Advanced search

URGENT! Government education proposals: you seriously won't BELIEVE number 14!

(152 Posts)
noblegiraffe Sun 11-Dec-16 11:08:32

Click-bait title, sorry!

But today's really the last day to tell the government their plans for grammar and faith schools stink contribute to the government consultation 'Schools that work for everyone' (except poor kids, those with SEN, the less academic and atheists)

Consultation document:

Online Survey:

It's a really long document with lots of confusing questions but they will have to record all responses as there will definitely be a FOI request put in to find out the results. Even if you just head straight for the grammar section and say that you are against the creation of more secondary moderns, please just fill out that bit and leave the rest blank. Ignore the questions and write what you want to. Oh, and if you can point out that Northern Ireland which is a selective system did worse than England in the PISA results, that would probably annoy them grin

Unless you are in favour of the proposals in which case the consultation ended yesterday wink

SilverDragonfly1 Sun 11-Dec-16 12:13:00

Done. What a pile of ridiculous crap. Why the hell can't you have grammar schools AND comprehensives in the same area anyway?

insan1tyscartching Sun 11-Dec-16 12:33:42


eddiemairswife Sun 11-Dec-16 12:38:01

Because if the brighter children attend grammar schools the remaining schools will not have a comprehensive intake.

TalkinPeace Sun 11-Dec-16 12:56:35

A school is only a comprehensive if it has no admission test of any sort
non verbal reasoning

if any of those apply to the school or its neighbours then its not "comprehensive"

SilverDragonfly1 Sun 11-Dec-16 16:40:42


Lots of people on MN say that their children are bright enough for a grammar but they are happy to be able to send them to a comprehensive instead (and I do believe them). So arguably some of the bright children wouldn't go to grammars and would be able to populate a comprehensive instead.

god gonads ? I'm definitely missing something there. Anyway, the fact that you can take a test for some schools doesn't logically mean that all other schools in the area are not comprehensive- that's just an arbitrary rule.

Anyway, the whole thing is blatantly a way for the government to give schools less money and demand that independents and universities fill the gap, essentially forcing the people who pay school and uni fees to give an extra contribution on top of their regular taxation. When you read the documents it becomes painfully apparent that giving children of any ability at all is a smokescreen. It is 100% about making cuts.

I live in a GS area and was actually pro grammar before reading that pile of tosh. Now completely changed my mind. It really put the dangers of an elitist system into focus- obviously the people conceiving the policies simply can't imagine anyone who didn't go to a good private school being able to comprehend (ahaha) their motives.

SilverDragonfly1 Sun 11-Dec-16 16:41:48

Talkin To clarify, I mean the government have made an arbitrary rule/distinction, not that you have.

Ontopofthesunset Sun 11-Dec-16 16:44:50

That consultation was desperate reading. Government out with a begging bowl asking everyone else to take on what used to be their responsibility. I feel so angry after reading some of those leading questions.

BroomstickOfLove Sun 11-Dec-16 16:46:48

If the grammar school takes the children with the top 20% test results in the area, then the rest of the schools will not be teaching the full ability range of children.

DD is bright enough to go a grammar school, and I am happy to send her to a comprehensive. My local comprehensives get excellent exam results and send their pupils to a range of prestigious destinations. But if a grammar school opened up in the area, those schools would no longer be comprehensive, and wouldn't be able to provide the same level of support for very academic pupils.

RedNailsAndRedDress Sun 11-Dec-16 16:50:13

I support grammar schools - why shouldn't the best be given the opportunity to stretch themselves? Who do you think is going to become the doctors and lawyers and thinkers of the future?

Ifailed Sun 11-Dec-16 16:50:21

you either have selected education - Grammar and Secondary Modern schools, or Comprehensive. The two can't mix.

Ontopofthesunset Sun 11-Dec-16 16:52:09

Why can't the children in the top set of a comprehensive school become the doctors and lawyers and thinkers of the future? They can be intellectually stretched there. Nothing magical happens in grammar schools, you know. They just select clever children and therefore get good results.

PausingFlatly Sun 11-Dec-16 17:09:04

Thanks for this - will read through proposals tonight.

Although the bits I've quickly glanced through look riddled with false assumptions.

MrsKCastle Sun 11-Dec-16 17:21:39

Yes, very leading questions: How should we support the opening of more grammar schools? I ended up answering many questions with 'We shouldn't be doing this, we should be doing x'. I hope my answers get analysed and filed appropriately.

I would hate to live in a grammar school area.

RedNailsAndRedDress Sun 11-Dec-16 17:24:51

Because ontop in the real world, teachers have to spend most of their time and energy helping the lower ability ones.

clmustard Sun 11-Dec-16 17:30:57

We border a grammar area. I was bright enough to go to grammar but went to the local comp as the grammar wasn't the right fit for me.

My year in the local comp has turned out : a vet, a gp, a surgeon, a literary agent, various local government professionals, high level civil servants, police officers, an architect and an osteopath. All to my knowledge and immediate recollection. Despite the availability of a grammar in my area we certainly weren't scraping the barrel intellect wise.

I resent the assumption that in areas where grammars are available any child who goes to a comp must be a bit thick.

Ifailed Sun 11-Dec-16 17:32:47

Are you a teacher?

clmustard Sun 11-Dec-16 17:33:18

Oh btw I support grammars as I support the idea of people having a choice

Alfieisnoisy Sun 11-Dec-16 17:34:12

They would do better properly funding education so that the brightest kids get th support (as they require it) as well as those who struggle academically. As it is Comprehensives struggle at both ends because they are not funded well enough.

But yeah...let's ignore that problems as a Govt and fund new schools for the brightest, cream them off the comprehensive schools so that anyone who doesn't make the grammar school realises at 11 they have failed in life. Great!

clmustard Sun 11-Dec-16 17:36:32

I actually think that by creaming off some of the very top it gave the opportunity for those who had potential but weren't naturally academic the chance to be noticed and stretched. Because the good results had to be worked for.

PolterGoose Sun 11-Dec-16 17:38:11

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

eddiemairswife Sun 11-Dec-16 17:39:25

Speaking as the mother of a doctor,who went to our local, not outstanding comprehensive, I must disagree with you rednails. However, I know that one example does not form the basis of a valid argument. But I would like to add that I have 5 grandchildren who have attended their local comprehensives in three different areas of the country and in their GCSEs they achieved A*s, As, 3Bs, 2Cs between the 5 of them. Academic subjects and no pushy parents (or grandparents!).

Ontopofthesunset Sun 11-Dec-16 17:41:09

Er, no.... In a properly organised comprehensive children can be set for ability by subject so each teacher is only dealing with one set at a time.

I know teachers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, business owners, advertising directors etc who went to comprehensive schools.

frikadela01 Sun 11-Dec-16 17:42:55

I've seen enough posts on here to know that a lot of grammars aren't actually taking the cleverest pupils but the ones whose parents can afford many months worth of extra tuition in order to pass a test.

Anyway I'll read the paper after I've done tea.

Ontopofthesunset Sun 11-Dec-16 17:43:23

But people don't have a choice, do they? It's a misleading concept of choice. I suppose you have a choice to do the exam or not. But the child either passes or fails. So there's actually only a choice if your child passes. Do you send them to the grammar or to the secondary modern (in a fully grammar school area)? If your child fails, no choice.

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