,and he had to choose between history or geography.
Now imo DH is at least as intelligent as me, but I was lucky and had a "grammer" school type education where as he didn't. So I went to university, he left at school at 15, all his school did was produce factory fodder.
If you are satisfied with only 10% of children getting a decent education, then vote for grammar schools.

The80sweregreat Fri 10-Mar-17 21:31:43

Its got to be about money, its the only language the tories 'get' .

TFPsa Fri 10-Mar-17 21:31:51

The whole country will become like Kent is now. Overall standards broadly similar but social mobility that little bit lower. That's what the two tier system is there for.

Neverthelessshepersisted Fri 10-Mar-17 21:32:50

"If you are satisfied with only 10% of children getting a decent education, then vote for grammar schools."

Exactly.
I don't know what TM is thinking.

Crumbs1 Fri 10-Mar-17 21:32:58

Given "I am disappointed by your behaviour" was worst possible thing I could say to the children, I too "am disappointed" but then I fully expected to be when the leadership election was announced.

JenniferYellowHat1980 Fri 10-Mar-17 21:33:07

A school cannot specialise in everything! Grammar /modern split seems reasonable enough to me

I wonder if it would seem as reasonable if any of your four children hadn't made the cut.

The80sweregreat Fri 10-Mar-17 21:33:31

The tories - divide and rule in action.

Rabbit01 Fri 10-Mar-17 21:34:58

I have to admit that I am confused why some areas have grammar schools and some don't? Surely it's unfair for the areas that don't, why is this so? Why is this continuing and why not everywhere?

The80sweregreat Fri 10-Mar-17 21:36:55

Rabbit, the tories only like the right areas to have them.

goose1964 Fri 10-Mar-17 21:40:17

My mother went to a secondary modern, they were taught things like typing, shorthand sewing/woodworking etc things that would get you low level jobs, whereas Grammar schools were academic for people who went to uni or higher level jobs. She was never happy about it as she was made to feel a second class citizen.

I really can't see how big it would work, it would just be sending people to school with poorer resources .

noblegiraffe Fri 10-Mar-17 21:48:32

Surely it's unfair for the areas that don't

Actually, I think it's unfair for the areas that still have grammars. Such an amount of time, effort and stress wasted on an anachronistic school system that renders the majority of children worse-off.

But once Theresa May gets her way, against the will of the entire educational establishment who, unlike her, know what they're talking about, every area will be plagued. I wonder if she has shares in private tutoring companies.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now