to think most would not really want a secondary modern

[inkyfingers]

OK, tell me why the 'grammar school system' is good for the 85% who don't get a place? I love the pace and challenge etc the GS offers (as many MNers tell me), but how does the alternative serve the huge majority of pupils? (cos surely a 'system' has to benefit as many as possible??).

If it's a really good wheeze, then the GS supporters would surely be happy if their own DC don't get places?

Money shouldn't buy advantage - how very very naive is that, if the children from grammar schools and private schools were suddenly put into the local comp tomorrow they would still succeed due to the other factors involved in determining a child's success in school, you cannot buy that.
The last government threw money at the local dumps and they are still producing scallies out of scallies and decent kids from decent homes, but the buildings are nicer.

IME it doesn't work though, if we are going be anecdotal evidence. Both ends suffered. In fact, due to the lack of teaching that could be aimed specifically at either end of the spectrum in my schools case, the top end pupils ended up being grouped off with the low end pupils in the vague hope that they could pass on their knowledge while the teachers got on with the rest of the class.

sea- it may have worked in your area in the 80s, but not in mine. There was one posho in my school (10 points if you can guess who). 90% of my year did not pass GCSE maths, 85% did not pass GCSE English. 4 of us went to university - out of 180 children, of those 4, 3 did not stay at that school for 6th form. The majority of those leaving were functionally illiterate.

We weren't in a grammar school area either.

Premature- decline overall maybe- increase in birthrate in my LA is 19% over past 9 years. This year's reception intake have over 1000 children sitting in temporary classrooms.

can you define scallies?

mama, you come across as an utter snob. Naive maybe but as always money buys influence and advantage and always will but it should as far as possible be removed from education.

Scallies from scallies hmmm yes you are a snob

A snob, well yes so what ?

my schooling had O levels - maybe we should blame the start of gcses then

It doesn't matter whether you remove money from education or not, some people will never be successful in life because they won't take the opportunities when they are presented and tbh formal education has very little to do with it.

I don't get the anti-private school rhetoric. I don't see whats wrong with paying for your children to have a better chance of doing well academically

money doesn't make you a good person

At least you are honest.

of course formal education has something to do with it! how mad to suggest otherwise

you can train monkeys to pass exams imo, just need to guide them in the right direction

real intelligence really doesn't have much to do with it

No money doesn't make you a good person, but it stops you from being cold and gives you choices.

so does working in asda

I agree with you, which is why you come across so many so called educated morons. Having the pieces of paper to prove you can repeat what the teacher says doesn't impress me particularly but it's a means to an end, a necessary evil.

The sooner Public schools lose their charitable status the better and maybe a new tax can be brought in to be put on school fees that will bring in some much needed money.

it is rather ridiculous that tehy have charitable status

newwave- Would really want to put taxes on private education?
Would putting VAT on private school fees bring in enough revenue to cover the costs of educating the private school children who would need state education as they could no longer afford to go to private school?

but why cannot comps give this le queen?

and i really resent the thought that children who aren't academic are looked on as thick

Mamatomany the problem is a lack of opportunity, not people not making the mist of opportunities.

And under the last government schools have been getting better, particularly through schemes like Teach First and Future Leaders which actively target high calibre graduates/school leaders at schools with high percentages of FSM pupils.

It's not enough to send people to the local comp though - you need to send students to the school they get in a ballot - that way you ensure that the middle classes can't move into the catchment of a good school creating sink schools in the areas they leave behind.

Quattrocento put forward a seemingly sound argument on a previous thread that removing the charitable status tax break wouldn't actually raise fees by all that much- I think around 3%.

I doubt very much that my LA could find school places for all the children in fee-paying schools within its boundaries- in some areas it is impossible to get a place if you move other than at normal transition times- I know families where 3dc are attending 3 primary schools in different directions, up to 10 miles apart- an impossibility for the majority of families. (one of their dc misses an hour of school every day, because of the pick-up times at the other 2)

Lequeen in my experience - and I have a lot of it - there are vanishingly tiny numberscof children who have brain injuries or SEN issues so severe that they cannot get Shakespeare. Depressingly though there are many teachers and other educationalists who have incredibly low expectations of children, in particular those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

unrulysun schools have been getting better- at cramming children for examinations. Education standards are not being raised. University admissions tutors have a great deal to say on the standards that are deemed acceptable in mathematics these days.

A ballot/lottery system will just mean more parents opting for fee-paying schools IMHO.

Hudd, yes i would and maybe raise VAT on the fees to say 100%.

Dropping Trident, cutting the armed forces and adding the money to Education budget will cover any increased costs.