11+ being scrapped

[musu]

At one school in Essex here

Interesting development which follows on from Bucks CC overhauling their 11+ and trying to make it tutor proof (although everyone I know in Bucks is still employing tutors).

Why lose a portion of the day ferrying the child to a different school, when you could just have a school in which there's a top set where s/he can do the same?

IF I SAID THE SKY WAS BLUE YOU WOULD SAY IT WAS RED. You are obviously commited to comprehensive education. The great thing about a democratic forum is that, can discuss different opinions without war breaking out.

You can discuss different opinions without war breaking out.

Maybe the syrians should join mumsnet.

Eh?

There's a wide range of performance amongst the remaining grammars beatback, they don't all do that well. Also, it's completely unworkable to dot off to a different school for a particular subject. It might sound good in theory but it would never work in practice. Timetabling issues and transport would get in the way.

OK accepted yelow tip. But we have to find a way forward and not keep thinking its the 1960s where secondary schools are concerned. Its 2013 surely we can come up with a selective system that works for all, those at the top those in the middle and those at the bottom. I accept that in the 1960s if you went to a secondary school , you were designated to be factory class at best.My own experiences in the 80s at a comprehensive was worse, but it does not mean it has to be that way now.

beatback you're right that I'm committed to comprehensive education, but truly I'm not arguing black is white just because you say it isn't! I'm arguing for my point, not 'against' you!

As for war breaking not breaking out: well, quite, but you're the one doing all the shouting you know!

And it is all about a mere 164 grammar schools- a tiny number.

A big question if you live in Kent,or other pockets, but irrelevant to most of the country.

EXOTIC FRUITS. I think you could say the story is bigger, than the sum of its parts. However in other parts of the country is not the story instead about private vs state.

No, of course not. Only 7% of the children in the country go to private school.

Most childrengo to comprehensive schools. Most children do well. Only UKIP openly wants to reintroduce grammar schools, and even they have no answer when asked whether that means they also support secondary modern schools.

What do you think happens in all the areas where there are no grammar schools? Do you think that children all fail?

All of this shows just how popular grammar schools are. Extensive tutoring I dont necessarily agree with but who on earth scrapped grammar schools???

BTW - I live in a grammar school area (Bucks) but went private as I didnt like the tutoring, smug middle classes saying they didnt believe in private education but did pay over the top for a house in the grammar school catchment area.

Who scrapped grammar schools?

Possibly people who realised that they were also scrapping secondary moderns?

Its blooming Labour - who thought everyone should all be equal (apart from them and their children of course!).

I went to secondary school the first year grammars were scrapped. Complete chaos and went to a sec modern school that was complete rubbish!

Grammar schools are in great demand. Please bring them back...

They werent for my children but I dont see what we have now is doing anyone a favour.

Please can you address the point that you will be bringing back secondary moderns too?

The Tories did quite a lot of grammar school scrapping too!

I thought it was the Tories who scrapped most of them?

But sec moderns were rubbish (if that question was to me). Now learning a trade for the less academically inclined would be a good idea.

What I am saying is that look at the people applying for grammar school places, its a very popular option. Seeker - even you chose it and I am not having a go at you. I would have in the same circumstances tbh.

If there were more grammar schools wouldnt it calm down a bit.

If there were more grammar schools, would there not also have to be more secondary moderns though?

seeker. I'd have no qualms about re-introducing secondary moderns. Except that I wouldn't call them by that term, since it's got such negative connotations, which is why you keep demanding a response. And I'd like to see the new alternatively named secondary moderns fit for purpose in providing an appropriate education for the remaining 90%. Which would almost certainly mean a further subdivision of children, geared to their talents and needs. One important reform that's required (but almost certainly not going to happen) is grammar provision right across the UK. It's merely a recognition that people are different, which is not a revelatory proposition.

"recognition that people are different, which is not a revelatory proposition."

Of course it's not. That's why you have comprehensives with rigorous setting. I genuinely can't see why that's a problem.

MN posters get it all out of proportion- about 3% go to grammar schools and 7% to private schools therefore the rest of the country is not state v private- because most people can't afford it. What we should be doing is getting poor comprehensives up to the level of the best, because most children will get comprehensive education.

Actually handcream it was both Conservative and labour. Both for different reasons.First the unofficial reasons Labour realized that if Grammar Schools became succesful I.E taking working class kids out,of their communties it would diminish the socialist vote,they were frightend that the most socialist thing would be to succesful. Conservative two reasons first to save money,the second was that toffs within the tory party were very worried by the influx of talented oiks,that were threatening their god given right to places in the establishment. Now the official reasons Labour decided that it is unjust and incorrect,to judge a childs Academic abilty at 11 years of age,and that it particulary discrimanated "Working class kids".Conservative in certain conservative areas the party came under local pressure,to make sure that "LITTLE JOHNNIE OR JEMINAH" would not have to face the prospect of failing. I say in some conservative areas,because in other Conservative areas Kent, Buck,s Essex ,Trafford ,Wirral, they decided that why get rid of good schools because the secondary moderns are bad. Trafford is an area that has managed to make a fully selective system,I.E 30% selection while still having kids who fail going to secondary schools,that still achieve up to "80%" 5 A TO C INC ENGLISH AND MATHS. the fact that Bucks and kent cant achieve this is a sad indictment on kent and bucks, if you were to ask a non selective school in trafford are you a "SECONDARY MODERN" they would tell you do Secondary modern schools get kids reguarly to russell group universities. The selective system really works in trafford and to a lesser extent on the wirral.

"Secondary modern schools get kids reguarly to russell group universities"

I would really like some evidence to support this. I want it to be true- but..........