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

[ConstantlyCold]

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

Stupid idea.

Well we are not affluent and I can't afford tuition and we are putting dd forward for 11+. The local school is actually very good so we are lucky but out of 7 or so schools we looked at dd and I preferred this particular grammar. I like the choice.

Re faith schools I think it depends how extreme they are. My dd is in one and in year 2 said she doesn't belive in god etc. One re lessons a week.. Dc who have hours and hours of brainwashing different story.

I like choice. I also like how they want to address getting more people from fsm in.

It will shake things out. The thing is not enough is done to tackle bad behaviour in some schools.. Or help dc who have no clue in maths etc.

Not sure why our ones seem so well funded , but i know that parents also donate and things, so maybe they are just a bit luckier than other schools.

I am just against money being found for these kinds of things when other areas and schools are falling apart. Keeps the tory voters happy i guess.

How many of that 36% BR are in the top sets at high school?

Surely if 36% should be at the grammar then 36% should be in the top sets at high school.

Studies show bright kids aren't making good enough progress and reaching their full potential at high school. What is being done in high schools to ensure that 36% are in top sets and stay there?

Are your grammars taking part in measures to increase access to pp kids like other areas? If not they won't be able to expand.

There might be a point in grammar schools if there were two distinct types of children, "academic" and "non-academic". But there aren't. There's a continuum, with most in the middle. And a completely artificial dividing point between those who go to a grammar school and those who don't. Once there, the facilities for the grammar school children are so much better.

The children who benefit from a grammar school system are
a) the very brightest
b) moderately bright children whose parents can throw resources at their education (whether this be tutors or extra curricular activities)

Moderately bright children whose parents are unable to afford extra tuition etc are gravely disadvantaged. And this is a far greater group than the small number of extremely bright.

Equality of opportunity isn't just a matter of giving opportunity to 1-2% of the very brightest of the disadvantaged. Equality of opportunity hasn't happened until a mediocre child of disadvantaged parents has the same life chances as a mediocre child of middle and upper classes.

Well what’s the alternative offered? At the moment Labour’s position seems to be to carry on with the current position of the standard of your schooling being determined by your parents wealth.

This suits them because it allows their middle class Southern ideological voters to do their normal thing of espousing socialist values whilst buying an expensive house near a good school while lecturing poor people who have to send their kids to shit schools on how good this is for social mobility because it’s good for their children.

If a genuine lottery system with decent transport for children between their area and school was brought in I would support a comprehensive system.

But of course Labour would never do that. Because all their middle class voters of the type of many virtue signalling on here would drop voting Labour like a shot if they thought little Felix and Florence were actually going to end up in a classroom full of Lily-Maes and Alfies.

There should be no money given on the basis of someone having an imaginary friend.

Sorry, toomany, I don’t understand your post. Of course the 36% pp children at the high school shouldn’t all be at the grammar.

But if the 11+ was the value free test for potential that grammar supporters claim it to be then the PP %age at both schools would be roughly the same. Breaking in mind their proximity and more or less identical catchment,

Oh. And it suits Labour that their working class northern voters continue to have shit educations at shit schools. The worse their education is the less likely they are to stop voting for a pig wearing a red rosette and actually question what the fuck Labour has done for them recently except tell them if their (white) kid does badly at school it’s all their own fault and they don’t deserve better.

You have noticed that Labour hasn’t been in power for a while, haven’t you? Oh an putting white in brackets doesn’t dilute racism...........

Bertrand, in case you haven’t noticed Labour are the opposition who are supposed to be offering alternatives to current policy and their current policy is standard of education based on parent’s wealth.

And I’m glad you think that’s racist. Because it was a Labour education minister who said exactly that specifically about WHITE children. You won’t think it’s racist now you know one of your darling fucking Corbynistas said it now will you?

Labour were in power for a long enough time to do something about schools. Yet my takeaway was Blair, and dianne turned thier backs on ordinary schools and got their dc into unusual schools from average. Ie Blair top stated school and dianne, private.

Surely if a certain type of learner is out of normal schools the focus can be on those who learn a different way? To bring them along.

DS is at the grammar school.

We didn’t have a tutor. He’s one of the ‘poor’ ones. Mostly middle class I’d say.

However, all the schools here are shit. We had to do whatever we could to get him in.

Even though we have one at grammar, that extra 50 million someone has just found, should go to state schools.

It was Angela Rayner who specifically said that white working class boys fail because they ‘haven’t adapted’ and ‘don’t push themselves’ and their under achievement was due to their ‘culture’.

Imagine saying that about black or Asian children? You’d have a fucking fit if someone did bertrand.

Come on bertrand, are you going to admit it’s Corbynista Angela Rayner who is the big ol’ racist?

My son goes to a RC primary school and starts and RC high school in September I had him baptised etc because the schools in my town are absolutely shit and the faith schools are better. If the comprehensive system was a fair one or all children in all parts of the country had the opportunity to sit the 11+ than I would have sent him to our local school but as it isn't and the hasent been any grammar schools in my town for at least 30 years ,and I just want my son to go to a decent school

Personally I think all funding for faith schools should be abolished. Education should be secular and of equal quality for all. It disgusts me that in 2018 children are still being indoctrinated into this religious bullshit, especially before they are neurologically capable of fully rational thought.

Oh. And it suits Labour that their working class northern voters continue to have shit educations at shit schools

Would you like to identify those shit schools?

If only there was an 11+ style test which a child couldn't be tutored for. Until that day grammar schools as basically cut price private schools for the families who can pay enough to train the DCs up.

I go against the grain on MN and feel there is a place for faith schools BUT I think the money would be better spent on schools which benefit everyone regardless of religion or ability.

there was a list of something like the 280 worst high schools in the UK I think there were four from my local northern working class town .

The term 'shit schools' is thrown around very casually these days. And it means different things to different people - but most often, it translates as 'schools full of shit children from shit families, with whom I don't want my child to associate'.

That's what the Conservatives are tapping into with their nonsensical talk about 'choice' and 'diversity'.

@sashh top 2% of the population academically. She has an iq of 144 (she takes after my father not myself). She has a natural talent and I've never had to coach, tutor or push her in any way.

My kids' school is the 'worst school' in our region according to that kind of list x2boys. Because they are based on deceptive data. In fact, it's a fantastic school, where my children are getting an excellent education from brilliant teachers; as well as growing up side by side with a genuinely mixed cohort of peers.

because socialists like to keep the working classes in their little boxes where they can be controlled.

Bollocks. Socialists want opportunity for everyone, whatever "class" you are.

You do realise it's ok to be working class? It's downright condescending to suggest that those who are are controlled by the state.

I'd love a link to Angela Rayner's actual words! And there is often discussion about how black boys are underachieving in school too.......

would you like to identify these shit schools

Okikoki.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/englands-worst-schools-revealed-your-11913069.amp