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

[Neverthelessshepersisted]

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

Yes i personally believe about 75:25. With some of that 75 being pre-natal factors. Of course children share their parents enviroment , but it is very heritable, particularly at the extremes.

I deal with this professionally and came from a very much attachment view point, but that just isnt the evidence. Steven Pinkers Blank Slate is good on this.

Um yes and actually I generally gave my top groups activities that stretched them and which did need their share of my time.

I'm sure Ofsted would love kids being given an activity they just went off and did without any challenge,process or guidance.

Seriously is that what we expect for bright kids,is that what they deserve?

Or the teacher could be explaining something else.....they can reach a given level with less teacher time yes. But could reach a higher level if given more. Doesnt mean they should get less.

Laughter It is confusing that a school can call itself anything! There are some comprehensives -Harrogate, Steyning, Ilkley for example that call themselves grammars.
I'm repeating myself here but for me a secondary modern is defined by the fact that pupils are there because they haven't passed the 11+ and not by how many High Achievers it contains. Wellington School in a very nice area of Trafford has more High achievers than many a comp in a poorer area. Yet I'd still call it an SM because I very much doubt anyone goes there if they have passed the 11+ in Trafford. This is not a definition that everyone would agree with.

Whilst for the purposes of the debate we have to use overall statistics but that does not mean at all that every secondary modern is a crap school. Indeed in Kent quite a few have better Progress 8 for High Achievers than some of the grammars.

What do you mean "that just isn't the evidence" stillwill? I also work with children and have seen first hand over many years how much of a massive difference parental input / wealth / family stability etc make. They make all the difference in fact. I would also appreciate an answer to my question about, how do you explain the huge disparity in wealthy kids of educated parents in existing private / grammar schools? Or are you basically saying poor kids are not bright while wealthy ones are? I would be interested in your thoughts.

Private schools did not flourish during the grammar school era. I wonder if expansion of grammar schools might temp parents back into the state sector?

I have refferenced the most recent paper on this. The evidence is that academic achievement is heritable, also that it becomes more so during life. So parental input makes more of difference in the early years, but less so later. 25% difference (from enviromental factors) is significant in a lot of cases too, but yes academic potential is largely genetically determined.

Naturally intelligent people will on average be weathier (be able to do higher paid work). 2 graduate parents are more likely to have above averagely intelligent dcs, than 2 people who struggled at school.

still I have seen a lot of anecdotal evidence of this.

Noble reffered to someone not reaching their potential as poor diddumz

No I didn't.

And fuck off with your 'Noble thinks that bright kids don't matter', because what you should have actually said is 'Noble thinks that all kids matter, not screw some to boost the others'.

Sorry noble you didnt say that. You refferred their hopes being dashed and it being a pity in what I interpreted in a sarcastic manner.

I interpreted what you said to mean that you felt an C to D was more important than A to A*. Nobody on here is suggesting we screw anybodies chances.

Can you explain what hopes would be dashed by getting 6 A*s and 2As? My point was rather that most likely nothing was dashed rather than 'who gives a shit that their hopes were dashed'.

And we answeared you , medicine, oxbridge and law (to name 3) are incredibly competitive every point matters , my state school didnt understand this in 1992 and it seems some still dont. But the private schools do and make sure their most able students dont drop a point.

noble it would certainly rule a DC out of reading Medicine at Oxford. Just saying, since you asked.

We know this because when they get there state schooled pupils out-perform their private school peers. If they can get there.

Cross post Still. Obviously uni admissions are going to have to react to the loss of AS but in recent years a whole raft of competitive courses would have been ruled out. As with the plum jobs, lets hand all the prime uni courses over to independently schooled kids. That's fair.

Again, though at what point do we make the cut-off? If the student who gets 70% and goes to a grammar gets a much better chance of Oxbridge than the one who gets 69% and goes to the secondary modern isn't this unfair?

This is the point where someone always says "But the child at the secondary modern will get a second chance at sixth form if they do well" So if it's so easy for them why is it so difficult for a child to do that in a comprehensive? Why is it that a bright kid at a comp is doomed to failure but a bright kid at a secondary modern will do just fine and get lots of second chances?

I've just looked up the GCSE requirements for medicine, and the only one (St Andrews) that specifies a number of As specifies 6. I'm guessing that one could still study medicine with 6 As.

But they are going to be inundated with kids having entry requirements and then some.

They will pick those with the best.

Noble reffered (sic)to someone not reaching their potential as poor diddumz

I may not agree with Noble's stance on this issue, but I take exception to this comment.Noble has been posting for many years and has consistently been a consciencious and caring teacher who wants the best for all children.

Dont be so naive. When i went the official offer was BBB not one person in my year didnt have at least ABB. Those the minimum. It is so competitve they can exclude candidates on the second instrument they play. The majority of applicants will have all A* and sadly be from independant schools.

Not all children.

springflowers

Hear, hear.

I have apologised, noble do you want me to get that post deleted ?

noble check out the Oxford website for Pre-Clinical medicine. You will not get in with 6A*.