To think most of the people bemoaning grammar schools are hypocrites

[pleasemothermay1]

That's just it's really I don't mind people who have the courage of there conviction but I have no trux with champagne socialists

Like jc or Diane Abbott or Tristan hunt

Who's children all went or will be going to grammar or private

Even bloody James o Brian moaning about grammars when he rountinly says he wouldn't rule out private for his girls 😕

[sunshield]

My children have experienced the bitter sweet nature of grammar schools/secondary modern, at first i was quite contented as both girls passed comfortably .
DS failed , perhaps not totally surprisingly.

At first i was not really bothered about it especially during year 7 but the difference in the life chances, perceptions of pupils in grammar /modern two years down the line are sickening . The school DS goes to is no inner city struggling school either.

[minifingerz]

Cory - grammar supporters believe that children can fairly easily be divided into two groups: "high ability" and "not high ability". "High ability" children can be identified by the fact that they attain highly, all the time, in everything, and are usually very conscientious about school work. Almost all of them believe their children are "high ability".

[corythatwas]

Bobochic Wed 14-Sep-16 07:43:40

"It is a laudable aim to lower inequality, but not by preventing able DC from reaching their full potential in order to protect the egos of the less able."

Ok, so the secondary school experience where my ds, a late developer with chronic health issues, worked his way up from bottom sets to top sets was all about "protecting his ego"? Not about giving him an education that made the most of his developing ability?

[smallfox2002]

We're post expert remember, every opinion is equally valid.

"

[noblegiraffe]

I was thinking that this policy is so bad that even Jeremy Corbyn can muster an effective opposition against it.

I note Theresa May couldn't name any education professionals in favour of it, while the list against grows ever longer.

[smallfox2002]

She does so, mainly because she knows little about Corbyn, or Islington, or London.

Its a good insult thrown by badly educated Tories.

Lots of schadenfreude after May's display at the ballot box today, if Corbyn is so poor, how come it was a rout?

[Cerseirys]

OP why do you keep calling JC a champagne socialist? As several PPs have pointed out, he split with his wife because she wanted to send their son to grammar school and he didn't. Also, the bit if Islington he's MP for isn't exactly posh - it's a fairly run down area that's traditionally been home to working class voters. Gentrification is slowly creeping in but it's still not Tony Blair's Islington.

[smallfox2002]

Totally agree about immigration.

London is also full of opportunity, kids can see a future and some kind of result at the end of it all. There are pockets of poverty but they are right next to affluent areas, there are still the disenfranchised but I think because of the proximity to so many opportunities there may be slightly less.

[doubletrouble41]

actually JC fiecely wanted a comprehensive education for his son, and he and his wife split over it. He is not a champagne socialist. Diane Abbott on the other hand, yes, is a massive hypocrite.

[Capricorn76]

One of the reasons why London schools are doing so well is because of immigration. I see it in my DDs school. There are many races and cultures and lots of the kids come from backgrounds where it's cool to be smart. Their parents want their kids to step up the ladder. The competition is high so everyone including non-immigrants raises their game.

Londoner's don't have to read about globalisation competition because the South Korean boy or Nigerian girl are sitting in the same class as our kids and we can see the work ethic and attitude towards education and have conversations with their parents and we raise our game.

A friend moved to a coastal town before she had kids thinking it would be good for kids, safer etc and she regrets it.

Grammars may save a minority of kids but something needs to be done about towns with widespread low aspiration. Decades ago kids could drop out early and still get a job and even if they couldn't get a job they could easily get benefits. This isn't possible anymore.

[noblegiraffe]

The selection by postcode thing could be solved for everyone by a lottery/fair banding.

Grammars aren't a solution to the issue because they exclude poor kids for other reasons.

[0pti0na1]

The postcode lottery is odd. Either allow grammars in all counties or none.

[minifingerz]

"Aren't London selectives ridiculously selective? Tiffin and the like? "

I know three children who failed to get a place at a London SS. One went on to be offered a place at Dulwich College and St Pauls, and the two girls both got generous academic scholarships at good private girls schools.

It is VERY competitive and children are hothoused for the tests practically from reception.

[smallfox2002]

Not all, some still have rules on catchment, some even on siblings.

[noblegiraffe]

Aren't London selectives ridiculously selective? Tiffin and the like? I'd hope they outperform a bog standard Kent selective.

[smallfox2002]

It also doesn't follow that because these students are coming to you from highly selective schools that this is the reason why London students out perform others.

As an academic surely you should acknowledge that because the selective state schools make up such a small amount of London schools that they can't be the reason for this.

[smallfox2002]

Or the Sutton trusts findings that grammars are actually under represented at Oxbridge?

[minifingerz]

Haybott - grammars = massive selection bias, hence superior results.

You're an academic, you must be able to see that.

Or is the Sutton Trust's report showing only very small gains associated with grammar schooling for high achieving children, nonsense? (And even that research doesn't control for SATS sub levels).

[haybott]

As an academic who sees high achievers coming in, it is completely obvious that the London selectives (private and state) outperform the rest of the country and that the gap is growing. It's irrelevant that most of London's children aren't in these schools - most of the London students I see at a highly selective university are coming from these schools.

[smallfox2002]

Also.. how come the grammars didn't make such a difference before the London challenge?

Which btw isn't the only thing that has improved London schools schools.

[missymayhemsmum]

I went to a grammar school (well actually an ex-grammar school that wasn't officially allowed to select on ability so selected on a 'parental letter'. I got an ok (if somewhat unbalanced) education, but not nearly as good an education as my children got in the local comprehensive.

The problems with grammar schools (imho) are the atmosphere of pressure and entitlement, the emphasis on academic excellence or failure they promote in the whole local school system, and their impact on other local schools. There's nothing like an ambitious head and a cohort of sharp-elbowed educated parents to push an average comp to excellence, and nothing like a 'second rate' label to drag one down.

I'd criticise any parent who chooses a school on snob value, but never criticise anyone who chooses to put their child where they think they will thrive.

[smallfox2002]

Secondary school age children make up 8. 8 percent of the cities population.

So 750 000 give or take a few thousand.

38000 is 5 percent of that total.

Even if there were 5 kids attempting each available space it would still only be 25 percent of the school population.

As we know that not all areas have grammars and that not all have 2000 students it's highly.likely to be significantly less numbers of students in London taking the entrance exam.

It is not a determinant of success for London schools.

Funding, the main, biggest and most important.

[sandyholme]

DARTFORD ! (22)

[sandyholme]

Ramsgate, Faversham , and Sittingbourne

21 grammar school towns out of 71 are 'coastal'.

[sandyholme]

Ok then Grammar Trivia facts

I think they are 71 Towns with at least 1 Grammar school in them !
39 Grammar schools are located within 5 miles of the sea or an Estuary!

For some kind of reason Grammar schools and coasts seem to go together ! Poole, Bournemouth ,Plymouth ,Torquay ,Brixham , Dover Folkestone , Chatham, Sandwich , Rochester, Gravesend, Southend Skegness , Boston , Liverpool , Bebington, West KIrby , Lancaster