New grammars by 2020 which will exclude 90% of local kids

It's strange that people can get (rightly in my view) concerned about selective education in secondary schools, but not so bothered about it when it comes to undergraduate level?

stjosephstrentvale.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Admissions-2016-2017.pdf

This is explains just how 'poor' standards are in stoke generally. The school only requires a score of '105' as opposed to the general '120'ish in most normal grammar schools. That only equates to level 4 SATS at 11 .

The entry requirements are just above the average attainment of pupils taking an 11+ exam '100'.

However, the school takes the top of the ability range for the town.

This school is not effecting the other schools in the area , it is in reality just offering a 'Comprehensive ' school that is taken for granted in places like 'Winchester' !

Good one here:

Nick Gibb seems to believe that education in Stoke-on-Trent needs to be a "national priority" for improvement

t www.stokesentinel.co.uk/video-education-minister-vows-to-make-stoke-on-trent-a-top-priority/story-30135995-detail/story.html

Seems that the grammar school in Stoke stjosephstrentvale.com/ has not had a transformative effect on the neighbouring schools?

I would imagine watching many hours of pupils sitting in nice straight lines in silence would make very dull viewing.
Yup
And that is most of what was filmed at Bohunt and other schools.

DH goes to over 100 schools a year. I'll trust his views of comps over any politician or journalist.

Bertrand You now Grange Hill was a highly sought after Grammar before Phil Redmond in 1978, hence the very middle class girls off to Cambridge in the first episode.....

OK editing has a lot to do with giving the people what they want to see . I would imagine watching many hours of pupils sitting in nice straight lines in silence would make very dull viewing.

Sorry, I should have said that most people's experience of schools are their own and the schools on the telly. Starting with Grange Hill........

Flying
I know of kids who were in the classes as Bohunt involved in the Mandarin programme recently.
Do not trust ANYTHING you see on the telly about comprehensive schools
it is always edited for "story" and "drama"
most of the Bohunt parents were very, very unhappy with how the school was portrayed as it did not match the experience of the children.

Flying,

Would you say that a programme such as educating Yorkshire / Essex shows typical life in a typical comprehensive or secondary modern today? Or that the school - and the editing - would have been chosen to provide greater entertainment rather than greater reality?

My children attend a comprehensive, and have laughed at the very small amounts of such programmes they have seen, as bearing about as much resemblance to their everyday experience in the classroom as the little girl with the strange clown + blackboard on the TV test card does to todaty's primary schooling.

For various reasons, i have been able to observe a lessons in a variety of different schools over the last 5 years or so. The only truly, truly dreadful one (in terms of both teaching and off-topic behaviour) was in a high-flying grammar.

No Actually Bertrand if you compare and contrast this video with Educating Yorkshire/Essex you will see the children are more respectful to the teachers in 1977 and less overall anarchy is evident. I admit the teaching is quite hilarious , particular the History teacher teaching 1st years. A totally useless character.

Because anecdotes from 30 years ago are so incredibly relevant to this discussion.

Actually I do think that's part of the problem. Most people have no experience of schools except the one they went to.

At my Kent 'Modern' school in the 1980s we had a French teacher that just walked out of the room everytime he had us in the 3rd year. In the end he just decided there was no point teaching or speaking French so just put Neighbours on to stop the Shouting. Indeed my Maths teacher told us he would not bother us if we did not bother him. He said quite openly he was not going to expect us to do any homework or any classwork . He actually allowed the class to take the 'piss' out of the girl for daring to ask about doing Maths at a higher level.

Near where I live in Kent, on the edge of an area of significant social deprivation, the grammar school has 1% Pupil Premium pupils, the secondary modern school a mile away has 37%. So unless you think that better off children are intrinsically cleverer than poorer ones........

My partner actually has an audio recording of a lesson at his old grammar school in the 70s (recorded by sticking the microphone of a cassette player through an inkwell). The lesson is beyond appalling - supposed to be a French lesson but consists of the teacher droning on (in English naturally) about how awful the boys are and how they will all fail the exam - which in my partner's case turned out to be an accurate prediction.

Schools of all types were pretty much unregulated in the 70s and 80s and tolerated bad teaching in a way they wouldn't today. DD's comp is miles better than the grammar I went to but I imagine most grammars are a lot better than that too.

myfavourite Certainly not all the Kent grammars.

Tonbridge grammar school: Pupils eligible for free school meals at any time during the past 6 years is 2.9%

Hillview school for girls ('comprehensive' very close by): Pupils eligible for free school meals at any time during the past 6 years: 18.1%

This is 'panorama' from 1977

Are Comprehensive Schools any better today

So in a town with the two schools right next to each other in the centre of town 9(for the sake of argument):

The half of the town over the minimum transport distance on the 'grammar school side' would get free transport to both schools.

The half of the town over the minimum transport distance on the 'secondary modern side' would only get transport to the secondary modern.

And those 'halves' protrude out into the surrounding countryside until they bump into the regions surrounding the next pair of schools??

Bizarre.

cantkeepawayforever

honestly think it's nothing to do with postcodes- grammars and Uppers are in the same towns. It's just a money saving exercise so that they provide their minimum legal requirement.

My catchment upper and grammar are in the same town with essentially the same catchment area.

cantkeepawayforever

They say they will give transport to the closest school you are qualified for so if:

A) pupil qualified for grammar - this is any school - grammar or upper so whatever is closer

B) pupil not qualified for grammar - this is the closest upper school

Note: it is the closest Bucks school so not necessarily your catchment school (as is my case) - my children are at their closest catchment school but there is a closer (30 meters) non catchment non grammar school.

Note 2 : If your closest school is out of county they will give you a choice of either free transport to the out of county school or free transport to your closest Bucks school (which you are qualified for).

"But grammarcschools don't give places to children from deprived areas

They do in Kent. Everyone thinks the home counties are rich but there are some real pockets of deprivation in Kent."

Which grammar schools did you mean?

But grammarcschools don't give places to children from deprived areas

They do in Kent. Everyone thinks the home counties are rich but there are some real pockets of deprivation in Kent.

I went to school in Torquay and there are some real pockets of deprivation there as well. And yes, some of the kids I went to school with at the grammar came from those areas. Because the catchment was so tight and the grammar took the top 25%. Now it takes about 3% and the girls come in from all over the place, including, I believe, Cornwall! It's ludicrous.

The problem is if you have grammars that take the top 3% only they become even more elitest and private-by-proxy. I'd prefer a much larger percentage going there, though I do take the point about more kids being left behind in the secondary moderns.

I've always thought selection should be 14 rather than 11, and very fluid so you can opt in and out of the more academic and less academic tracks. Oh that would be a comprehensive school! I was always in favour of grammars because I thought I'd have been stacking shelves in Tescos if I'd gone to my local comp/secondary modern but I realise that was rubbish. And I live in a non-selective area now with very good comprehensives.

The thing is, the Bucks position would be logically consistent if it said 'nobody gets transport to grammars' (this is the position in counties with a few grammar schools but not a county-wide system)

What is truly bizarre about it is that, if i understand correctly, it WILL gigve transport to a grammar OR a secondary modern if your nearest school is a grammar, but a secondary modern only if you live closest to a secondary modern.

This wouldn't be because grammars are located in nicer postcodes so it is a good way of ensuring the nicest possible intake for the grammars, would it?

It is ridiculous of Bucks CC to claim that upper schools are fine for all pupils and simultaneously to argue that grammars are necessary.

Mind you, this is the same Bucks CC that boasts of its superior exam results to neighbouring authorities without ever mentioning the numbers of High Attaining students travelling over the border into Bucks whilst the lower achieving march the other way.

Burnham has had a troubled time with Khalsa and all the upset it caused. BGS is a great school though but like looked down on by some

HPFA. The real reason is Buckinghamshire Council is 'Skint' and looking for any way to save money !

Do you blame them if they use every loophole in the book to do so !

However, both Gt Marlow and Waddesdon are more than capable of educating all levels of ability !

The educated middle class 'Conscientious' objector's will be able to keep their morality intact if they use those schools.

I think if Burnham ended up with just one school, it would end up being 'Crap' it would still be the ECT Academy just bigger and ruin the 23% that had escaped from its clutches.