New Grammar Schools: good or bad?

Yes, I have already acknowledged that grammar schools may be ethnically diverse, but that wasn't really what I was talking about. When I mentioned segregation in a previous post, I think I made it clear that I was talking about segregation along class lines. You responded saying that this wasn't the case at your ds's school. Consequently, I was asking how that school had managed to achieve socioeconomic diversity, but as you clearly didn't understand what I was getting at, I'm assuming that it probably hasn't.

Sorry what is a super selective school? Aren't all grammar school the same?

Here is a snapshot of the schools allocation policy. In the registration process children you notify them the child had sen and extra support is put in place. I know other grammar schools that go the extra mile and give disadvantaged children priority etc.

@Anothernamechangeplease
How is it that you have a local comp and a grammar school in the same area?
Grammars in our county do not select by distance from the school, so kids travel, including from other counties. I think the grammars take about 10% of secondary kids in the county and the test is only for those who opt to take it. Some kids come from private schools and would continue with private if they didn't make the grammar. So I would call the other schools comps.

We are a low income working class family but DS's friends parents I've met seem better off (and about 10 years older than me!).

Because both the schools are in the catchment area of a large white working class estate. The grammar school has children coming from out of area up to 40 miles away and much more ethic minorities attend the grammar school.

OK, the ethnic diversity thing may differ in different areas.

I grew up in an area with super selectives, and agree that there were fully comprehensive schools in that area, not least because the so-called super selectives were so bad at identifying the brightest pupils. There were plenty of kids who "should have" got into the grammar and didn't, and plenty who did get into the grammar but shouldn't have done!

What definitely isn't the case in any of the super selective schools that I've seen is that they are socio-economically diverse. They were packed full of middle class kids who had been extensively prepped for the 11+ exam, either by one of the private primary schools, which seemed to exist solely as an 11+ factory, or by kids who were heavily tutored (sometimes by their parents). I therefore assumed that @Itiswasitis90 was not talking about a super-selective, but I could be wrong.

If there is genuinely a super selective school out there that has somehow managed to crack the longstanding problem of creating a level playing field for disadvantaged pupils with regard to its admissions process, then I would be very interested in hearing about it, but in the absence of any evidence, I remain sceptical that such a school exists.

@Anothernamechangeplease places like Reading which just have one super selective grammar taking a small number of children from a wide geographical area also have comprehensive schools - it is 100% selective counties like Bucks which have grammar and upper schools.

I disagree that grammar schools are ethnically diverse - and certainly not representative of the ethnic mix of their catchment area.

How is it that you have a local comp and a grammar school in the same area? Surely the comp would be more diverse if the grammar school children weren't creamed off?

Grammar schools tend to be ethnically diverse, but if your ds's grammar school is genuinely more socially diverse than an average comprehensive in a non-grammar area, that would be incredibly unusual and a massive achievement on the part of that particular grammar school. How have they managed to buck the national trend in this way? I presume that there must be an army of academics studying the school to see how they have achieved this.

I disagree with segregation, my child mixes with a more diverse group now he's at grammar. He is on FSM and our local comp doesn't have any diversity- everyone is from the same area.
SEN children and children in care are given priority at the local grammar- they are given allowances on time during the test and take priority during allocation of places.

fairly terrible idea, wouldn't play well at all with the wider voting public but certain to play well with the tory membership i.e. couple of hundred thousand home counties bigots with an average date of birth that's somewhere in the 1940s or 50s.

@HPFA - maybe that’s because secondary moderns have not been funded as they should be (ie more per pupil than grammars due to greater need)? I agree that unless they can provide an attractive alternatives, they shouldn’t expand the grammar system.

people get new bikes for getting an apprenticeship and getting onto further education college courses. People compete to get into sports or performing arts specialist schools. Why not have ones for specialisms where U.K. has a lack of people? Or maybe give kids at secondary moderns an extra year of education to do their gcses - so they can consolidate their learning and have a higher chance of passing. They can then join sixth forms or further education colleges.

Yes, I know. I linked to a research paper above that highlighted the lack of evidence with regard to academic selection producing better results. I'm quite capable of doing a Google search, I was just interested in knowing which countries' systems you thought that we should emulate.

You say that you've proposed alternatives above but I can't see how your suggestions would improve the system. You want more grammar schools with more fluidity for late bloomers but less academic, more practical content for the kids who go to the non-academic schools. Not really sure how late bloomers would transition between the two if they are following such different curricula.

Then you've talked about having "proper assessment" processes but you have been very vague about what that would actually entail, other than mentioning that it would involve teacher assessment, which has previously been shown to disadvantage kids from less privileged backgrounds.

You've made reference to different learning styles, but you seem to be working on the assumption that kids with similar level of academic ability will naturally have similar learning styles, which almost certainly isn't the case.

And you've highlighted that the current approach is failing kids with SEN but you haven't mentioned where they will fit in to your new system. And what about kids who are "twice exceptional" - academically gifted but also having SEN. Where will they fit in?

All in all, I don't see any real workable proposals that would contribute to better outcomes for all children, nor that would lead to greater social mobility. I just see a push towards segregation that would primarily end up being along class lines. Not what I want for my own dc or for anyone else's, thanks.

How would you know if the concept would work, when we don't actually have the systems in place to scientifically test the theory.

Also if you Google anything, you will always find statistics or research to suit your agenda.

Actually the concept of learning styles has been quite widely debunked, and most psychologists don't accept there is any scientific evidence to support it. That's not to say there's nothing in it – some people clearly pick things up better if it's written down, while other like to be given verbal instructions and others prefer to watch it being done. But it's no stronger than a mild preference.

Hmmmm... strange then don't you think how most adults manifestly recognise it as true based on their own experience and that of their own family members etc?

Exactly there isn't enough choice for children. They pick their opinions in year 9, so would make sense (even if it appears early) to start making children think about their future and what will work for them.
The system is too communist and rather then bring academics down, they should be encouraging everyone's abilities.

I'm glad your BIL managed to learn a trade. Your correct how some people don't see the connection between learning from a white board to practical, the amount of kids that said I dont need to learn maths etc because I'm going to be a builder or a electrician was funny (I believed it too!) as an adult, I now know how wrong we were in our ignorance.

Yes @Itiswasitis90

My BIL is a case in point - he went to the same (shit) school as me. I got all A* GCSEs as I could teach myself well from books and have a great memory. He is far more talented than me, but left school without a pass in maths, which would astonish you if you saw him playing darts(!) - he aced all the maths exams he did in order to learn a trade when he later went to college (ironically, paid for by a grant because he failed his GCSEs). He is just a very practical learner. School offered him nothing and he thought it was totally pointless - there was no way to map from what he was (rote) learning, to what he could do with it.

I totally agree that we should make evidence-based decisions and that we should learn from the experience of other countries. Which countries' systems in particular do you think we should emulate?

Tons of data on this published online if you would like to look.

@Itiswasitis90 exactly, totally agree.

I agree, it doesn't matter how much money you throw at it - the comp schools in my area have so much technology and much nicer in comparison to the grammar.
The grammar school seems dilapidated in comparison. It's the attitude of wanting to learn that needs changing.

Everyone knows that kids don't all learn the same way, so I don't see why people are anti grammar school.

I would love to see technical colleges for children at earlier ages, kids that learn better kinetically, learning a trade and having maths, English, science installed that way- something that's more exciting for kids that would rather be hands on rather then disrupting.

Again, have yet to hear from a secondary modern parent that grammar schools are great.

Again, I've not suggested that we scale up the current system as is. I am suggesting that children with practical talents are given a chance to develop them into good quality technical qualifications and careers with strong industry links like they are in e.g. Germany.

OK, so what do you propose instead?

I've described that already upthread. ^^

@TurquoisePterodactyl if our education system is so rubbish, why do so many people send their children here from abroad ?

Ummmm... to private schools you mean?

OK, so what do you propose instead? What exactly would you put in place to meet the needs of all children? Surely you're not proposing that old fashioned grammar schools and secondary moderns are the answer??