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

Talkin the poster compared her DD with DC at grammar school she didn't mention private!

Are those DC given homework just to appease parents too?

rolls eyes at ridiculous over generalisation...

Viva
The fact that your DD does not have lots of homework may not mean that she is coasting.
Teachers hate setting lots of homework - because they have to make it in evening and at weekends.
But parents at fee paying and selective schools expect it as proof that their DCs are working hard.
It is not particularly for the benefit of the kids or the teachers but to placate the parents that homework is set.

Viva posted that her DD is in the top set but is coasting. Wondering's response is that Viva should be happy since her DD is in the top set.

Why should Viva be happy if her DD is coasting?

At the risk of sounding antagonistic (who? moi?) this is the kind of attitude that the OP is talking about. A bright child is not operating to her full potential but since she is doing ok relative to everyone else then the answer is not to challenge her academically. Instead the 'answer' is to find extra curriculum stuff to detract from the academic boredom.

It was in a post upthread.

Where is this academically superior labelling the less able as losers thing coming from?

My Year 8 DD recently did her end of year exams at her selective. The papers were GCSE standard and she scored a slate of As and A*s. GCSEs aren't that difficult which isn't something that you want to hear if your (general 'your') Year 12 is predicted a 'D' for example. But observing that something is easy for something that others find hard is not by default that person feeling superior.

Wonderingagain, it seems your children are in classes that are providing them with the right level of challenge.

If some academically able pupils are not getting appropriate challenge in class should we just shrug our shoulders? Yes to respecting and valuing all but some academic skills are worth nurturing for the good of everyone.

Maybe if more of the roles requiring a high level of academic success were occupied by those from comprehensives , the "academically superior" wouldn't appear to be looking upon others as losers.

Wonderingagain - yes its good that she's keeping up but if she's keeping up with no work then is the level of the top set high enough? That's my concern.

She reckons she wants to do biochemistry at uni.....well she needs AAB at a-level and that won't come unless she pulls her finger out her backside.

By the way Talkin, being a maths geek isn't that many rungs (if any) higher on the Cool Ladder compared to an accounting 'anorak' :)

Bonsoir - one of my IT guys has a Physics degree from Cambridge and a PhD from some US university that I never heard off. I once naively asked him why he was in IT.

His answer was similar to yours ie if you aren't the best of the best then some grad with a sociology degree stands the same chance of getting that research job :)

Talkin - you tend to be quite dismissive of other people's opinions on education. From that I got it into my head that you was a teacher rather than an accountant. Sorry, it won't happen again.

I agree about not doing A level in Accounts. Its not a traditional subject so some unis won't recognize it. Plus a lot of it is bookkeeping which is great.... if you want to be an accounts technician. However, I don't see how a maths degree is expanding her options.

I grant you that a maths degree will open career paths like being an actuary. But IMO it closes more doors than it opens.

As I said upthread, a lot of these jobs only recruit the best of the best ie a First from a highly ranked uni. If that isn't that girl then she is going to be standing in the same job queue as all the graduates with degrees in English and Chemistry.

And I am not advocating doing a degree in accountancy. The accountants in our office that I am friends with have degrees in business administration, international finance, finance and French and economics. Ok, they can't jump ship and become actuaries for example but I suspect that they have more options then a graduate with a maths degree

And if she still wants to be an accountant she will be competing for a coveted training contract with other equally academic graduates who have knowledge of the business world and who may have taken advantage of placement/internship programs.

Exactly. A Maths degree alone doesn't confer skills that are in high demand at work unless you are some sort of maths superstar.

If you have a First in maths, preferably followed by a PhD in maths, from a highly ranked uni then financial companies will snap you up. By your early 30s your can be on £100k plus.

Anything less and you fall into the same employment problem experienced by people with English and Chemistry degrees looking for a non academic/research job.

Beatback - in past threads various posters have said that they based their decision to go selective on their experiences as school kids, which supports your point.

However, a lot of parents base their decisions on current experiences. In our case, our primary school's attitude was that DS was already KS L4 at the start of Year 6 so leave us alone while we focus on getting everybody up to L4 by the end of the year.

Then there was our local non-selective secondary. A neighbor with academic kids there wasn't too happy. Their DCs would be set homework and they either didn't get marked or came back with just a tick. After a while the DCs didn't bother.

A lot of parents do have valid reasons for favoring a selective education. Not all of us are basing that decision on something from 20 years ago :)

And before teachers tell me that not all schools are like that, I know but since I don't live in your catchment tray that is small consolation to me.

My odd job man has a Maths degree from Oxford. He is particularly good at things involving intricate geometry, like putting up difficult shelves and tiling. He is poor and has a complicated relationship with society.

There are several stinking rich families at DD's school with parents who attended mediocre UG business schools...

(Maths degrees are better than business degrees. Business degrees are usually done at less good universities by people who aren't so bright).

Viva surely that's a good sign, you should be thankful that she is doing well, keeping up with the top sets. If you feel she is not busy enough, offer other activities to enrich her education. Or just give her a break and allow her to develop in other ways.

My children ate not in the top sets but they are never bored or unmotivated.

I'd totally agree.

My dd is bright, she passed her eleven plus but has gone to a comp due to her not getting a place on distance. They do stream them/set them and she's in the top sets. Though not all subjects are streamed - the main ones are but stuff like drama, citizenship, re, aren't.

Anyway, she's coasting. Hardly has any homework. Kids I know at the grammar are doing 90 mins of homework a night.

I get the impression that because she's bright and finding the work very easy the teachers are concentrating on getting other kids up to standard. Sadly dd isn't very self motivated.

But not ok for the academically superior to be expected to perform only averagely well at GCSE

Various studies have shown that there is a disproportionate number of selective kids taking up coveted uni places and jobs. You have to wonder how much of that is down to bias on the part of unis and employers, and how much is down to parents and teachers telling kids that it's ok to be average.

Interesting point Habba, but I would say that it actually is OK to be average, academically. Millions of people are average and really don't have a problem with it. What needs to change is the academically superior people have to accept that it's OK for other people to be average and show them the respect they deserve, rather than look upon them as losers and failures.

Yes I suspect you are right , there is also often a desire for things to be different, better for their children and so they want something different for their children and an obvious way to do that is to opt out of mainstream.

My DH and I have done well out of state comprehensive education , even though our schools were not on paper, great schools. It is therefore not surprising that we want that for our children, even when other models are available .

Arisbottle. There is a simple reason for parents who have not been to University prefering Selective Education .it is because in most cases Comprehensive Education failed them. I can accept things are different now but people always remember how things were for them, and the last thing people want are for their offspring, is to encounter the same trials and tribulations they did.

DH and I don't agree with selective education and therefore I will admit that we were quite relieved that for most of our children it was not a suitable option.

I accept that is easy for me to say when I teach at their school in a fairly senior position and can keep an eye on them. Our school is also a good school, the kind that drives property prices up. I have a feeling that our local grammars are not as good as others as well.

We do have my eldest son in a grammar as part of a managed move, not my ideal scenario by any means but one that at the time felt like it was our only "choice" .

We do send students to Oxford or Cambridge every year and have actively worked to make that happen . However we also have an issue with students choosing safe, local universities rather than those that offer the most academic rigour.

Our students by nature seem to be very conservative , they are very compliant and play it safe, I suspect that is part of our issue. We also have a relatively low number of families with a history of university education for themselves .

Interestingly I have noticed recently, that parents who have a bright child and they have been to university themselves are likely to keep their child in the non selective system . Those parents who have a bright child and they are generally supportive of education, but do not have a university education themselves , are more likely to send their children to the grammar. I am not claiming that can be generalised and it is only something I have noticed over the past two or three years .

That's encouraging. Certainly the girl whose parents didn't bother to get the results is a model student with interested, encouraging parents. My DTDs are only 6 so we're yet to decide whether to play the grammar game. In lots of ways, I'd rather not- I strongly disagree with selective state education. They might have other ideas, though.

Evil I don't think that turning down or failing to take on a grammar school place is necessarily a sign of disinterest .

Like you I teach in, or close to, a grammar school area . My first two children were offered grammar places only one took up the place. That was exactly because we are interested in education , we knew the grammar was not right for her and we also wanted her to go to the local village school because community is important to us . Our third child is probably borderline grammar material , she did not even sit the test because we wanted her to experience a comprehensive education.

I have noticed that the very bright students whose parents have chosen to keep their children at our comp- secondary modern have families who tend to be involved in and passionate about their education. Not always of course but definitely a trend you would notice .

Of course it may be different at other schools , particularly in the centre of a grammar catchment or where the alternative is not as good.

SHOULD. SAY I WOULD NOT LET ANY OF THOSE RUN A*