Talk

Advanced search

so, how quickly could these new grammar schools actually open?

(72 Posts)
megletthesecond Sat 10-Sep-16 15:47:12

Obviously I know it won't happen overnight and these things take ages to go through parliament. How long is a piece of string etc....

But when could they start opening? Three years, ten years? It seems like a personal campaign for May in which case would she want to push it through before the 2020 GE?

mrz Sat 10-Sep-16 18:40:02

It's a great distraction from everything else ...

SideEye Sat 10-Sep-16 18:42:37

I expect the current ones will be encouraged to expand quite quickly. There's a shortage in schools and this would help.

mrz Sat 10-Sep-16 18:48:30

It would need to be passed by parliament first...so not quickly or easily

mathsmum314 Sat 10-Sep-16 20:19:09

2 years

Peregrina Sat 10-Sep-16 20:21:01

Some little independent schools which are under financial pressure will apply, so could take one school year or two perhaps.

mrz Sat 10-Sep-16 20:41:26

More likely to apply yo become free schools or academies where law is already there

megletthesecond Sat 10-Sep-16 20:45:14

Thank all. I'm tying to gauge whether to start worrying about year 3 dd having to take the 11+.

I do like a good worry blush.

noblegiraffe Sat 10-Sep-16 20:55:31

Sam Freedman (former advisor to Gove) says that a Green Paper coming out on Monday means that the proposals are very tentative and they don't really know what they are doing. The Green Paper will be consulted on, then revisions made. Then there will be a White Paper (maybe six months to a year later) and further consultation and votes.

He reckons if the SNP vote on it (they might abstain because it's a devolved matter), then it would be defeated in Parliament, but otherwise it will go to Lords who are not, as a majority, in favour of grammars so it could then end up being bounced between Parliament and Lords.

If it does become a reality, then the original proposals were to open a bunch of grammar schools in deprived areas. Whether other schools decide to become selective could depend on whether there is a demand for them in that region.

I wouldn't worry, what I would do is respond to the consultations (starting with the Green Paper out on Monday). Then hopefully you won't have to worry at all.

SideEye Sat 10-Sep-16 22:02:23

meglet I really wouldn't spend any time worrying. The entire education system and all exams and assessments are totally overhauled annually so by the time your 3 year old is at secondary school it will be totally different.

OlennasWimple Sat 10-Sep-16 22:07:54

I'd also look at the free school programme for examples of how long schools take to be set up or convert. Even where an existing school (such as a struggling independent school) wants to convert, it's a couple of years before they are operating with their new status. So nothing is going to happen overnight even once the legal framework is in place.

HPFA Sat 10-Sep-16 22:15:30

I've been following the Twitter feeds from people at some big Edu Conference going on today. It's bonkers. When they say the whole Education System is against this they don't mean Luddites at the NUT. They mean people the government itself has appointed!! Apparently some Academy Trusts are saying they will have to make their schools selective to stop other schools getting in first!! And as Peregrina says - some failing private school could destroy wonderful comprehensives. This is completely insane. Even if I was in favour of grammars I would say that's a mad way of doing things.

I agree with Noble - people must respond to the consultation.

HPFA Sat 10-Sep-16 22:19:42

* I'm tying to gauge whether to start worrying about year 3 dd having to take the 11+.*

I always used to worry about this. Thank God DD is now safe in her comprehensive school. Seeing how well it does for all its pupils (including the 18% disadvantaged - not an especially deprived school but not really leafy) just makes me more angry that it could be destroyed for no reason.

noblegiraffe Sat 10-Sep-16 22:47:51

I've been following the Twitter feeds from people at some big Edu Conference going on today. It's bonkers. When they say the whole Education System is against this they don't mean Luddites at the NUT. They mean people the government itself has appointed!!

I was there! Everyone speaking there was against this policy - even Nick Gibb, Schools Minister. He gave a long speech about education policy and looking at evidence (it was the Research Ed conference) and not one did he mention grammar schools. Then obviously they were brought up in questions and he gave the least convincing defence ever. He was clearly doing as he was told. So I don't think this is popular at the DfE either.

mrz Sun 11-Sep-16 06:26:05

It's interesting that the second part of the proposal is largely being ignored or aren't people concerned about more selection by faith?

HPFA Sun 11-Sep-16 06:30:09

Noble I'm glad you agree with me. When you're looking on at these things from the outside you're never sure you're interpreting things correctly. Some big cheese from the D of E (Tim Leutwig?) was praising work of Christopher Cook and Laura McInerney (strong anti-grammar campaigners).
This idea of a complete free for all is stark staring bonkers. It could mean that all new grammars are set up in nice middle-class areas and not actually in these deprived communities that are held (wrongly) to need them.

I don't want grammars at all. But surely even those who do can see that this is a completely mad way to re-introduce them. You cannot return us to a binary system without a democratic mandate.

I think if these plans go ahead then Heads, Ofsted Inspectors, need to threaten to resign en masse. They cannot and should not be expected to implement this.

HPFA Sun 11-Sep-16 06:32:23

It's interesting that the second part of the proposal is largely being ignored or aren't people concerned about more selection by faith?

There's a theory going round the Twittersphere that the government has done this deliberately - that all the energy goes into defeating this, they withdraw the grammar bit and the faith part goes through.

DoctorDonnaNoble Sun 11-Sep-16 06:35:06

That theory makes sense. There's a lot more support amongst Tory voters en masse for that element.

mrz Sun 11-Sep-16 06:41:36

Many Tories also speaking against

mrz Sun 11-Sep-16 06:43:10

"There's a theory going round the Twittersphere that the government has done this deliberately - that all the energy goes into defeating this, they withdraw the grammar bit and the faith part goes through."

Or we all focus on this and forget the acadamisation issue

DoctorDonnaNoble Sun 11-Sep-16 06:44:51

Exactly Mrz, for a variety of reasons. I suspect we will actually continue with the status quo. A few counties that never really changed (Kent) and then the ones with superselectives. There isn't enough political capital in this particular reform. May is just doing what previous politicians have done, thinking that what worked for her will work for everyone.

2StripedSocks Sun 11-Sep-16 06:45:19

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

mrz Sun 11-Sep-16 06:58:46

They could convert existing non faith schools or create new faith schools

2StripedSocks Sun 11-Sep-16 07:02:59

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DoctorDonnaNoble Sun 11-Sep-16 07:05:34

When faith schools aren't oversubscribed they take anyone

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