Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Grammar Schools : the debate is about what happens NOW

519 replies

TalkinPeace · 15/12/2013 16:09

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.

OP posts:
Thisisaghostlyeuphemism · 16/12/2013 21:59

I don't care where they were educated - they had no choice in that - but I do care where mps send their kids, yes.

Because if you are intent on 'being fair' and everyone being at their local comp then you wouldn't be so bold as to opt your own children out of it, would you?

Oh yes, you would.

So they will close down grammars, but they will continue shipping their kids half way across London to go to religious schools.

And we are expected to suck it up?

TalkinPeace · 16/12/2013 22:01

oddsins
Catholic schools / Jewish schools / Muslim schools : segregation based on the faith of the parents.
Grammar schools : segregation based on the ability to pass a test in three subjects, only two of which are GCSEs

OP posts:
straggle · 16/12/2013 22:01

'They'? Mrs Thatcher closed down more grammars as education secretary than the previous Labour government.

Thisisaghostlyeuphemism · 16/12/2013 22:06

MPs I mean.

Re. Thatcher- Well I didn't like her either!

missinglalaland · 16/12/2013 22:09

Decentralisation leads to highly unequal outcomes. Look at the USA. I read that if the states were judged as seperate entities, some, like Massachuttes for instance would be among the very best in the world. Others like Mississippi are basically 2nd world or possibly 3rd. Each state has a lot of control over standards and budgets. I would never want to deny the "Massachuttes" of the world the chance and the choice to do better, but I wonder how the politicians here would cope with the losers in the postcode library.

TalkinPeace · 16/12/2013 22:17

missinglala
so you are not happy with centralising
and not happy with decentralising
what DO you want?

OP posts:
straggle · 16/12/2013 22:29

PISA also found that selection does not lead to better standards overall, and market-led systems like US and Sweden do not either.

We are around the OECD average and EU average especially for share of low attainers e.g. in Maths (but EU average is better than the US and Sweden is even worse). And we have less of a gender gap than other EU countries.

summerends · 16/12/2013 22:31

Following on from what happygardening said, why are so many good teachers disillusioned, burn out and leaving before they should?
Disempowerment? Too much paperwork and not enough teaching?
Poorly motivating management? Don't think it's salaries although it might be for some.
The state sector can't hold on to its good teachers (with the self evident that good teaching is not a one size that fits all), that is an issue that is a critical one if education is to be improved

missinglalaland · 16/12/2013 22:47

talkinpeace I want people to think things through and to be aware of the consequences of choices both good and bad. If you are upset about the unfairness of selective education! the unfairness of localism is also likely to disturb you.

curlew · 16/12/2013 22:54

"why are so many good teachers disillusioned, burn out and leaving before they should? "

Could it be because people keep on saying that they are giving children a fourth rate education and why can't they deliver like the teachers at Westminster do.........?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 16/12/2013 23:00

It's funny how often people who argue that comprehensives embody a 'one size fits all' philosophy and can't work because of this seem to be very confident that two sizes would be plenty! Although of course, one of the sizes wouldn't be the size you'd want Confused

straggle · 16/12/2013 23:01

summerends motivating teachers is a really good point and I agree it's central to overall improvement. All the teacher-bashing rhetoric is demotivating, as is constant political meddling in structures, league tables, tests, curriculum, teacher pay/pensions/working conditions, etc. Having unqualified teachers is also stressful for the qualified and experienced teachers who have to teach alongside them if they are not being properly supervised.

There are already too stresses in the system - schools should be working together and teachers learning from each other but in a supportive local network. Not competing with each other in rival academy chains or to grab a bonus.

curlew · 16/12/2013 23:14

The"one size fits all" argument is a very odd one. Presumably people think comprehensive is a synonym for mixed ability? My son's secondary modern has 4 streams and sets within streams......

summerends · 17/12/2013 04:50

Actually, my comment about 'one size fits all' related to teaching styles not about comprehensive versus grammar or whatever Smile. I think that what makes a 'good' teacher is not formulaic as different pupils (even of the same ability) may respond best to different teaching styles.
Any individual teacher however amazing is never going to be best for or please every pupil / parent so they should n't be dispirited by occasional criticism.
One thing that seems to mark out the best schools to work for in whatever sector is that teachers feel a sense of shared drive and excitement about what they can achieve with their pupils as well as being part of a supported, effective team.

happygardening · 17/12/2013 07:32

TOSN my definition of one size fits all differs from your. I'm talking about seeing each child as an individual, having the freedom to say I don't need to to X for Jane but I do need to do it for Helen and if I don't do X for Jane it won't matter, it won't be seen as her getting something less, it will be seen as a positive thing instead. Of course there needs to be an overall frame work that has to be worked within, standards need to be set but as professionals in my area of work and I'm sure in teaching we need to be able to use our own judgement at times because we after all are the ones on the front line, we are the ones who know, not MPs not office pen pushers who even if they did work in our areas at some stage in their careers have now lost touch or forgotten with what's going now or in many cases I suspect never knew.
I think one of the reasons why independent schools are attractive to many is they seem to have more autonomy, I'm not saying it's perfect I never have but parents perceive that there is less of a one size fits all approach that policies are decided upon implemented by individual heads, departments etc and people like this. They feel they and their children are treated as individuals.

curlew · 17/12/2013 08:48

Do you really think that never happens in a state school, happygardening?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 17/12/2013 09:21

Happy you will be expecting me to say this but.... Wink I truly don't see that as being something which a) doesn't happen in a cpmprehensive school or b) seems as though it would naturally be the preserve of a private school.

I do think your approach is different from the one I'm talking about though, because as I understand it, you're all about the variety (state, grammar, private, home ed, boarding etc): the POV I have an issue with is the one which directly says that, since one size fits all is what you get in comprehensives (problem #1 for me), the 11+, with its two sizes, is the way you create a system which caters for individual needs (problem #2!).

happygardening · 17/12/2013 10:36

TOSN curlew I haven't see it happening in any of the state schools my DS's have attended but maybe as pointed out my approach is different. So let's put my views to one side what I've found is that many many other parents who may not wish for the variety that I want (this is not a criticism of them) also feel thoroughly disgruntled with their state schools. They also feel that that there is no variation on a theme and that the whole system caters for a certain type of child and that their child is not seen as an individual. So are we saying these people are all wrong. I was/am surprised that in Smalltownsville where I live how many parents were unhappy with our outstanding comp, the ofstead report positively glows we were told how all children's needs were being catered for which certainly wasn't my experience or others, ditto in Slightlylargertownsville up the road again another very high achieving comp.
As I have repeatedly said in the past I don't believe independent ed is always necessarily any better. But from my own experience of the public sector I can't help but feel that the whole system has just become too large and too centralised and over regulated. In my profession this has been done to try and create a level playing field but we are not working with machines we are working with humans with all their variations and complexities.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 17/12/2013 11:00

Well, I am quite saddened and surprised that you've never seen any acknowledgement that Jane is different from Mary etc - it's one of the things I've been pleasantly surprised by at every level!

I also don't think you can really say that the private sector is fantastic at recognizing different pupils' needs and styles and acting accordingly, without acknowledging that if they're doing that, they're doing it from a pre-selected pool of children who have all met the criteria of being either rich or clever before they're allowed through the door anyway! Not over fussed about the learning style of Jane if her parents haven't a pot to piss in and she's not very academic, are they?

nibs777 · 17/12/2013 11:01

The fact of it is, grammars can and do allow social mobility but usually of the type lower middle class to professional middle class. You can look at certain grammar schools with large intakes (of second or third generation immigrant children) from areas which are not considered wealthy middle class areas, to witness social mobility.

What the detractors want is more social mobility of FSM/working class to middle class. But is it surprising that lower middle class may have higher educational aspirations for their children than those on FSM (I generalise here as sure there will be some FSM who value education as a priority). The other issue that people seem to have is any notion of segregation of school by academic ability at secondary school age, even if those who are able to enter at selective schools at 11, are better off academically because of it, because of the other 75% who are not able to be part of it.

I do also think some people just resent that grammar schools as a notion give some sort of label as elitist and therefore superior compared to non-selective schools even though some of the least academic grammar schools at the bottom of the range will be worse than the best leafy comps with middle class catchment areas.

These arguments will never end because some of the 75% will always resent the 25% and the notion that somehow grammar looks superior on paper to non-selective to society at large.

3asAbird · 17/12/2013 11:06

Are there not just 164 state gramnar schools left on uk?

when i watch tv programmes mainly political ones theres never any shortage of mps, journalists and tv presenters andrew neil proudly saying i was grammer school boy or grammer school girl and how much it did for them.

Ed miliband went to leafy sought after affluent comp

so many guradian journos send their kids private.

mps magically get their kids into very sough after state shols cameron is coe and cleggs son just got into oratory and they can afford the school fees.

I you look at that example you would think many of them did well as lots went uni at oxford or cambridge and dominate the top jobs as only 7%of uk go independent /private yet dominate russel group and the top posts.

Can we define comprehensive please?

Reason I ask is based on my comp and what people did yes could be as it was shit

but few went on to better things.
reckon there was lots lost potential.

but the bright kids were in the minority,

which left large middle co-hort
large bottom co-hort who needed lots of extra support and were fairly disruptive to the school at times in terms of behaviour as the remedial class wasent just for non bright was kids with emotional issues and was complete zoo.

I was in bottom sets for few things and tops for others but in bottom if you seemed keen or swotty you would get bullied and teacher spent most of time trying to control the class.

A lot of the popular state senior schools here

are faith

rc
coe

take kids wide catchment.

Then theres 3acdaemies one all girls .
2/3acedemies were ex independents.

They can select 10%bu test on their speciality music/language then the remaining 90T%take test are fair banded so they hve equal amounts of ability i each co-hort, wide catchment then when they get past this state its random allocation so basically alottery name puled out of hat if one gets in siblings then get in.

But mostly in a way its engineered and skewed towards middleclasses as theres

stress of them taking the tests-I dont think ist as bad as 11+grammar schools but as parent of primary child im bit vague on exactly what tests entail think some type of verbal reasoning.

Then we only get 3 preferences on admissions so its potentially risky choice its a gamble.

All 3 stupidly oversubscribed I like 2of them but cant put 2lottery schools down unless had secure backup comp.

I spoke to mate whos son wanted to go and she said she thinks as he was middle co-hort and middle probaby biggest so his chances would have been less ta if he was very bright or bottom.

Then theres finance 2/3schools have expensive uniforms.
bus no longer funded £60 amonth

this creates barriers to lower classes -be silly to think it dident deter people which is why on whole this is just observation growing up in wales and where lives now the working classes tend to stay local no matter how bad the school is on their doorstep
hence lower social mobility.

My local comp is connundrum its in leafy affluent area with mostly good well performing primaries but most choose out of area ie the many academies within the city which are quite good or they choose faith/independent which means the local school is full of kids from other areas whos local school is worse than ours so to te seems good but 38%gcse a-c i dont think thats impressive and hear bullyings bad but new heads amazing plus its now like another poor performing school partnered up with a good one but in reality the 2schools are distance apart very diffrenet with different demographoc but they think will raise standards at the poorere school if with the richer school.

But a small town not far from me is in uproar as basically their poor performing comp went academy and partenered up with acedemically well performing afflunet school and they just made decision to scrap a levels and academic subjects at small town school and make them bus it to the academic school which basically says ypu all rubbish lets just focus on vocational, I dont think the town has alternative fe provison has 2 other seniors but parents expeted to pay the bus too if their child wants to do a levels seems but unfair.

In terms of grammars if some are doing well it almost discriminates against areas that dont have them. some travel bristol to gloucestershire but its long way,not even bath has grammars but bristol/bath do have highest independent sector outside london mostly skews results so if people dont get their preferences then many an afford private as backup know few who done that at primary but sheer cost independt at seniors is scary.
On exam results day is same schools that dominate the results mostly indepenendent or the highly sought after faith schools/academies.

I did hear the now state girls schools has achieved really good results and is comprehensive but its also 10%aptitude and fair banded so its balanced and ethos/teaching provision good so guess can be done.

We did have one new comp built in very affleunet area and surprise surprise its oversubscribed and does well although not sure its yet had a gcse results . So i find selection by catchment just as bad.

we have very few free schools yet and they are strange.
in area of shortage places yet take city wide catchment by lottory.
The free senior school is odd location but atracts afflunet postode as like other cities we have nice areas that are blackspots for schools which is ok if you can afford private.

happygardening · 17/12/2013 11:31

TOSN please can you show me where I stated that private is better recognising children individual needs?
Are all those parents I talked to wrong? Or perhaps you think they're just expecting too much.
In my profession we have in the past and often still are guilty of complacency, everyone in the garden is rosy, everything is fine, the evidence of those who had bad experiences was swept under the carpet, they were seen as people who didn't understand the system, people with too high expectations, there are and have been endless warnings from those within the profession, our unions and those from outside of it as I said often on the receiving end. But time and time again following what can only be described as a disaster, a terrible heartbreaking event, an unnecessary death on an inquiry it's found that everything in the garden wasn't rosy and everything was not fine.
TOSN you can carry on believing that everything is fine, that independent ed is rubbish and that people like me have a different approach therefore our opinions are not valid, that the experiences of the hundreds of parents I meet are also not valid, that studies demonstrating our education is of poor quality compared to the rest of the world are not measuring the right things therefore not valid. But whilst you hold those views sadly many children today are being significantly let down by their schools and this is a tragedy in a affluent country like ours.

Bonsoir · 17/12/2013 11:34

I dispute the OP. I went to grammar school in 1977 - the best in the county for girls. There were four classes of 30 pupils (or perhaps 31) in the year group. There were 2 pupils per class ex-private school. A large proportion (maybe one 1/3) of pupils were on FSM and free school uniforms.

The rot set in later.

curlew · 17/12/2013 11:36

Happygardening- so you meet "hundreds of parents" who are all dissatisfied with the education their children get? "4th rate" I think you said.

Can I ask what context you meet these parents in?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 17/12/2013 11:40

Well, Happy, you said you'd never seen it any state school - I assume you have felt you've seen it in private schools, but perhaps that was a leap too far?

And I don't think it's my fault for thinking that a) there's no reason to think comprehensives embody a 'one size fits all' mindset and b) most of them do an infinitely better job that you'd think from reading MN, that any children are being let down. That too is a bit of a leap of logic.

Perhaps it would be better for those children if I whipped mine out of the state system and then spent my time saying loudly that the education the others were getting was substandard? yeah, that's sure to help.

Swipe left for the next trending thread