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).

I think that super selective would be OK-I would expect only 1 or 2 DCs per primary school and it would be easy to get right-anyone in the school would be able to tell you who they would be-they wouldn't need to have exams they simply shine out. If no one shines out then you don't have any of them at the super selective. However, thinking about it, you would still need the test to check that DCs that shine out at their school would shine out at any. I think 6% is too high-only 2% would be about right.

I agree DownstairsMixUp-I feel sorry for those who have to move to Kent.
The problem with super selectives are that some, in rural parts, would have to cover huge areas in order to get enough pupils.

What's wrong with covering a large area? It works for the school DD1 attends. It reduces the possibility of entrenching privilege in middle class enclaves of course....

Seeker, I'm away from home for work at the moment and functioning through dodgy now it works now it doesn't 3G but to answer your point from yesterday before the signal goes again - the intake of a school is only one determinant of the 'results' of the school. Schools in desireable or well connected, logistically, areas, will find it easier to recruit top teachers, for example. Schools in silly locations, however selective they may be, will find their pool of potential teaching recruits smaller. Grammar schools in areas with a disproportionate number of private schools offering good bursaries may find it difficult to recruit either great staff or indeed the very best pupils. Grammar schools in fully selective areas have a different vibe than Grammar schools in almost completely comprehensive LEAs. It's not just about the demographics of the area, there are many other factors too. I'm not at all surprised that Kent doesn't do much better or much worse than areas of similar demographics with only comps - because the Kent system clearly no longer works in the way the grammar system was originally intended to work (and this is good, since under the original premise, kids at sec mod weren't expected to be in any way academic). The world has changed from the 1950s. I don't believe that many people who support selective education would welcome their area turning into Kent. Finally - the 5 A-C is a very very blunt measure. 5Cs is not the same as 12 As.

The wide area works in areas of fairly dense populations e.g. The Thames Valley - the reason I think it might have problems is somewhere like Cumbria where the travelling distance is too long.

It defeats the object if you have to say that somewhere like Keswick has to take 20% to get enough pupils to be viable.

I'm not familiar with Keswick. It would be fair to say I'm not familiar with anywhere north of White Hart Lane or, at a pinch, Enfield. However, I think where I live is not densely populated, and our school doesn't have to drop it out to the top 20% to 'get enough pupils to be viable'. It does take kids from a 50 mile radius (actually more than 50 miles now I think, based on the info about bus trauma for the last time we were doing a creditable impression of Atlantis)

I think it is important to remember though that just because a kid is in the top percentiles for some types of intelligence, doesn't necessarily mean they will perform hugely well in GCSE type exams, especially when SEN conditions are in play. that doesn't though mean that they don't deserve to be given the opportunity to access an education appropriate to their needs, even if they may well meltdown in the actual formal GCSE/A level situation.

Keswick is like many places- small and a long way from a large town - you would have similar problems in any rural place, like Norfolf.

Norfolk

I live in a small rural village and 20 odd miles from the nearest large town and our superselective grammar (which is three miles away in the opposite direction from the large town) does tolerably well. In that's it's ranked either top or nearly top most years as it has been for years. This large area thing is really not a problem with the important exception that travelling in from some distance away costs money. Quite a lot of money really. That is the single most difficult to overcome deterrent for those on a low income, or even a middling income if there are multiple DC in a single family who get in. The government could put that right of course, but it won't. There just isn't the political will, or courage.

Why do you want Grammar Schools restricted to the top 6%. All it would do would make them,the preserve of the Super Brigtht and "RICH" because believe me, the rich will find a way. The "COACHING" Culture would become even more intense, surely we need as many "ORDINARY" people as possible to get an Academic Education,because how many kids from "BOG STANDARD" Comprehensives join the Establishment,the odd Grammar School kid gets in to the Establishment. I went to a Comprehensive School in a very prosperous area in the North west. The School was used as a place of refuge by kids from the nearby Selective area. The Comprehensive School that deemed me to thick to take any Academic Exams, the School that they were so desperate,to avoid "THE MODERN" is a far superior School in every way. I had to laugh a few years ago,when the Comprehensive got a grade 4 from ofsted,and the Modern got a grade 1 because a School is a Modern does not mean it cannot get kids in to good Universities,and because a school is a Comprehensive does not mean it will enable kids with Educational Difficulties to achieve. Thankfully both my niece and newphew have both had a Grammar School education, my niece is currently reading languages at a Russell Group uni, my newphew doing is G.C.S.E "s . if you were to effectively kill 100 of the 160 Grammar Schools,you would just be creating more "TOFFS" in the esablishment.

I think you might need to read the whole thread, beatback......

SEEKER. I think it is "IMPOSSIBLE" to stop Tutoring of any system, whether its C.E.M Verbal reasoning, Maths or English, that is just how it is. After 2 or 3 years of the new "SYSTEM" the Tutors will work it out, but the solution to the problem is not scraping, Grammar Schools, maybe the State should identify kids from humble backgrounds with Academic potential, and give them"TUTORING". the pupil Premium could be used, that could possibly even things up, hopefully giving more ordinary kids a chance of joining the "ESTABLISHMENT"

@yellow - our bus is a grand a year for the first child. :(

Exotic - by the sounds of it Keswick is no different to the area served by Dd1s school. Except it will get more attention from central government and have a better rail service. Because everywhere else does.

Russians yes quite. And that's a huge amount. The government could offer subs if it chose, but all colour of governments are terrified of pro grammar policy backlash. UKIP appears to claim it's not, but no doubt we'll never see (which may have it's own compensation).

You probably use a different train line from me. Mine is lovely. Flower baskets on every station although a bit weavy and wendy for those in a hurry I suppose.

Yellow I suspect yours hasn't been diverting via what the government alleges is the capital of our 'region' (hollow laugh) since before Easter. Adding over an hour to journeys to London. It's back to normal now though so I will have a nice lie in on Friday. Well, I say lie in. Still have to get up at 5:30. But I'll be in the office 45 mins earlier.

The bus is a huge amount of money, really. If I was saving that every year, in a tax efficient way, it would pay a nice chunk of fees etc at uni time.

You should come our way then Russians, it's just so mellow. Isn't Waterloo better anyhow? (yes sorry, derailed :)).

If you only have the top 2% the rich and heavily tutored can't make it unless they are super bright in the first place. You can have any amount of money but you can't get an average or moderately above average into the top 2%. They are bright enough to stand out and everyone would be able to tell you who they were. Because it is a small number you would heavily use school reports and an exam and then easily have an interview where it would be fairly simple to throw in a question that they have never come across- the heavily tutored won't cope with it. As soon as you get above 5% there are too many to interview thoroughly and it is possible to tutor well enough to pass. I would expect it to be only one or two a school and they would really stand out.

Teachers may try and keep it hidden but ask any child who is the cleverest DC in their class and they will know!

If it was 2% you would just create "ACADEMIC TOFFS". The system has got to be able to Educate reasonably bright kids,and they is nothing wrong with 20 to 30% of kids depending,on the L.A going to Grammar Schools. You have just got to make the other Schools better at achieving,the correct results for their kids. Grammar Schools are desperately needed for bright kids in inner city areas,so possibly you could have Boarding Grammar"s for them taking,them out of the corrosive inner city Schools that eventually bring them down to the other kids level.

My, what a "LOT" of "CAPITALS"!

The fact that i am able to be barely "LITERATE" after the education i had is a miracle, i am totally self taught, i have not one single "ACADEMIC" qualifaction to my name,and if you had the "EDUCATION" i have had you would not be as articulate as me. What my inproper use of capital letters as got to do about the subject,i dont know. just be thankful that you were able to go to university.

Sorry i cant spell QUALIFACATION i was not taught spelling or grammar.