I don't understand the lingo...

[mefifi]

There are so many terms that get banded around for types of schools, but I am going to stick my hand up and say I don't really understand. So here goes...

Academies - what are they and what's so bad about them?
Grammar schools - what's so great about them and why don't we have them in London? And what happens if you do have grammar schools but your child doesn't get int?
Independent vs. public school - are they the same thing, or does a public school trump and independent

I am sure there are more, but they are the ones I can think of right now.

Public Schools are special group of independent schools, they are usually older and more established; can be further divided into minor and major.

Grammar schools, can be good if your kid will pass the 11+, as then your child will be with other bright kids. They fall into two categories: normal and uper selectives. Normal take the top 25% or so from an area. Super selectives, cream off the top few % from a much wider area, you have to do very very well to get in, as there is much more competition for places. (Occasionally a school has Grammar in their name but they are not a Grammar at all.)
In a super selective area, the grammar probably doesn't have much effect on other secondaries, as lots of bright pupils will be going to the other schools (for a variety of reasons). In a normal grammar school are the brightest who can pass the exam are creamed off, so the other schools have fewer bright pupils, and they probably mainly have SEN (eg. dyslexia), or are late developers.
London doesn't have any (well not many, Redbridge does, and there are some close) because successive governments tried to abolish Grammars, the consensus seems to be to leave those that still exist.

Academies are independent state schools. Sometimes they have a sponsor, which is why some people don't like them. They have more freedoms, so teacher unions etc. might be worried. As they are not controlled by the LA, there are concerns about who is supervising them. Also they are new, and there are concerns over what will happen if something goes wrong.
My eldest DC are at an academy and I am not worried.

There are two types of academy. Some academies are failing schools which have been forced by the government to close down and reopen as an academy. They will have some sort of sponsorship from business.

The newer type of academy is a school which 'elected' to become an academy. Ofsted outstanding schools can apply to be an academy straight away, and are encouraged to do so. Schools which are not outstanding can also apply to be an academy but they need a partnership with an outstanding school to support their application. These academies do not have business sponsors.

Academies are outside LA control and manage their own budget and, to some extent, can set their own curriculum and timetable as it doesn't have to be cleared by the LA.

I say that schools 'elect' to become academies because the Tory government is very keen on them and thus has tried to force as many schools as possible to 'choose' the academy route. School budgets have been drastically cut and so academy status is seen as a way to get back some money as the LA doesn't control it any more.

The Tory plan appears to be to get as many schools outside LA control as possible, then start closing down the LAs. Academies have to buy in services which would have previously been provided by the LA and thus there is an opportunity for Tory friends to make wads of cash.

No one really knows what will happen if academies fail or go bankrupt. It's a bit worrying that schools are being forced to rush this decision (many schools were reluctant to convert but have because of the cash issue) given that it's all a bit of an experiment and no one knows what will happen in the long term.

A Public school is open to applications, through scholorships, to the general public. A private school is private, they decide who they want ( normally on the basis of fees paid, but they can turn anyone away)

Can't public schools decide who they want?

Asiastic - wikipaedia definition "The term 'public' was adopted from the Public Schools Act 1868 and refers to the fact that the school is open to the paying public from anywhere in the country, as opposed to, for example, a local school only open for local residents, or a religious school open only to those part of a certain church, or private education at home (usually only practical for the very wealthy, such as the nobility, who could afford tutors)."
However some schools are considered to be Public schools which do have a distinct religious nature (eg. Catholic ones such as Ampleforth). Most people consider members of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC) o be Public schools.
All private schools can decide who they take or don't take.

If you consider all members of the HMC to be public schools then you have over 250 public schools in the uk,so I think thats a bit misleading,there is no actual definition of a public school but they arent hard to spot,tend to be main entry at 13,most are long established,most will be boarding schools, most of the fee paying schools in this country are private schools, less than a 100 are Public,look for odd things do they play in the Cricketer cup,do they play in the Halford Hewitt,its that sort of thing,its sort of self selecting.
Prep school is another one that confuses people ,a prep school preps you for common entrance,its main leaving class will be 13,it will send to a variety of schools,if it meets those criteria its a prep school,if it doesnt its a private school with pretentions..however some preps do just prep for one(usually) public school,confusing isnt it..
The major -minor public school split is a bit simplistic ,Evelyn Waugh had it right in Decline and Fall-"We class schools,you see into four grades,Leading School,First-Rate,Good and School,Frankly School is pretty bad"[grin ]

Grammar schools do exist in some London boroughs eg Sutton, Bromley and Bexley.

Grammar schools are good if a) your child gets into one and b) if you don't care about what happens psychologically and in some cases educationally to the other 77% of children in the area. Or about social mobility.

Interesting that everyone calling for the return of grammar schools seem to be forgetting that they are also calling for the return of secondary moderns!

And, seeker not necessarily good even if your child did get into one - disadvantages might include not meeting all sorts of types of children, different options (sometimes narrower), maybe single sex, all dividing your child off from how "normal" society is. Of course lots of people want this, and that obviously perpetuates further social divides down the line: Your point about secondary moderns is well made.

Strictly speaking, the only Public Schools are the handful thus designated in the Public Schools Act of 1868.

In practice nowadays, it means the same as any independent private school, bar a bit of bitching.

It was not the intention or purpose of the 1868 act to define a public school,so to say "strictly speaking" is wrong.

What did it do other than define those schools as public schools and indeed define Public School?

I am always amazed by the snippiness of the public school parents on threads like this.
They tend to drone on about emphasise the confidence public school instills in their progeny and yet they come across as arrogant, bitchy, pedantic and supercilious on many, many threads where public schools are discussed.
Nor a great advertisement for public schools.

It was nothing to do with defining what a public school was or which schools were public schools,why would parliament get involved in such a thing.
Its purpose was to deal with "problems" at those schools and to legislate on the governance of the schoos,simple as that,nowhere does it say or imply anything more or less than that.

It named those schools as Public Schools, thus defining both them and the term. Other terms were in use for the other schools which existed at the time (eg grammar schools, church school, charitable schools).

Of course it named them as Public Schools,the title of the Act is a bit of a clue,what it didnt do as you have claimed is give a definition of what a Public SchOol is(or was) it did not as you claim "designate" the named schools as the only public schools.
The Act is available to read,if you can find anwhere in it where it defines a Public School or states that the named schools are the only schools that can be called Public schools feel free to provide the quote.

I think you are taking a different view of what in law constitutes a definition.

Edith,Its simple,The Act does not define in any way what a public school is or what Schools are Public schools,you stated that strictly speaking the only Public Schools are those listed in the Act,that is wrong,there is nothing more to say about it.
It is nothing to do with different interpretations of definition,your statement was plain wrong.

My ds has got an offer from hocherill to board but i must let them know this week but he likes gordons - promblem as gordons give out offers in march - & we have only applyed 2 2 schools - scared 2 turn down hockerill as its such a good school. But cant afford to lose deposit + a terms fee if gordons do accept him.
We live abroad. Hockerill is quite far from guardian where as gordons is easier for them 4 exeats.
Is it true that if i tell gordans that we have a firm offer from another sch that they will say take it + cross him off their list, as their criteria is armed forces get priority, which we are not

sorry im new + put my message on yr thead in error how can i put it as a new thead