Genuine question - why do some people have a problem with the grammar school system thread 2

[octopusinastringbag]

Original thread full so here goes.

I think the people who are concerned about aspirational/non-aspirational need to trust their DCs to select friends who are like minded. Generally it is my experience that they find their own groups who are similar to them, especially with setting and especially once the GCSEs have started.

Indeed Talkingpeace.I suspect they have far higher levels of compliance amongst their population.

However, when they cannot deal with a child in the egalitarian way that is Finnish, I suspect they remove the children quietly and deftly from the schools. Those of wealthier parents sometimessend their DC here ( we have had some in my school) but those pupils have been clearly SEN and not disruptive at all.

I suspect they remove the children quietly and deftly from the schools
and do what with them?
as they do not vanish unless one is very into eugenics

see those in favour of segregating their kids never give a moments thought to those they wish to be segregated away from : apart from tutting at their later antics in the Daily Heil.

Grammar schools were useful in the immediate post war period in levelling the playing field a bit for some kids, but ultimately these days they represent business class education for some kids with clued up, affluent parents able to have them tutored, whilst other capable and interested children in other situations have to make do with a no frills education as a consequence. And the irony is that the ones getting the expensive education with their middle class peers don't necessary achieve more academically in the longer term as a consequence, and the provision of grammar schools certainly doesn't lead to an improved scientific and knowledge base throughout the UK. Complete waste of money and effort.

You could perfectly well have a comprehensive schooling system that addressed the needs of bright/academically inclined/highly intelligent/keen kids properly, if you funded it at the right level. There are many examples of this in areas without grammar schools. Except in the UK we like to play this game of competition, status, class and prestige as a method of rationing education and filtering pupils from very early ages, even though in actual fact there is no need to do this. It's a hangover from the first half of the 20th century when the private schooling sector was enormous, and nepotism rife.

We also fritter about 20% of the education budget on paying lawyers, accountants and private businesses to tinker about with the paperwork associated with schooling, rather than schooling itself, which means all state schools are underfunded as a consequence.

It says a lot about how bloody ignorant most grammar school graduates are that they can't see the archaic, unhelpful system for what it is, and get rid of it.

You can't BE SEN. You may have SEN or an SEN condition. Or you may be dyspraxic, dyslexic, autistic. But you can't BE Special Educational Needs.

Episode 9. I think.... Steaming..... CRINGE HILL COMPREHENSIVE RULES
OK...... Educating Marmalade 30 years ahead of its time ..........

GEORGE ORWELL EAT YOUR HEART OUT.....

Yeah, I read that one. Superglue, cock.

I really do not know. I presume they have places where they go, or they are home schooled on individualised plans with home tutors? They are very quiet about it. I wouldassume that to be a way forward. But as you say, the parents are not the same as we have here. The culture is different.

My school, being the kind it is, manage pupils we cannot deal with into the state system ( local comp) in the certain knowledgethat they will find their niche there and still get an education - of sorts ( saving their parents a few bob too). The reason we do that is purely economic. If we keep a disruptive pupil it will cost us ten other pupils as parents pull their DC out and send them to schools where the behaviour is not tolerated.

My school is very strong on discipline.

The comprehensive depends entirely on tne area it recruits from and the attitudes of the parents. Thankfully my children didn't go to one where 80% were disruptive and didn't want to learn.
The behaviour at my secondary modern was excellent, the Head was passionate about turning out good citizens and it had the best reputation in town for behaviour.
I do think that people are incredibly naive about behaviour in grammar schools, some are lacking in pastoral care. Bright children can be very clever in that bullying is harder to spot, they take care not to be obvious.
Some are good, some are not. I know parents who were determined to get their daughter into a single sex grammar school and it was a nightmare for her because she didn't 'fit'.
All children deserve to learn without disruption. Not being academic doesn't mean you don't want to learn, are badly behaved or your education doesn't matter!! It is just as important to educate the average child to the best of their ability, they deserve the best too.

I couldnt agree more SatinSandels. Children who are less academically inclined but want to learn need a space ( environment) where they can do that more than the academically able in many ways. Thats why I do not believe anyone should have to accept disruptive behaviour in class. Its the schools job to ensure their classrooms are business like and there is an ethos for learning. That means good discipline and rules are rules and dont back chat. Simple really but so hard to find in a great many comprehensive schools.

LaQueen but that happy state of affairs is not because it's a grammar school. It's because the people in charge run it well. Which doesn't always happen. And sometimes, even when a school is well run, disruption can happen. You can't identify every potential problem from a desktop review. Sometimes it's only by kicking the tyres that you can see the issues. And once a kid (or a toxic group of kids) is in, it;s difficult to resolve the situation unless you are a posh school or a free school.

"LaQueen but that happy state of affairs is not because it's a grammar school. It's because the people in charge run it well."

Absolutely. In common with the other thread, much of the positive information given about grammar schools is not directly caused by their grammar school status - it is a positive aspect of a particular school, which could be equally truly said of many comprehensives.

DS refused point blank to even consider a boys' grammar in a neighbouring town. 'It felt dangerous' was all that he said - and he had a separate tour from me, as for logistical reasons I saw it on another day and was perhaps quicker at spotting the stuff going on in the corridors, the battered furniture and lockers, the lost-control staff bawling at boys crashing out of classrooms. Bad reputation for bullying, too.

I think that we should be addressing the problems in education and making all schools centres of excellence and not saying 'it is OK, Johnny only has an IQ of 100 he can put up with disruption in the classroom'!

LaQueen, Just a question - were you comparing like with like? Do you mean comprehensive, or do you mean 'the other schools in a grammar system', which are by definition secondary moderns?

Also, are you comparing top sets in the comp with the children in the grammar? If, as you feel, the ability of the pupils has an impact on their behaviour (thus selection = selection of better behaved students in your hypothesis) then surely you need to compare a set of able children at the comp with a set of similar ability at the grammar before you can meaningfully compare the behaviour or learning environment.

As I say, DS's comp (technically a secondary modern, though it outperforms several of the grammars) is a significantly safer, better ordered and better disciplined place than the boys' grammar, and a far better learning environment for any except the most alpha of alpha males. So if I too was to work only from the direct examples I have available to me, I would say that the reverse is true - that selection at 11+ creates worse behaviour.

As i do not believe this to be true, I see it as a case of correlation not causation - your girls' grammar, and my son's mixed comp are both well-run schools with excellent discipline. The 11+ pass or failure is an unrelated statistic.

Talkin - Good luck if you think segregated schools are any less crap at dealing with things than non segregated.

Believe me, I don't think this. And the further my children get into their education, the more my belief that that isn't true is reinforced.

I was privately educated, the secondary was selective. I left with a handful of GCSEs that no comp would be particularly proud of. I remember a phase of being bullied at prep school, the schools were spectacularly uninterested despite my plucking up the courage to tell them. The head actively disliked my family, to the point that they were so unprofessional that even now my Mum will get angry if she is reminded of it.

Behaviour was dire at secondary school, and when behaviour want disruptive, it was because we were trying to keep out heads down because we were doing something much worse than being disruptive, like smoking pot in the extensive and impressive grounds they had. Next to nothing was ever done about it. My Dad died in complicated circumstances in the year I took my GCSEs, I didn't even get called in for a chat to see if I was ok. It was only even acknowledged once by one particularly nice teacher who didn't actually have me for any subject, who gave me her condolences in a corridor. This was, and still is a school that sells itself on results and it's pastoral care.

There is nothing about the selective education that I experienced that I would wish on anyone.

"What did you learn in school today", "JACK SHIT" The minute turns away
that's it .

"How many times were you truly intrigued" "Not once"

Is boredom a symptom of mental fatigue.

"What will you be when your out on your A**" "A DUNCE".

"what are your prospects of doing quite well" "TOO SMALL"

"what will you have at the very last call" "F** All.

IAN DURY...

I think these words some up how difficult, it can be teaching and motivating many kids who have got problems or have given up.

Therefore they see no reason not to F** up someone else's education.

Yes, a man did sing that song, you are right.

[I should point out that I believe my second paragraph to be false, based on LaQueen's false hypothesis - that passing the 11+ is an indicator of better behaviour. Of course every student of every ability has the right to an ordered learning environment, and in well-run comps like my DS's (and the very different one elsewhere in the country I have posted about, where the incident rate has dropped to zero through new leadership) that is the case.]

Oh I have no doubt that many grammars are very nice places to be, I'm just not sure that makes them a good idea overall.

But then, I just got hit by a fucking rhythm stick, so I'm not sure of anything right now.

The minute the teacher turns away....

I think these words sum up how difficult..... Typos..

I have one that would have passed and one that would have failed. They are both hardworking and motivated. I can't see why the one who would have passed deserves a better learning environment than the one who failed. Luckily in the comprehensive one was in top sets, one was in lower sets and poor behaviour wasn't tolerated in either.

Negative behaviour is extremely hard to deal with in school when parents don't support schools in discipline, and when their discipline methods are close to non existent.

There are many parents that have no respect for education and have no respect for the schools that have to deal with their children.

This is the biggest barrier there is to a school having effective discipline, and the fact that schools cannot exclude children without consequences doesn't help.

I have a rather unusual take on the problems in selective schools.
I was the psycho bully. I never did it in class - I could get caught there.
But changing rooms and corridors and cloak rooms and lunch queues ....
so anybody who helped in class had no idea of the level of dysfunction going on at the school ...

Another reason why I really, really, really want my kids to come out of school with a more balanced, open minded, aware viewpoint than I had.
That and some shit hot grades.