Grammar Schools : the debate is about what happens NOW

[TalkinPeace]

In the 20 years after WW2, when the baby boomers were kids, grammar schools did amazing things for social mobility.

But then, self preservation kicked back in
and since 1970, selective state schools have become progressively less inclusive
to the extent today where the (grammar school educated head of OFSTED) says
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25386784

the death knell has been rung
as it has for DB pensions (another great Baby Boomer nest lining idea)

so lets bite the bullet and put equal resources into all schools and reduce the carbon footprint of the grammar school madness.

This is what happened to ds in yr 5-6. State primary.

Nothing. He didn't learn a thing. He and his cleverer mate were consistently sat next to really naughty kids in an attempt to be a good influence. The class was in chaos. I went in but was told it was ok, he was doing better than the others (and therefore that was good enough) He was miserable.

We live in a grammar area (not kent!)The head was very anti grammar and there was no help within school time (heads three kids went to the grammar of course but ho hum). I thought sod this, why should my son do crap at school in the hope that him being obedient wears off on the others - so encouraged him to take the 11plus.

School went into special measures. My annoyance at that 'educational approach' remains. I learnt the phrase 'teaching to the middle' on mumsnet. This was teaching to the bottom.

3asaBird - I wax going to give the example of Redland Green School in Bridtol too but you beat me to it

I don't think thick oink and chav are contagious.

I'm working class. We have no inherited wealth, no properties to give our kids. They have to make it by themselves. I don't care about the class/wealth of the kids around mine but i'd prefer them to be around kids with a positive attitude to education. And if that makes me pushy I'll take that.

Talkin' - giganto-schools are problematic for those with SEN.

I think school uniform is lunatic, I really do. I can see the benefit in something like a compulsory fleecy and a requirement to be not completely T&A hanging out all over the place - but really, that's it. I sometimes feel like a lone voice of sanity at the schools my kids attend though.

Metebilis
giganto-schools are problematic for those with SEN
evidence for that?
as all the schools in this county are big and SEN parents I talk to seem quite happy that the SEN teams (ten staff at DCs school) cope with most things or refer to special schools for those who do not fit mainstream

"That's why most are not convinced by those stats alone as to which type of school best serves brighter children, comprehensive or grammar."

Two things. One- what do you base that statement?

And two- even if it were true, why do the needs of the brighter trump the needs of the average or the less bright?

The hopes of humanity rest on the scientist and engineers of tomorrow. The brightest do need nurturing.

I have family who work in schools for excluded kids. The money spent per pupil is eye watering.

"The hopes of humanity rest on the scientist and engineers of tomorrow. The brightest do need nurturing."

And you can tell who the scientists and engineers of the future are at 10, can you? I can think of a few who would have slipped through the net. Einstein, for example............

"I have family who work in schools for excluded kids. The money spent per pupil is eye watering."

Good. I, for one, don't want to live in a society with a significant underclass.

Think what einstein could have achieved with a grammar education ;)

Curlew I am not saying that it does but is n't that a different argument to whether brighter pupils are best served in an excellent comprehensive or grammar. I don't know the answer but I am saying that there are more nebulous aspects to an academic education (discounting non academic pursuits) that cannot be quantified in these exam results.
Unfortunately these nebulous aspects are also perhaps more part of the professional class advantage at home.

Talkin' - experience, love. Bitter bitter experience. I should have been more specific though - prob not an issue for dyslexics. But dyspraxics and some people with AS? Hell yeah. :( In the same way that crowds can be a problem for us. And transport systems (e.g. tube system, airports (busy hubs in particular can be horrendous)). And that's just the sensory and spatial issues. We haven't even started on the 'teachers knowing what the issue is' area yet (and I have never me a SENCO who didn't say things were fine and everything was walking as it should. And that has only rarely been the case, across 3 schools (primary, comp, and grammar)).

And you know what? I am BEYOND fed up of people snidely implying that if you can't deal with a year group of 300 and a building a size to match, you aren't fit for mainstream education. Piss on that. Giganto-education isn;t fit for kids - it's battery education and it's just as wrong as battery farming.

metebilis
if big schools are so rubbish, why does Eton persist in having 1300 pupils?

Eton is the spiritual home of agribusiness, isn't it? Big Land is well represented there, no doubt about that. Some kids probably thrive in giganto-schools. My own son likes the anonymity (and uses it to his (dis)advantage). They don't suit everyone, especially kids with some types of Special Needs. But, curlew you know you were asking for an example of the one size fits all mentality? Talkin' has very kindly provided it. You're welcome.

Oh, and the other reason that Eton has a lot of pupils is the same reason that agribusiness operates the way it does - cold hard moral-free cash.

I suppose the big question with regards to Grammar Schools is what motivates a family to want to go to extreme lengths to get their child into a Grammar School and is it worth it ....

I read threads about 11 year old children travelling 1 to 2 hours to get to a school - thats education which actually results in their child not really having a childhood - I thought the best day's of your life were supposed to be when you were at school - not spending over 20% + of your awake hours travelling... let the children have a life you spend 40 years plus working even more going forward - Crazy !!!

Local schools are definitely the way forward but it means that parents do need to take the plunge and support their local schools ... we have a few super school in our borough non selective that are churning out amazing results (79% pass rate A-C)...success breeds success... If some of the parents put half the effort into supporting there local school that they put into getting their child into grammar school we would soon see improvement.

"And you know what? I am BEYOND fed up of people snidely implying that if you can't deal with a year group of 300 and a building a size to match, you aren't fit for mainstream education. Piss on that. Giganto-education isn;t fit for kids - it's battery education and it's just as wrong as battery farming."

I wholeheartedly agree.

TalkinPeace - Eton is not a valid comparison. There are houses and a massively favourable teacher:pupil ratio that the state sector will never be able to match that allows for individual attention.

And it is a selective school that does not suit all boys.

TalkinPeace
Please find me an example from outside London where a comp has turned away catchment kids.

In Reading, we're in a shared catchment for two comprehensives. Our catchment area was changed two years ago, from Comp A to both Comp A and B.

Comp A is Ofsted Outstanding, is where our neighbours' (older) kids go, where many of my kids' peers will go (following their older siblings, they'll get places) and where we will most definitely not go - the school is oversubscribed and we are furthest away by distance, despite being in catchment.

Comp B has a bad reputation - in comparison to Comp A. It has a more mixed, less "naice" (new MN word that I've picked up ) intake. People I know are actively moving out of this school's catchment to ensure their kids will get into Comp A.

So, my experience teaches me that there is little, or no actual choice in where we send our kids to school. Short of having the money to move (I agree with up thread poster that catchment = wealth).

So what do we do? We live within a mile of a grammar, we channel our funds into providing support for our kids to sit the 11+. I am as guilty of doing all that I can do ensure that my kids won't go to Comp B, as those who have moved homes.

But I will be pleased if my kids get into the grammar - I believe that they'll enjoy being in an environment where they'll be challenged, where learning is actively encouraged (by staff and by peers, I was bullied at secondary for being bright (amongst other issues) and I would like my kids to avoid that "stigma").

In our area, the grammars take a tiny percentage of the population, so I would not think that the absence of those children matter significantly to the performance of surrounding comps. But I am grateful that there is still an element of choice / hope for those who cannot buy their way into a "better" education.

I can't tell if that's the right decision, how can anyone?!? This is an emotive issue, because we parents are led to believe that there is a choice. If you remove all the 11+ testing, catchments etc. it would still be a difficult decision because wherever the kids go, above all else you want them to be happy and there is ultimately no way of guaranteeing that I'm afraid.

Sorry for the waffling btw..

"But, curlew you know you were asking for an example of the one size fits all mentality? Talkin' has very kindly provided it. You're welcome."

What, Eton? I wholeheartedly agree.

Eton is a terrible example of why large schools work so well.

For a start Eton would not be the school of choice for the quirkier boy. Any decent prep would advise you on that.

What you have at Eton is a group of handpicked botys, all chosen precisely because they will suit the type of education on offer.

It is also obscenely well funded, so class sizes are often extremly small with plenty of one-to-one thrown in for good measure.

Eton is the antithisis of a large comp!!!!

I dont believe in "Nationalism but in Eton's case, i make an exception and ask that it be turned into a state grammar boarding school.

If you abolished grammar schools, say in Kent - in order to provide the so-called advantages of large comprehensive campuses that Talkin advocates, would there have to be lots of expensive new building projects or would the plan be for smaller comprehensives with shared resources requiring peripatetic teachers

sorry, silly of me to mention Eton, but it always makes me laugh when school size is brought into the equation

small schools and big schools can both be good / bad at ... pastoral care / options / discipline / progress

the size of the school matters much less than the ethos of the senior management team and the power of the sanctions over pupils (something where private schools always have the edge over state schools

summerends
No.
Hampshire has big campus schools because it does
if you just abolished the 11+ and brought in a catchment system in Kent - federating each grammar with its local secmod so that the teachers could be shared
it would take only 5 years for everybody to forget that Grammars had ever been
same as in the counties that did just that years ago