Bring back secondary moderns?

If the grammar is the best fit academically, the grammar! Most children do not get really upset at not being educated without boys and they need to persuade DD of the advantages of the girls school. Where I live no-one would refuse a grammar on that basis and there are plenty of ways to stay in contact with boys if it is a major issue.

That would reduce choice further wouldn't it? You want your kid to go to the grammar because the other schools are crap, but it's a Harris Academy. What do you do?!

A friend of mine is in a similar situation, send her DD to a secondary modern, or send her to a girls grammar. The DD would hate single sex schooling. They don't know what to do.

The CEO of the Harris academy chain has said that they will consider converting some of their schools to grammars, because tactically, they wouldn't want their schools to become the secondary modern.
schoolsweek.co.uk/dan-moynihan-chief-executive-of-the-harris-federation/

So that school could well become a grammar.

KathyBeale Sat 17-Sep-16 08:51:51 I live in the same area as PWP and I'm currently flummoxed by our massive choice

To be fair, if PettsWoodParadise's DC(s) attend a grammar, they were likely one of the lucky ones that did have choice. Perhaps this is why they think there is a lot of choice in their area.

From what I understand, and I could be quite wrong here, a lot of people don't have choice because school planning guidelines don't allow for a sufficient surplus of schools places to facilitate real choice.

I live in the same area as PWP and I'm currently flummoxed by our massive choice - which when you look closer is really no choice at all. Either you tutor from y4 (my son has just started y5 and I'm told most of the tutors are now fully booked) at the expense of all extra-curricular activities, or it's the local comps. Which are all great. Darrick is walking/cycling/two stops on the bus distance from us but their catchment is now just 0.9 miles (we are about 1.2 miles away) because 50% of their intake is siblings. There is a CofE school locally. We are completely atheist and even if we weren't, we are culturally Jewish and Catholic. There is a lovely boys comp where my neighbour goes by there is no public transport. In London, seriously.

The Priory that someone linked to has just become a Harris Academy. I loathe Harris Academies. They have completely taken over the other side of the borough.

Anyway, while I think there is demand for another secondary school, especially for boys, there is no physical space - you need a lot of room for a secondary school - and throwing a grammar into this mix would make things much, much worse, not better.

If the SMs are getting nearly all the PPs then how on earth can the argument be made that grammar schools aid social mobility?

You said there was room for a co-ed grammar- which, if these plans go ahead, could well be the excellent non selective school you mentioned- and you said that you thought moving to being grammar may not be a rosy prospect for comprehensive schools.

I made assumptions based on these statements. My apologies if I was wrong.

No where did I say that you are the one making assumptions.

What I meant by being naive is your assumption that schools will not want to become grammars. And even if they do this will have no impact on the provision in your area.

Bertrand I am not naive about the education in my area. I have always couched my explanations as being from my experience or those close to me. I did a lot of research before DD moved to secondary school and find the choice in our area an amazing combination that I believe others should be able to have. Idealistic I may be but I am rather hurt by the word naive.

Errr.... the secondary moderns get nearly all the PP money now! Very little in the grammars, as you would expect. This means the grammars get less funding per pupil.

sashs - To answer your point, it is because the grammar schools here take nearly all the high, high achievers. High achievers are not all the same. Some are tutored to become high achievers and others are very bright and nuturally quick. Bucks has very many high achievers! The grammar schools, however, are not full of Bucks children. Where my old school is situated, there is one secondary modern (plus now a tiny free school just opened) and one grammar of roughly the same size. However, 50% of the children in that area do not go to the grammar! The grammar, by law, has to be open to any child that passes the exam, firstly in the catchment area then secondly, outside the catchment area by distance. Several towns in Bucks are exactly the same as this, eg Marlow, one grammar and one secondary modern. The short-fall in the high, high achievers are made up from the out of catchment children. Basically Maidenhead where Theresa May wants a grammar.

It is difficult to get your head around unless you live here! However, it is clear to me that any new grammars will make a mockery of a comprehensive education unless they only take, say 2-5% of children in a huge area such as the grammar schools in Devon that do not adversely affet the other schools (so I have heard).

The very big issue is how do you get FSM and PP children into grammar schools (should they come into being) if these children cannot access tuition and cannot afford the transport. In Bucks, if you do not go to your nearest school, whether you have achieved the magic 121 or not, you pay for transport. Transporting 50% of FSM and PP children to a new grammar school would cost a fortune. What size of catchment area would be needed for this?

Also, no, there cannot be a 14 plus! Usually it is 12 and 13 plus for obvious reasons. The secondary moderns may do 3 year GCSEs, but the grammars do not. They cover more topics in the subjects fom Y7-9 and teach quickly in Y10-11 to cover the GCSE syllabus and, at the moment, that is not changing.

The secondary moderns really do not lose many pupils for Y9. There is no seamless move to a grammar for very many children becuase they do not want to go! It is utterly wrong to think that hundreds of dissatisfied parents are queing up to move their children into a grammar school at 12, 13 or 14. It is simply not the case. The children make friends, enoy their school, make good progress and can do well and go to university. Many parents consider that going to the grammar will mean their child is bottom of that particular heap - and they do not want that! I know parents who are university lecturers, teachers, Charity executives, Accountants and other well educated professionals whose children go to secondary moderns and none of these children have transferred elsewhere when clearly capable of going to a grammar school and obtained A*s at the schools they were at, at A level.

What is evident though, is the pecking order of secondary modern schools and the huge number of appeals against allocations to the "wrong" ones. Being in the right area is not down to house prices either. Waddesdon is much cheaper than Beaconsfield but guess which has the best secondary?

There is, today, news of a Kent school (not sure which one) applying to be a grammar.

Oh, but noblegiraffe- think how unfair it'll be when secondary modern gets all that pupil premium money and the grammar gets none...............

Converting to a grammar isn't all rosy? Given the nice cushy intake, the guaranteed brilliant results and the easier ride to Outstanding status and being left alone by Ofsted?

Oh I'm sure schools will be clamouring to be the secondary modern

I think you're being very naive.

There's space for a co-ed grammar in our area. Supply and demand. I know the rules for grammar academies have to give the parents the option of voting to convert to non-selective and I suspect there will have to be agreement with a wide range of people to do the opposite to convert to selective. For many it won't be attractive. I know our local girls grammar reports on high teaching costs as NQTs etc don't fit the needs of the very bright and confident girls. This they say is similar to other grammar schools when compared. They have scruffier buildings older equipment. I think when schools look at all the facts converting to grammar isn't all rosy.

Yes, but what if Darrick Wood chooses to become selective? (I don't know these schools at all, btw). Or some other school nearby. Suddenly it's slicing off more bright kids. Then another school in the other direction. There doesn't appear to be anything to say that couldn't happen.

Yes St Olaves is superselective, my point is that as it takes so few it doesn't slice off all the bright kids nearby. Also nearby Darrick Wood is an outstanding school so there are nearby excellent choices rather than secondary moderns in the old sense or Kent sense.

I doubt it.

PettsWoodParadise Fri 16-Sep-16 08:10:19 In our area as grammar is for a very small number it doesn't adversely affect the other schools. There is only one girls school and one boys

I thought St Olave's was a super selective, is that not the case?

Here it is just another choice and not devastating if the child fails as we have other good and outstanding schools

I think some parents may be devistated when their DCs don't get in. Particularly those living approx. 1 mile from St Olave's or approx. 1 1/2 miles from Newstead but get allocated:

www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/138114?tab=absence-and-pupil-population

However, as I don't live in the area, I could be very much mistaken.

Petts you are aware that this policy won't necessarily bypass your area just because you've got a grammar? More grammars could open/convert which would then affect the surrounding schools and you'd be in a worse position for school choice.

People who post on these threads have never been near a secondary modern. They have no idea that A levels are available or that children get 55% and upwards of GCSE's at A-C including Maths and English. If any of you have time, take a look at Waddesdon, John Colet, The Misbourne, The Amersham School, Chalfonts and Great Marlow School and you will see schools you will not recognise as secondary moderns. Some have in excess of 30% high abilty children so why would they not offer A levels and academic GCSE's? It would be failing the children if they did not.*

So what is the point of grammars then?

So. Am I misunderstanding, or is their another of the "3 impossible things before breakfast" of the grammar school supporters?

Fact 1) Grammar schools provide a specialized fast paced academic education for the able.

Fact 2) Secondary modern schools are geared to a more vocational, appropriately paced education for the less able.

Fact 3) Pupils will be able seamlessly to move from secondary modern to grammar in year 9.

"Have you been to Sheppey lately? Medway Towns? The coastal towns?"
What are the secondary moderns like there? If they're still awesome, I'll be more convinced . . .

But the policy isn't for a lone grammar covering a wide area. The policy is for state comps deciding to become selective and for unis and independents to open up new grammars.