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

[Neverthelessshepersisted]

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

HPFA, there is also the point that getting into a grammar at 6th form is not a level playing field.

For all those i have looked at, for INTERNAL (11+ passing, already grammar-attending) candidates, there is simply a minimum number of grades / points for them to automatically progress. Whereas for EXTERNAL canddates, there is a ranking and although they technically only have to get the same minimum grades, in fact the cut-off is much higher because only the highest-performing of the external candidates are admitted to the limited number of places available.

At least if all candidates for the 6th form were 'put back into the pot' on an equal basis, and then the 'best' x [admissions number] were drawn from the whole pool of external and internal candidates, it would be a SLIGHTLY more level playing field at that stage....

It is so competitve they can exclude candidates on the second instrument they play.

Are you talking about applying for Music here? Because for any other subject this would be extremely discriminatory and I cannot believe any University would do it.

I would imagine, frankly, that a suitable candidate for reading medicine at Oxford would not need their hands held constantly to get their As to A*s...............

If state school kids perform better than private kids when they get to uni, then perhaps Oxford should put a higher GCSE tariff on private school kids? Might sort out their selectivity issues?

Anyway, how can you argue on the one hand that the country really needs really bright kids to achieve all these As, then on the other hand say that there aren't enough places on the top competitive courses in the country for them to go to? That would seem to suggest a surplus of bright kids with strings of As, rather than a dire need for them.

What we need more of is things like engineers, and the entry requirements there are more reasonable.

" It is so competitve they can exclude candidates on the second instrument they play"

Well, yes. For a music degree. Absolutely not for anything else.

What a very convoluted argument noble. If only life were that simple.

Bert noble asked the question about 6A* and a couple of us answered it.

I'm really trying to understand why people are so concerned about "bright kids" in comprehensives but seemingly unworried about the "bright kids" that will be in the secondary moderns. There's no way you can situate a new grammar so that it will only take bright kids from poor comps, it will take from good comprehensives too. With lower numbers of High Attainers that will surely mean the good comp finds it more difficult to cater for them, by the logic of the pro-grammar argument.

Depends where you are looking at.

You are also going to get the same competition but simply on lower entry requirements.

The grammar 6th for thing is interesting. My ds is currently applying- and he has much higher offers than his friends already at the schools concerned. He has also had to go for interviews-and one head of 6th form was very discouraging- talking about the pace of work and how hard he would find it...........

Noble i accept that you may be an excellent teacher, but is that really what you would say to one of your brightest sixth formers who didnt get an interview and had their heart set on medicine ?

What a very convoluted argument noble.

Is it? Either it's important to the country that these extremely bright kids meet their potential of 8As instead of 6, and so we need to roll out special schools for them, or actually, it's not, because even if they get their 8As there aren't nearly enough places on courses requiring 8 A*s, in which case the 6 would have been just fine.

Quite Still. Why shouldn't a perfectly able DC with an ambition to read Medicine at Oxford achieve that goal?

is that really what you would say to one of your brightest sixth formers who didnt get an interview and had their heart set on medicine?

And what do I say to the lovely Y11 who needs a C in maths to do a particular college course but didnt get it because the maths teacher left to teach at a grammar school and they had a PE teacher instead?

Yes noble if you're completely happy for all of the very competitive university courses to be filled with perhaps less inherently able independently educated kids who then go on to bag all the elite jobs. On that basis sure, no problem.

Lots of teachers do PE and Maths noble, as you no doubt know.

No, goodbye I said that Oxford should set a higher tariff for private school kids and sort out their social selectivity problem, especially as apparently state school kids are more likely to stump up the goods once they get there.

The places for Medicine should surely be determined by the number of doctors we need (or given our reliance on EU staff presumably not) rather than whether people deserve them. My guess is that their are far more people capable of learning to be doctors than there are places, hence the incredibly high requirements.

Lots of teachers do PE and Maths noble, as you no doubt know.

Yes, and that's because there aren't enough qualified maths teachers to go around, so anyone with a free spot on their timetable could be roped into teaching maths.
Or indeed unqualified teachers with 4 GCSEs, as one job advert for a maths teacher required, according to another thread.

As I said, a kid capable of getting to Oxford to read medicine shouldn't need a lot of handholding. A bit of guidance, maybe, but not the teacher time that a marginal C student would need.

Oxford has been contextualizing for years. The Pre-Clinical Medicine entry stats still show the lowest GCSEs in each cycle to get a place taking contextualization into account. You asked the question, I answered.

There is something very ironic about the fact that in a thread specifically about secondary moderns, we are once again focusing on the needs of the very highest attainers.......

There's some sort of metaphor in there somewhere.........

No there isn't Bert no need to get mystic. It's important to look at any educational blueprint or system as a whole. After all, you always always say on the grammar threads: ask those in support of grammars if they are also in support of secondary moderns. Do as you would be done by etc.

Indeed Bertrand. What should I say to the lovely Y11 whose maths teacher has been replaced with a PE teacher?

OK - to get back to the theme of the thread. What is the plan for secondary moderns to be able to stretch the good mathematician(s) who failed the 11+ because they couldn't do verbal reasoning, or write a good essay or whatever that part of the test is? If you're saying their needs can't be met in a comp top set how will their needs be met in a secondary modern top set?

But that isn't down to the tiny number of grammars. There is a north south education divide with London and the Home Counties hoovering up teachers. Coastal areas and market towns are struggling and also struggling with recruitment. It isn't due to grammars.