There's a "culture of low expectation" in secondary schools. Do you agree?

Habba
I am utterly against state funded selective education : you want selection on grounds of "intelligence", faith, sex or anything else, go pay for it.

Elquota
At events with my children and DH and through my own work, most of the ones round here. Including the local academy that I chose not to send my kids to.
I fully agree that there are some truly dire comps, but there are also many, many excellent ones.
Bringing in Grammar schools is not the answer
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-17874326

Elquota. Would you say a ratio of 30% Grammar School 50% High School 20% Remedial/Special School then would be appropiate then. Would 30% give kids on the borderline now a better chance and would you believe in year admissions say in year 9 from the High School.

Do you know, I've just remembered something.

Our borough opened a brand new cofe comp about 8 or 9 years ago. It was and has been touted as a flagship school.

We looked at it for dd. One MFL was offered and the science department on the open day could not confirm that triple science was offered. Millions were invested in it. At the open daye we witnessed a member of staff yelling at a child (like shite) and a pupil making ruden bigoted and racist remarks about a member of staff.

It is revered as fab and I believe ofsted rated it outstanding. Pupils about whom parents complained subsequently sexually assaulted a fellow pupil on the premises and set another on fire. This year the inquest of a pupil who committed suicide because of reported bullying has been all over the local papers.

We didn't apply; but many parents have no choice but they big. Up the school because of they have no choice.

This is one of the best state schools in our borough; we removed dd from one that has an amazing reputation in a similar borough.

Low expectattions - certainly. Comprehensive education - no it equates to secondary modern; good enough - not for our children; utter disgrace yesj part of an excuse based cultue in education - yes. Ofsted outstanding - hahaha - but it is!!

Talkin - Your standard response to any poster that disagrees with you seem to be to tell them that they are talking crap because your DH's job gives you a greater insight into whatever. Nice to see that you are open to other people's experiences and opinions

Talkinpeace I've been in several as a teacher as well as attending one myself. Clearly I don't live in your county. How about you, how many have you been to?

No-one is saying a changed system would be perfect, but the current system is worse IMHO. Comps have had decades to sort themselves out, but many haven't. While there will be a small minority on the borderline who don't pass the 11+ but develop later, is that really a good reason to deny the opportunity to so many?

Elquota
How many comps have you actually been to?
Because your description does not fit ANY of the county ones round here.

And as the parent of a summer baby who was a bit of a late developer I'm awfully glad that he was not tested at the end of year 6 and barred from ever reaching the top academic sets - as he has been able to at his comp.

Yes, I completely agree that many state comprehensives fail the brightest students. They're more interested in the middle achievers than those at either the higher or lower ends of the spectrum. Many comps aren't streaming for different subjects but pile everyone into mixed ability classes, which IMO should be disallowed.

I'd support the reintroduction of grammar schools in all areas, and I also support special schools for those with severe learning difficulties. One size doesn't fit all.

It's wrong that the most academically able can only attend a school focused towards their needs if they can afford private school. We need the brightest from all backgrounds to be given a rigorous academic education, not just those with money. This directly impacts on who ends up in the most powerful positions in our society and where they've come from.

We have arranged apprenticeships with lots of local smaller firms for the reasons given above .

PS
its also excellent for kids as they get to "try out" employers and skills without having to make a huge commitment.

several of my clients are taking on grounds and technical staff that way
filling posts that would otherwise have been left empty as the costs of hiring and firing are too much for small employers.

beatback
I know. I'm an accountant for several of them.

And for small businesses the apprenticeship scheme is an absolutely excellent way to get trainees who are at college part time and working for you part time : with no ERS NI bill and subsidised training - and they are on limited term contracts so you can either keep them on or let them go with no costs.
Look into it : you'll be pleasantly surprised.

TALKIN PEACE. You say Business pay very poor wages,apart from the big muti nationals like "STARBUCKS GOOGLE" most S.M.E"S and family business are fighting just to stay in Business, in many family owned small and medium sized firms i know, the Directors are not taking SALARYS so that they can either keep going or not make any"REDUNDANCIES". The vast majority of family business in the U.K are not making any money and are running huge "OVERDRAFTS" that banks can call in at any time. So the only companies that have the financial means for the new Y.T.S scheme are the major corporations. Small Business up to 100 employees are just trying to keep the wolf from their doors.

"So, just to be clear, it's not true that all a school has to do to jump successfully through the OfSTED hoops is to get as many GCSEs Cs as possible?"

Picking up this point from upthread...

It depends on the school. There are two things here:

• League tables, conventionally, still have a default 'sort' mode that ranks schools by their '5 good GCSEs including English and Maths' percentage. The 'floor target' set for all schools by the Government is also based on this percentage. Even though more detail is available for those who choose to search for it, the most publicly-available 'ranking' system (and the most publicly reported 'name and shame' measure) is based on this percentage. Wider public perception is often driven by league table position, rather than by Ofsted grade [so in my town, for several years, the 2 best-regarded comps had Ofsted Outstanding, and Oftsed Satisfactory grades. The one every MC parent sought to avoid at all costs due to its league table position had a solid Ofsted Good]

• For those schools that have a higher-ability intake, the '5 good GCSEs including English and Maths' %, based on A to C is not enough to get a high Ofsted grade if many of the intake could do better than getting Cs. These are the 'MN-friendly' schools where there is enough teacher time and effort to also concentrate on A/A boundaries. However, for schools that have a lower-ability intake (and there are some for whom the % of low achievers on intake is so high that the Government's 'absolute floor standard' of 40% reaching 5 A* to C incl Eng and Maths represents supurb progress) then, as the flexibility is only 1 way (intake does not excuse schools from that 40% figure), huge effort is put into the D/C borderline and less is left over for the very few higher achievers.

So the GCSE grade Cs are necessary - and more critically necessary the lower-achieving the cohort is on entry - but not sufficient for a good Ofstd grade BUT they are still absolutely necessary for a good league table position drive public perception.

There should be as many kids in apprenticeships as there are at university.

Employers have got away for too long with paying crap wages that are topped up with tax credits
and not being willing to train employees - wanting that done by the taxpayer at colleges.

I remember lots of spiral teaching when I went thru school & even in university (spiral = revisiting old material but moving on from it too). There are lots of reasons why I could see this being good practice.

My DSs are at a non selective Comp. I'm astounded at the level of commitment the teachers offer, to one who is very 'middle of the road' & the other a bit above.
Whilst the students & staff are busting a gut to get through GCSEs it must be very disheartening to hear Gove banging on about exams not being hard enough.

As an English teacher the reason we revisit primary work is that many pupils can identify a word or technique, they can even understand what they are for but in many cases they cannot use the technique. This is down to solid teaching to the test, when given more freedom if expression at secondary school a lot of pupils struggle, so we revisit and research the skills.

You would be amazed how many different level Level 4 and 5 s come through ours doors, depending on which primary. This also needs to be factored in as a pupil may have a 5C at primary due to a lot of help but is in no way ever going to get an A or B.

Vocational courses, NVQs, other training courses, revision 5-GCSEs in a year courses at 6th form colleges, apprenticeships, even.

I dislike the idea that they are "pulling down" others though. It's not that simple.

Personally don't see how raising exam standards will lead to higher achievement. . it just looks like a better excuse for the academically weakest to give up early. Does anyone talk about what would best engage the lowest achievers in education to keep trying and still do their best? I don't think solution is raising the bar even further above what they are already struggling to obtain.

They can do work place training, they don't have to stay in school, they have to stay in education.

What happens to kids with 5 E"s at G.C.S.E,the reason i say this is because they are being forced to stay in education to 18 which schools are going to allow these kids in to there 6th form. Are these the kids in the bottom 20% who pull down the other kids and because they are so challenging though Behaviour and Academic Ability take 70% of time dealing with them, and should not these kids be in seperate schools away from the mainstream 50%, you can work out what type of school the top 30% should go to.

I think also with so many pupils to teach at secondary level (and certainly as is true at my DSs school, there's a fast turnover of teachers).. its understandable that teachers 'forget' which pupil has what 'need'.
I've had to remind the Physics teacher 3 times now that DS2 is Dyspraxic and thats why his mind wonders, i've advised him to simply re-engage him back in by calling his name. The staff simply dont remember, we've even had to write it on the staff white board!
At Primary level its much easier to really work with individuals and keep them engaged.

My mentor used to say high expectations would eliminate distruptive behaviour marriedinwhiteagain .

P.S married He was on School Action Plus, i never received any written copy despite asking, and then he was taken off it without informing me in Yr 8 when the new SENCO took over and he was still in the top sets, it was never put in place again..

married Oh yes, i spent virtually all of yr 9 writing to everyone, including the LEA who wanted updates, watched closely and gave me support but did nothing, and going to meetings (it took 7 weeks to meet with the head as she kept cancelling appts. and on one occasion didn't even turn up) i even initiated the help of the biggest independent body (SNAP) here in Wales that mediates between schools and parents of SEN pupils who backed me all the way (and attended meetings with me) even the previous Head SENCO was appalled by it all.. plans were eventually put in place, agreements made and written down, but never ever carried out..

It takes up to 5 days for calls to be returned and thats 'if' the secretary remembers to pass messages on!
After all the months of hard work nothing changed, i had to make a decision to give up as it was all taking over my life (i'm a single parent)..
Thats after an agreement was made with the Head, that the Head SENCO (a prison warden in her past job, and also head of discipline at the school, with no experience of SN) was never to contact me again (this followed an incident where i had evidence of her blatantly lying to me and was told i by a solicitor friend that i could've taken her to court, and her simply taking DS2 out of French because he needed help which she couldn't provide as there were no TAs allocated for that subject) and a member of staff was appointed as a go between.

I'm deadly serious about my DCs education, DS1 was at the same school under a different head with very good experienced teachers (who have now resigned or been laid off in favour of newly qualified cheaper teachers) and went on to gain a First class honours degree, so i didn't mess about with DS2.

I looked into our local college who would've taken him on at 14, but the range of subjects on offer are tiny (rural Wales).. So i decided to keep him at school to complete his Music and Engineering GCSEs which he loves, and go back to redo the core subjects later.

LeBFG - the problem is that teachers are expected to teach and children are expected to learn when 10-20% of many classes are disengaged and disruptive. The other 80-90% would achieve much more if the government funded and supported the establishment of more prus and more specialist units so that teachers could focus on teaching. That is the biggest problem and that is why we removed dd from the state sector. The perpetual slide to the lowest common denominator that helps nobody - least of all the most vulnerable.

there is also a strong feeling amongst some parents of "my child is cleverer than X- it 's not fair that X gets extra help- my child should get it"

Forgetting that the reason X is getting extra help may well be precisely because he is less clever, so therefore needs more help....