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 😕

Is it completely unreasonable to point out that the social mobility of the postwar period might have meant that many bright people from deprived areas moved up the social class system, taking advantage, too, of the increased professional and managerial job opportunities offered in the postwar years, and their offspring and grandchildren are now no longer deprived? So, there would be a smaller proportion of bright children, excluding migrants, in deprived groups now? Regardless of how carefully you target this white former heavy industry-employed group it can now never produce as many bright children as it might have done in the past as those with higher IQs have been socially mobile and passed on their genes within non-deprived groups? IQ is to a degree inheritable.

Which doesn't, of course, mean that children from deprived groups shouldn't be aggressively nurtured and supported, whatever their academic level, as not doing so is a huge waste of talent for our country.

I am not being unpleasant or goady, just wondering if someone who knows about these things can tell me what the reality is. IQ is a bit non-PC these days, isn't it?

I'd like to point out that Finland's school system became good when they got rid of their grammar schools and focused on making all comprehensives equal. Not good, but equal. From the equality came excellence. And its schools have gone downhill a bit now that they are not all equal again. Equality improves outcomes for all.

I am not a expect but we did cover nature vs nuture on my course

And I don't think is nessairly because the children of bright people are brighter per say

It's because of the envoirment there exposed to and values

So for example my fil is a barrister all of my dh siblings have all got degrees from russle group uni

They. Have art in the family home they were taken to the libuary , a parents evening was never missed they have books in the house they had proper bedtimes , hobbies Ect my dh was sung to read to Ect

not all of these things cost anything when we fostered we had children who literally had Ben sat in front of a to until the day they started nursey not been to a park ,never been swimming never been to a libuary never been sand to didn't no any of the nursey songs Ect

poster Natsku Wed 14-Sep-16 10:16:18

Finland don't have the same class system we do and largely have a mono culture

You close down all the private and grammar schools you will get selection by wealth

All the ritch will use the money saved from private schools and tutors to by there way via houses into a affluent area

Eveyone will then be going to comps but still non will be equal

It's Reaping Day 11+ day today here where we still have grammars.

Really brings home what a shit system it is. Wouldn't wish it on anyone.

*From my observations the people most vociferously against grammar schools belong to one of the following groups...

A) They don't live in a grammar area, and they're mad as Hell that other parents have this option.

B) They live in a grammar area, hoped their DC would pass the 11+, and when they didn't, they were mad as Hell about it.

C) They live in a grammar area, but know their DC isn't ever going to pass the 11+, and they're mad as Hell about it.*

No, you have missed people:

• those who do live in (superselective) grammar areas, whose DC would pass the 11+ but who don't actually believe in selection.

• those who have studied in detail research on the effects of selective education and have concluded that selective education is damaging as a national policy.

Most of my colleagues fall into both categories.

Oh come on Noble, people who vote tory don't listen to experts!|

Most people don't listen to experts, regardless of their political views.

Don't forget the other category- people who live in 11+ areas and have seen its effects first hand and have come to the conclusion based on personal experience and a lot of reading that it is a seriously crap system.........

Chukka Umuna went to private school, by the way

I don't live in a grammar area and I'm very pleased I don't. It means there is a truly representative span of abilities at my daughters' excellent local unleafy comp.

Yes, it's the posh school at the end of my road (just opposite the aforementioned wet hostel. Truly diverse, my area).

Chuka's school.

haybott how do your colleagues square that with sending their DC to independent selectives, as so many do? (alongside their peers elsewhere).

'Finland' it amazes me we talk about a tiny country that (apart from having a couple of racing drivers that are brilliant at driving on ice ) as a 'panacea' .Finland has never 'contributed' anything in the world , apart from having one of the highest 'Suicide' rates in the world !

What on earth makes people believe a country with a population of 5.5 million spread over 130,000 square miles can teach England/Wales with over 60 million spread over half the square area !.

Its baffling but then again posters believe Scandinavia to be all 'Lapland' and a place of unequaled happiness and social cohesion !

Not unreasonable at all Abraiid2, I think you are completely right. To have had the noticable levels of increased educational achievement and social mobility in the past, you had to have a previous generation of bright people who lacked educational opportunities, who left school at 14 and went in to manual work. (not synonymous with being deprived BTW). I also think people having smaller families made a difference. With very few exceptions, everyone brought up in the UK with a child at secondary today would have had the opportunity to stay on at school till 16 and take puplic exams. Grammar schools can't really be the gift that keeps giving; places will very likely go to ex-grammar pupils or those who could have gone if they had lived in a selective area. I know I upset someone on one of the education boards by suggesting that her DD being the 3rd generation going to grammar school was not very conducive to social mobility - when social mobility was something that she had been going on about all through the thread.

Well it seems to be fine to quote any other country when critiquing education, despite the differences.

You can cite good practice no matter where it comes from.

haybott you might want to add:

a) Those who missed the pass mark by 1 or 2 points but didn't get a place through appeals.

There is an interesting comment from someone familiar with Bucks appeals:

"It's interesting to note that it is becoming harder to win a Review case on higher scores, but easier to win a case on a lower score."

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=46245

b) Those who can't afford a private tutor and don't have the time/energy/knowledge to tutor their DC for the test.

c) Those who gained the qualifying mark or a mark that would have gained a place in the last X number of years, only to find a sharp increase in the number of educational tourists (i.e. those who buy or rent close to the school and then move after the place is allocated) have cut the distance allocations and/or significanly raised the pass mark.

e) Those who find out that a local prep. had 10 out of 15 children gain a place whilst only 1 DC in their state primary gained a place.

BertrandRussell Wed 14-Sep-16 10:48:51 Don't forget the other category- people who live in 11+ areas and have seen its effects first hand

It would appear that those people have it wrong because someone who has a DC at a SS knows better ;-) (not referring to you BTW Bert).

smallfox2002 Wed 14-Sep-16 11:15:40 You can cite good practice no matter where it comes from.

Provided you address and account for the bias to results.

goodbyestranger Wed 14-Sep-16 11:01:28 haybott how do your colleagues square that with sending their DC to independent selectives, as so many do? (alongside their peers elsewhere).

Perhaps they have the view that if they want more, they will pay for it?

Not saying I agree, just putting an idea out there.

Mumtryingherbest:

True, but those who critique education and compare seem not to do that.

When you apply the data regarding the issues of grammar schools here, and compare it with Finland prior to the changes there are comparisons can be made so the effectiveness of their aoproach can be used to suggest practice here.

I have always hated selection at 11, as i know it is a shit broken system, but i was happy as "grammars they ended before I was born" so no problem.
I then move up north to the only grammar in the entire fucking north east.

I have a highly intelligent son.
Am i going to avoid the best school for my son out of my principals? fucking hell I am not.

Will I vote to scrap the grammar if we ever have another vote, yes I will.

Can I add, re: social mobility and the grammar system - social mobility in the 1950's and 1960's wasn't just the result of bright working class children attending grammar schools. There were generally more opportunities in education than there had been before for working class men and women.

My father was one of six boys from a council estate in Essex. Unmarried parents, and no money to spare (because my grandad, an Irish immigrant who worked at the Ford car factory had two families to support - my grandmother was his weekend wife). My dad left school at 14, got a job on a newspaper and gradually worked his way up to become a reporter. He then took the civil service exams and became a press attache in the FO and eventually a middle ranking diplomat. He had no formal qualifications at all from school. That simply wouldn't happen now.

My dad was was a great reader, and like many intelligent working class men attended evening classes at the local working men's college, studying politics and economics. He said there were some fantastic teachers there whose classes would be packed every evening and lots of those who attended were manual workers.

All that's gone now. FE is fucked. Opportunities for adults to better themselves with part time education is financially very difficult. The idea of self-improvement through study rather than study as a means to a job. At least for people from my dad's background.

Point I'm making is that our culture is very different now. I honestly think there's less social mobility now, not more.

I don't know who you're referring to Mum, could be me, might not be. But if it is me then I'd say that living for forty years in an area served by a superselective, and having it as our closest school, and working in the field, and having eight DC go to the school and having watched many many cohorts from our local area go to the respective schools (and of course quite a number go private including boarding), I'm not that ill informed about the effects of superselectives, which in essence is what's proposed or at least far closer to the model than the Kent one is.

Mini:

There is less social mobility now, the main indicator for life outcomes for children is the income and job of their parents.

www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2015/07/Less-able,-better-off-kids-more-likely-to-become-high-earners-than-bright-poor-kids.aspx

Thinking for a minute is the proposal less about 'grammar' schools and more to do with whether you see yourself to the right or left of the political spectrum!

I wonder if the policy in trying to create more grammar schools is as much about education as it is about trying to create 'you either with us' or 'against us' type situation ! Rather like the Miners strike situation.

It could be that people might not be fully enthused by the policies , but are going to be forced to back them , because it becomes a 'battle' of left versus right !

The loser will of course be education if this debate becomes fixated on political or 'Union' allegiances , rather than trying to improve education.

The sad thing is i think both sides are 'squaring' up for a mini 'Miners' battle over this and using it for shortsighted political aims!

"Its baffling but then again posters believe Scandinavia to be all 'Lapland' and a place of unequaled happiness and social cohesion !"

Why not improve the quality of the debate by distorting and misrepresenting people's arguments, the better to then ridicule them?

Schools are schools.

Teachers and educationalists from around the world visit Finland to observe how they educate their teachers and structure their education system. Just because our societies are different, it doesn't mean that we have nothing to learn from the way they deliver schooling.

Supporters of the grammar system and traditional models of education constantly hold up schools in SE Asia as examples of successful teaching and learning.

You never hear any of them considering that cultures where authoritarian parenting styles and a huge emphasis on conformity are very different from UK culture and may not translate well here.

Interestingly, the suicide rate in both South Korea, which is often held up as a model for successful schooling, is vastly, vastly higher than Finland.....

Also worth noting - there is a paradox in the suicide rates, that they are highest in countries where people are more likely to also report the highest rates of happiness. Go figure. Rates of happiness in a culture incidentally are strongly linked with low levels of perceived social inequality.