To wish the extra funding for grammar schools was £500 million rather than £50 million.

[letstalk2000]

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/government-gives-16-grammar-schools-in-england-a-share-of-£50m-funding-pot-to-expand/ar-BBQqmk6

Instead of just 16 grammar schools sharing the pot of £50 million . It should be the full 164 of grammar schools hence the £500 million requirement.

Grammar schools as the flagships of the state education sector should have all the resources they require . In order to ensure a world class education is available to those that can make use of one.

I am not stupid and realise to make statements like this on here puts me on par with Nigel Farage or Katie Hopkins in the hearts and minds of the cohort which inhabits this parish !
However, I have a belief that if you have limited resources available you should make sure what you have got does not get wasted; i.e. put it in to areas such as selective education.

After all there are only about 220 good secondary schools in England with 164 of them being grammar schools. The other 56 being de facto grammar schools despite posing as comprehensives. This proves you cant be successful if you are all things to all people !

I’ve just toured local senior schools ready to make a choice for my ds. I met dedicated head teachers trying to lead schools in a pittance of a budget. All I could do was feel sorry for them.
I’d rather all the money wasted on academies went directly to Lea schools.
I’m normally a Tory voter but whoever thinks academies are a good idea should hang their heads in shame.
I went to a grammar despite being a free school meals child, so I do support them, but frankly we need to kill the academy policy first.

However, over half of the students in her class attending private school at primary level. I do not agree with this. I personally think students should only be admitted if they come from a state primary school

I’ve discussed this on another thread. But if that rule is to be implemented, then primary school admissions needs to be addressed.

Just to add to my post ⬆️

The school informs us that the money is to be spent on expanding the school in order to admit more pupils each yr.

I personally think students should only be admitted if they come from a state primary school

In addition to level the playing field, surely that should apply to children who are tutored too?

Yep non tutored state primary pupils is a good starting point!

there is a high proportion of SEN at two of my dc grammar school, not on EHCP

I know that EHCP are increasingly hard to get, but what level of SEN is being talked about here?

I think there is a real crisis in schools at the moment with children with complex needs falling between the cracks with regards to mainstream and special school....these children are deemed 'too able' for the majority of special schools, but flounder and fail in mainstream.

In our area 3 special schools are being closed. There are plans to open 2 special schools in their place - however the children from one side of the county will have vast travelling times. The children who access the special schools at present, who have mild to moderate learning disabilities and complex needs, will be expected to go to mainstream in future with a vague promise of 'extra support'....despite the fact that the whole mainstream environment may be unsuitable. These are the children being failed, and it is happening now and being labelled as 'improvement'.

It is a fucking shit show.

This is testament to a selective approach to education.

No it isn't, it's a testament to repeating a year, something comps can't do.

Of course someone can go from a 2 to a 6 in 2 years, particularly if one of those years is a repeat.

Only 220 good secondary schools in England? Don't spread such bullshit.

There are roughly 3,400 (maintained) secondary schools in England. Ofsted's annual report from 2016/17 (published on 13 December 2017, so I expect the 2017/18 report will be out soon) states that at their most recent inspections (up to 31 August 2017), 23% of these ranked outstanding, and 56% as good. So that's 79% of English second schools ranking as good or outstanding, so that's a little under 2,700 of them.

You are entitled to your opinion, but don't spread misinformation.

In addition to level the playing field, surely that should apply to children who are tutored too?

Yes.

In my daughters case we had to tutor. We did so for an hour once a week. This was because of a high number of students being admitted from the local private school across the road. They were tutored (by their private school) for 4 years prior to sitting the exam.

If private school students were exempt from applying, the need to tutor would not have arisen.

*In my daughters case we had to tutor. We did so for an hour once a week. This was because of a high number of students being admitted from the local private school across the road. They were tutored (by their private school) for 4 years prior to sitting the exam.

If private school students were exempt from applying, the need to tutor would not have arisen*

Ah so a very specific situation.

Out of DD’s prep, 5 took the exam for the grammar (it’s out of catchment, we’re not in a grammar area) and only DD passed.

Exam preparation at DD’s school didn’t start until September of Year 6, so after the exam for the grammar.

There are very few private preps in the area, so the vast majority of the intake is from state school.

Just to add we didn’t tutor.

The entire case for grammar schools is misinformation, and based on Cyril Burt's fraudulent data.

Grammar schools prioritise a very narrow set of academic skills - that means skills needed by people who will become academics.
Not engineers, physios, programmers etc. just teachers and professors

Nonsense - my nearest boys' grammar school had at least 35 students start engineering degrees this year, 12 computer science degrees (and 17 medicine) - the girls' grammar school had 7 students start engineering degrees, 5 computer science (and 20+ medicine).

Why should grammar schools get all the money?

• Grammar schools prioritise a very narrow set of academic skills - that means skills needed by people who will become academics. Not engineers, physios, programmers etc. just teachers and professors* You can't tell at 11 who the future medics, lawyers, politicians and academics are going to be.

I went to public school for Sixth Form and anecdotally found a lot of my contemporaries became academics as they had family wealth so wages weren't a consideration.

'Why ! Because a child has SENs does not mean the child is automatically likely to be disruptive or violent !

Behaviour of such that leads to expulsion has as much to do with parents, environment expectations as the special needs of the child'

Children with SEN without an EHCP are 6 times more likely to be excluded than children with no SEN. If grammar schools actually did admit higher than average numbers of children with SEN - without an EHCP - it would be apparent in their numbers of excluded pupils.

If 79% of all schools are good we really shouldn't be wasting our time on education matters. This being as they are so many other pressing matters around the world.

What absolute rubbish that there are 79% of schools graded as good or excellent. I think the number of schools graded as excellent or good seems to go up with every new government by coincidence.

I have an idea why don't Ofsted (Government) reduce requirements so much that every school gets an outstanding rating 100% or wait until Corbyn gets in for that one....

With regards to the possibility of increasing from a level 2 in Maths/English to a level 6 by repeating a year for a SEN child in a comprehensive !

Well its about as likely as me winning £4 Million on a £10 Lottery Scratch Card .

"I have an idea why don't Ofsted (Government) reduce requirements so much that every school gets an outstanding rating 100% or wait until Corbyn gets in for that one.."

But your own data was very flawed. In fact the OFSTED criteria changes to demonstrate tougher criteria each time it is moved on.

"With regards to the possibility of increasing from a level 2 in Maths/English to a level 6 by repeating a year for a SEN child in a comprehensive ! "

It happens, people who repeat years often improve vastly, for a number of reasons.

"What absolute rubbish that there are 79% of schools graded as good or excellent"

Actually this is the data.

Your posts are lacking in critical thinking and factual analysis.

Bachet - you didn't have to tutor your child, you chose to

But if education is in crisis like we all know it is how do schools continually rise to every more demanding requirements to achieve such ratings. Secondly Ofsted saying 79% of schools are good is the equivalent of suggesting there are no failures at GCSE.

Whether I have an factual evidence to back up my statements well … lies dammed lies and statistics..

any factual evidence..

these children are deemed 'too able' for the majority of special schools, but flounder and fail in mainstream

Because there is no help.

Dd went to a private specialised senior school that had a predominance of pupils with dyslexia.

With the help that she got there, including all the relevant testing she did get a handful of GCSEs and the confidence to be able to proceed.

Ds otoh I ended up home schooling because although Ds has dyslexia and dysgraphia and couldn’t read there was absolutely no provision for him or anyone else who was having difficulties.

Just little things like the teacher actually reading aloud what they had written on the whiteboard

Equally just allowing Ds to do the spelling test that was for those that English was a second language where he would have learned the word how to write it and how to spell it and that was what he wrote down in the test rather than having to write a sentence with a similar sounding word which completely confused him.

I don’t know if that way of doing the spelling test was just a trial to see if it was a good idea. But it was definitely not the same as when dd went through the same class 2 years before.

Schools are great if your child can keep up.

If they don’t understand something or just have a blind spot in a certain subject then there is no help.

It is not possible to reduce the schools budget by 10% in real terms and continually improve standards. This as suggested by the higher number of schools rated good year on year by Ofsted.

As a product of a grammar school, I think that funding should be focussed on comprehensive and non-grammars in grammar areas. You can have all the 'smart' kids with your latin classes and chess clubs at a grammar - you don't need much cash to run those. Focus the money on the kids who don't have parents to fight for them or who struggle and need extra resources - that is how you make the biggest difference to the education levels of the entire population. Maybe then we'd get more true comprehensives.