Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

Worst forms of selection in schools: Views of M'snetters

560 replies

thankgodimretired · 26/09/2014 14:55

Interviews?
Questions concerning parental income?
Academic selection?
Previous school reports?
Decisions made by committee about whether to exclude certain individuals from attending?

Having just recently retired from the teaching profession, I am struck by how little things have changed over the course of my working life. There are certainly less overtly selective schools in the state sector than when I started out teaching in South London in the late 1970's. But the independents, grammars and faith schools appear to be more socially exclusive than at any time.

OP posts:
TalkinPeace · 26/09/2014 18:04

You have 400-700 kids competing for 100 places, you interview them, get a feel for the child and select them.

If there are genuinely that many more children than places, the failing in the system is rather larger than a couple of schools.

Large areas of the country cope just fine without selection at all
the vast majority of selective schools do not resort to the prejudice of interviews
and yet the "complete chaos" does not seem to exist.

ErrolTheDragon · 26/09/2014 18:02

Worst forms of selection?

Religion (real or pretended) of parents - not just socially divisive but acts against social cohesion and lets not even mention the possibility of indoctrination. That one's the worst in my book.

I'm not against academic selection per se (or selection based on some other aptitude) but the current situation where primaries don't prepare the children and therefore it can become reliant (to greater or lesser extents depending on whether 'superselective') on tutoring has corrupted what's left of the old grammar school system (which obviously wasn't perfect anyway).

There may be less overt selection, but the forms we have now are often worse in their effect on amplifying privelige and disadvantage.

Original poster
thankgodimretired · 26/09/2014 17:58

Look.

What I'm saying isn't hard to grasp.

You have 400-700 kids competing for 100 places, you interview them, get a feel for the child and select them.

Absolutely what the Oratory, Liverpool Bluecoat, John Fisher's and QEGS Penrith were doing up until fairly recently.

Keep interview selection, but don't interview the parents.

Why must this type of discussion always come down to Yes or No for selection, there's some really good middle ground options out there.

OP posts:
MassaAttack · 26/09/2014 17:55

Most schools aren't selective (unless we're talking about having the funds to move to the 'right' area). Most schools are no more chaotic than any other large organisation.

TalkinPeace · 26/09/2014 17:54

The evidence is apparent to any teacher who has worked in the profession for as many years as I have

Do, please link to research evidence that shows that all non selective schools are chaotic.

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of schools in the UK are non selective there should be masses if you assertion is correct.

What is your evidence in favour of Grammars still enhancing social mobility - when most commonly cited recent evidence states the exact opposite.

Original poster
thankgodimretired · 26/09/2014 17:47

The evidence is apparent to any teacher who has worked in the profession for as many years as I have.

I believe that in order to achieve a more meritocratic education system, we have to accept and protect some selection but do away with some of the mechanisms I have outlined, those that only keep decent working class kids down for perpetuity.

OP posts:
TalkinPeace · 26/09/2014 17:42

I'm certainly not in favour of abolishing all selection. Then you have complete chaos in the class room

Really?
Where is your evidence for non selective schools being completely chaotic?

Original poster
thankgodimretired · 26/09/2014 17:41

I'm certainly not in favour of abolishing all selection.

Then you have complete chaos in the class room, I'm merely opposed to
the sort of selection that exists or certainly existed during my career in teaching.

Take for example, TLBC School in Wavertree- when I was there the school was completely selective, using interviews to ensure it admitted a motivated group of children each year.

On the other hand, schools like Blair's Oratory were interviewing parents in addition to the candidates.

Another Catholic school in Purley, North Surrey at which a colleague of mine was head of department, was even interviewing parents and asking them about their jobs and income.

Bring back the grammars.

OP posts:
MassaAttack · 26/09/2014 17:34

I was told by the receptionist not to bother as ds wouldn't get a place at her oversubscribed CofE primary - when I gave my address for her to send a prospectus (this was before many schools had websites).

Friend in a naice part of town several miles further away from the school than the council estate I lived on was offered a place that year Hmm

I didn't apply because her attitude stank, but I suspect that was the idea. Does that count?

TalkinPeace · 26/09/2014 17:19

abolish selection then
simples