To wonder what Teresa May's plans for secondary moderns are

[Neverthelessshepersisted]

That's it really.
I am a bit disappointed with her tbh.

[DixieFlatline]

I wish people wouldn't refer to her as 'Mrs May' either. Bleurgh.

[Andrewofgg]

And damn it, we should give her surname a capital M too!

[Andrewofgg]

I'm not exactly a fan of the present Prime Minister but I think we should spell her name correctly. Teresa May is a star of soft porn films and so far as I know Theresa may isn't.

[cantkeepawayforever]

Kesstrel, I asked you earlier on the thread but i think there was then a bit of a break - is there an evidence base for selective schooling working for all abilities?

Not that it works better for high achievers, but that if you look at the full ability range on a significant scale, is a special school / secondary modern / grammar system better than a special school / comprehensive model?

The evidence base for good phonics teaching is, I agree with HFPA, sound. The pass rate for the phonics screening ought to be MUCH higher, but that is perhaps due to the old problem of 'people not learning from best practice and thus continuing to do what has always been done', which I agree also dogs the comprehensive school debate. Is there a similarly sound theoretical / data driven evidence base for a selective model of schooling across all abilities?

[HPFA]

Perhaps the reason this bothers me so much is that, over the 20 years I have followed the phonics discussion, this is exactly the approach taken by the people in education who are vehemently anti-phonics, but who have never looked at the evidence for themselves.

There are still people who are anti-phonics but in the end the Labour government introduced it (rightly I think though that's a non-expert opinion) because there was an evidence base. The evidence base for selection is not sound. We should see a solid advantage for the selective counties over similar non-selective ones. And we don't.

[flyingwithwings]

Conservative voters in leafy suburbs are often quite happy with their cosy, middle-class comprehensive schools. The "bad" comprehensives, with all the problems, are in the inner cities, where Labour voters live.

This perception that only Bad Comprehensives exist in Labour areas , has probably expanded to everywhere !

We are also a fundamentally different country from 83/96 and i think data from those periods are no longer reliable in any context !

Negative connotations of '1983' Modern Schools no longer exist (co- incidentally 1983 was the year i started at my Kent Modern)

[BertrandRussell]

You seem a bit invested in the Michaela school.....

[kesstrel]

The first half or so of the thread on Michaela was fine, although a few posters were nonetheless taking the approach I described. It seriously degenerated later on though. Read the last few pages.

Again, I am happy for threads to be 'lively'. There is such a thing, though, as taking the least charitable interpretation possible, amplifying it by groundless speculation, and spreading smears about the individuals involved.

Perhaps the reason this bothers me so much is that, over the 20 years I have followed the phonics discussion, this is exactly the approach taken by the people in education who are vehemently anti-phonics, but who have never looked at the evidence for themselves. While it may be enjoyable for the individuals involved, I don't think this approach does education in this country any good.

[flyingwithwings]

34 years ago is a lifetime ago ! Also in 1983 perhaps the perception of what were 'Modern' schools of the 1960/1970s might have greatly influenced those feelings !.

[HPFA]

More information here:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/time-to-bring-back-grammar-schools-1338364.html

[HPFA]

In fact Solihull Council attempted to reintroduce selection in 1983 but caved in under the enormous opposition, mainly from middle class families concerned that they would no longer be able to access good schools. It is widely thought that the ructions from this put off the Conservative party from adopting a pro-selection policy.

[HPFA]

Come to think of it the Tories could introduce a 5% rise in NI Contributions for the Self Employed, propose to take some-ones Family Home to pay their care fees and still people will not vote for Corbyn.

Indeed.

You are not taking into account though that the policy could also work against those Southern MPs who are a little nervous of a LibDem revival, particularly if Brexit goes belly up. Many of these constituencies have superb comprehensive schools - I know you don't accept that these will become secondary moderns but other people do and it will not be popular with them. With UKIP in a state of collapse many Conservatives might calculate that they are going to collect a lot of those votes anyway - therefore there is no point alienating more centrist voters.

The funding crisis is also an important factor - building nice new schools for a few as people watch their children's schools lose teachers and buildings crumble may not be quite so popular as is thought.

[flyingwithwings]

I think you are also making a mistake in assuming anyone who hates the Tories is a automatically a Labour supporter.

I am not making that assumption , however the way the FPTP system works in the UK means only the Conservative/Labour Parties can actually form a Government.

Another reason why the Grammar school proposals could be a huge 'seat' winner for the Tories at the next GE 4 Million votes went to UKIP . A fundamental policy of theirs is the return to 'academic' selection . So if the Tories sweep up a 25% swing from UkIP 1 Million votes , basically on the 'promise' of allowing more academic selection they would gain 50 seats at a GE. This being regardless of Labours woe.

Come to think of it the Tories could introduce a 5% rise in NI Contributions for the Self Employed, propose to take some-ones Family Home to pay their care fees and still people will not vote for Corbyn.

The Family home proposal is actually a real threat to both DH and Myself!
I am a 'confused' Disabled PIP getting 'HW' whose self employed husband is now doing well after the last 5 years who is 'being targeted

[HPFA]

Fair point.

[noblegiraffe]

Like the rise in tuition fees was blocked by the lib dems....?

[HPFA]

Michael Gove could have pushed through grammars if he had wanted to,

Would it not have been blocked by the LibDems?

[noblegiraffe]

Cameron and Osborne is the answer to that HPFA.

Not at all. Michael Gove could have pushed through grammars if he had wanted to, look how he managed to change the entire curriculum and exam system in a few years. The man's an arsehole but he put Education at the forefront of the political discussion and got things done.

He was massively in favour of a grammar education for all. It has been the cornerstone of Tory education policy since they got in, and I'm sure many were totally pissed off to see it gaily and unexpectedly abandoned by Theresa May.
Ther

[HPFA]

Certainly the Conservative party is split on the issue. But that is presumably because they can't agree on whether it would be a vote winner or not. If there was compelling evidence for the policy's popularity I think it would have been adopted.

[noblegiraffe]

I also think Mumsnet is the least representative cohort of the countries views and opinions that has ever existed

Except the MN poll agreed with the yougov one.

I think you are also making a mistake in assuming anyone who hates the Tories is a automatically a Labour supporter.

[flyingwithwings]

Anyway I thought Michael Howard and William Hauge will proponents for the Grammar system !

[flyingwithwings]

Cameron and Osborne is the answer to that HPFA.

They could not be 'arsed' because what was the point to much effort required for no gain for 'their' lot . I felt 'Sorry' for little Nancy having to go to 'State School' soley for being the PMs daughter and hence a hostage for his deceit.

The Tories have always had a love/hate relationship with Grammar schools, going where the 'wind' was blowing at the time.

Over the last 40 years they have been pro/against like a 'see saw'.

[HPFA]

If the policy was so popular why was it not adopted by the Conservatives during 1997-2015? Someone must have tried it out in focus groups surely?

[flyingwithwings]

Throw in from ( 2nd previous thread) Dam Dyslexia...

[flyingwithwings]

I also think Mumsnet is the least representative cohort of the countries views and opinions that has ever existed .

If Mumsnet was representative, i think we would still have a 1 party state. however it would be 'Labour' and they would still be looking at a 50 seat majority 'this being a total disaster ' because of Corbyn's leadership !

I take everything i read on here with an extreme pinch of salt, because it bears little correlation to what i see and hear in real life !

Hey i bet many of the posters on here that profess to be PC , therefore support Comps , Secretly would love the option of a 'Grammar' school !

[noblegiraffe]

90% of that 38% were prepared for the party that proposed them that would be significant in a GE

An observation that seems completely pointless given that Theresa May is determined to push them through before the next GE, despite there not being a sniff of it in their manifesto.

Incidentally, why did the Tories have to u-turn on the national insurance rise for self-employed 'because it went against their manifesto', as if the manifesto actually counts for anything? They've already abandoned a bunch of education manifesto stuff as well as trying to implement a major policy that wasn't in it.