Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think funding new grammar and faith schools is a bad idea.

451 replies

ConstantlyCold · 11/05/2018 08:05

Just that really. This will benefit pushy middle classes (like me) but not the kids that really need investing in.

Stupid idea.

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 11/05/2018 18:35

"Br who decree that only two papers was enough to prepare child for test grin"
I don't understand. The LEAs do. Why the grin?

RosaGertrudeJekyll · 11/05/2018 19:08

Exactly!

Mass intensive tutoring... But they think the support needed to help all dc in is a measly two papers and that's it! As I said a child may be super bright but not understand, know of exam technique so they would fail.

They are depriving dc of information to funnel them where they they want them to go

Bettyfood · 12/05/2018 07:26

DD1 found the timing hard in the test and just got in to the superselective grammar getting the lowest mark to get in. She had quite a lot of tutoring. So you might think she'd struggle at the school, compared with the superbrain peers who flew through the test? No. She gets top attainment and effort marks, is extremely mature and organised in her approach to class and homework and is doing very well. I don't think then a few years ago the state primary school she went to were teaching maths and English at a high enough level by the end of Y5 to do well in the 11+ at the start of Y6. I think the teaching is better now but it's still a stupid system and test.

ILikeMyChickenFried · 12/05/2018 07:29

We shouldn't need grammar schools. I don't know what the point in grammar schools is. Can someone explain it to me?

Bettyfood · 12/05/2018 07:41

I didn't choose to live here because of grammar schools. My theory is that a lot of parents of kids coming through the system now who like grammar schools had their own education in a middling comprehensive school where it was not cool to try hard and they were called swots, they did ok but in spite of school, not because of it.

ohreallyohreallyoh · 12/05/2018 07:47

Always we need 'special schools' to meet educational needs - except those of the brightest of course, who should be left to sink with the rest

Why should any child ‘sink’?

BertrandRussell · 12/05/2018 07:52

Being bright is not an additional need. HTH.

Spikeyball · 12/05/2018 07:58

In 15 years of teaching there is only one child I can think of who was so able that making sure they had work that challenged them was difficult. I taught lots that got A's across the board and went on to top universities but truly exceptional children are rare.

ScrubTheDecks · 12/05/2018 08:04

BettyFood, I think you are right. Or they went to Grammars and have no understanding of contemporary comprehensive education.
People compare Grammars now to comps of the 80s.

And there is so much myth and misinformation.

Polarisation in education doesn’t work well for anyone. Mostly what people really seem to want is segregation from disruptive children and troublemakers, and that is understandable. But all a school needs is s good mix and a critical mass of hardworking achieving kids (at all academic levels) and suddenly it is perfectly cool to be clever.

My kids go to a comp in S London in an area of high crime that has it’s fair share of problem kids. But their ethos does not prevail. They are seen as losers by the kids, and staff work very hard to turn them around and support them, and if that doesn’t work they are out.

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 08:34

People compare Grammars now to comps of the 80s.

What's the difference between comps now and in the 80s?

And there is so much myth and misinformation.

On both sides though. I see just as much "myth and misinformation" when people talk of grammar school children all being heavily tutored with pushy parents. There are pros and cons to grammars as well as comprehensives.

ocelot41 · 12/05/2018 08:36

I am fuming about it. My DS has SN - children like him need more investment to help him fulfil his potential, even though they won't be in the top percentiles.

goodbyestranger · 12/05/2018 08:42

ocelot41 every child should 'fulfil their potential', across the spectrum.

BertrandRussell · 12/05/2018 08:45

“There are pros and cons to grammars as well as comprehensives.”

There are definitely pros to individual grammar schools-some of them are fantastic. There are absolutely no pros to the selective system.

There are definitely cons to some individual comprehensive schools-some of them are crap. There are absolutely no cons to the comprehensive system.

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 08:53

There are definitely pros to individual grammar schools-some of them are fantastic. There are absolutely no pros to the selective system.

I think that depends on whether you are talking about the grammar, secondary modern school system (I would agree there are probably no pros) or whether you are talking about a few very selective grammars and comprehensives which is the system in most areas. My children go to a very selective grammar and I can certainly see some pros for the children who go there. The fact that some children go to the grammars has little effect on the comprehensives.

ScrubTheDecks · 12/05/2018 08:56

All schooling is different from how it was in the 80s.
The introduction of the NC, much more focus on behaviour management, more use of setting and streaming, more ‘bespoke pathways ‘: EBacc /BTec etc.

I used to visit many comps in the 80s that felt like No Go Areas. (in Hackney, Lambeth etc) I can’t think of one that is like that now. (I visit about 20 a year). Even the ones with a reputation for being rough have lesson times under control and polite well behaved young people in tne corridors. If they get a bit OTT and forget their manners and you politely and gently, with humour, pull
them up on it, they say ‘Ooh, sorry miss’. I’m not saying there aren’t difficult students who treat staff rudely, even violently. But it is totally different from what I saw in some schools in the 80s.

I believe that most of the current advantages of Grammar schools can be dealt with by increasing investment in good comps, and by doing that we would be giving more children the chance to be fruitful and fulfilled citizens.

My slight, musical, academic quirky, quiet eldest is most likely of to Oxbridge following A levels, because of, not despite, our local comp.

ScrubTheDecks · 12/05/2018 08:57

Dungeon: what are the advantages that could not be delivered in top sets of a good comp?

Iceweasel · 12/05/2018 08:58

It’s not just tutoring. I could tell you pretty accurately which children in a Reception class were going to pass the 11+ by looking at the brand of their shoes and the contents of their lunch boxes. It is much more complicated than grammar supporters would like to think.
£10 shoes, Vegemite sandwich and an apple? Out of interest, should my child have passed?

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 09:00

All schooling is different from how it was in the 80s.
The introduction of the NC, much more focus on behaviour management, more use of setting and streaming, more ‘bespoke pathways ‘: EBacc /BTec etc.

The comprehensives I went to in the 80s had streaming and good behaviour. At that time, many of the children with bad behaviour went to specialist schools didn't they?

WhakaMole · 12/05/2018 09:05

This only applies to urban areas.. In the proverbial MN's leafy towns and villages, you can be smug because life is good and all kids get into a good school.

My children have 2 options for secondary school:

  • a comp that has a "take all applicants" catchment when every other comp around here is 300 metres tops. The school only offers vocational A levels. Attainment is much worse than the national average.
  • a selective school for which they need to sit an exam, and be tutored for.

I don't love the idea of making 10 and 11 year olds do an exam but as long as I have this "choice", each of my kids in turn will sit the extrance exam for the selective school.

BertrandRussell · 12/05/2018 09:06

"The comprehensives I went to in the 80s had streaming and good behaviour."
Really? I though the reason so many mumsnetters are virulently anti comprehensive is because their own childhoods were blighted by chair throwing knuckle draggers.....

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 09:07

Dungeon: what are the advantages that could not be delivered in top sets of a good comp?

Not all the comprehensives are good though are they in areas with or without grammar schools? Some of the children at DDs' school come from areas with very low performing comprehensive schools. I live in an area with good comprehensives but even then, I think the grammar has been better for my DDs. When they were at primary they didn't have to work hard to be at the top but being at a grammar and being surrounded by so many academic children including (some extremely) has really made them raise their game.

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 09:08

Really? I though the reason so many mumsnetters are virulently anti comprehensive is because their own childhoods were blighted by chair throwing knuckle draggers.....

There was obviously variation as I'm sure there is today.

ScrubTheDecks · 12/05/2018 09:10

The people I have seen defending Grammars in response to their 80s comps talk of things that I don’t see as being a problem in contemporary comps. Though of course there are still bad comps. That need investment, not cuts.

Children who run the course of interventions are still removed to smaller specialist units, yes.

Academies seem to move them out very fast, in fact, without giving them much attention or chance, IMO.

ScrubTheDecks · 12/05/2018 09:14

Dungeon: my kids raise their game against others in the top sets. There are some seriously gifted kids in our top sets. Including some whose parents would never have thought to have put them in for the 11+ for the super selectives 2 buses away.

And including my summer born late developer who probably wouldn’t have passed as a 10 yo but is now heading for top Unis.

Dungeondragon15 · 12/05/2018 09:21

Dungeon: my kids raise their game against others in the top sets. There are some seriously gifted kids in our top sets. Including some whose parents would never have thought to have put them in for the 11+ for the super selectives 2 buses away.?

There won't generally be a high number of "seriously gifted" kids in a comprehensive though will there because by definition they make up a very small proportion of the population. If there are many at your children's comprehensive then that would be very unusual, particularly if there are superselectives in your area.