Benefits of selective education?

[AmberTheCat]

I'm aware that I've been cluttering up the 11+ tutoring thread with discussions the OP said she didn't want, on the merits or otherwise of grammar schools in principle, so I'll stop doing that and start my own thread!

So, I genuinely don't get why so many people think separating children by ability (or potential, or however you try to do it) at 11 or even younger is a good thing. Why will they benefit more from that than from properly differentiated teaching in a comprehensive school? And what about the children who aren't selected? How does a selective system benefit them?

Genuine questions. I'm strongly in favour of comprehensive education, but would really like to better understand the arguments against.

[TalkinPeace]

Procrastreation
why does oxbridge struggle to recruit state school students?
statistically, Oxbridge are darned near their correct level for stae versus private : a couple of years back, using the data sets, a couple of us worked out that it should be around 60:40

[Procrastreation]

40 % of kids don't go to private schools.

[morethanpotatoprints]

cory

Can you not see though that whilst it is unfortunate for the cases you talk about, other people shouldn't be deprived.
I understand that it isn't a fool proof system but neither is state or private.
There will always be those who miss out, and those who don't meet the criteria. This doesn't mean that particular type of school shouldn't exist.

My own dd is hoping for a place at a very selective school in the future, if she doesn't manage it for some reason, others should have the chance.

[TalkinPeace]

Procrastreation
indeed 40% do not go to State schools - overall its around 8% at late secondary
BUT
if you take a comp like my DCs
300 in year
100 of those will do Btec type courses (that got so roundly despised on the other thread)
100 will do A levels and then go to work
100 will go to University of some sort
of them around 40 will go to Russell Group
and 5 to Oxbridge ie 2%

Oxbridge in fact take under 1% of 6th form students

now take a well known school up the road
kids at Winchester went through a really tough exam at 13 which puts them on a par with the upper 70 at DCs school
so All of them will do A levels and at least 3/4 will go to University
at least half to Russell Group and a fair few to Oxbridge

its not fair, but that is the nature of academic selection : money gets you through exams

[lljkk]

I come from a family of late bloomers so that's all there is to know for me.
The emphasis in England on early specialism upsets me a lot.

[Martorana]

"There will always be those who miss out, and those who don't meet the criteria. This doesn't mean that particular type of school shouldn't exist."

Why not? If something is blatantly unfair, and favouring the privileged classes over the less privileged surely they thing to do is get rid of it. Particularly when it's departure will not disadvantage its current users?

[Procrastreation]

talkin that's flawed logic .

Winchester is not statistically significant. It is an example of a highly selective school out of the 8% cohort that went private. Overall - the selection for going private is your parents wealth. There is no contradiction between being in a private school & learning vocational skills (to stereotype - horse care, army cadets and child care). There is no explanation there why private school kids should be five times more deserving of an elite Oxbridge education.

[ReallyTired]

So called comprehensive has selection by post code instead of by test. This results in schools for the rich and schools for the poor. I feel that bright children need other bright children.

My son sat on his laurals at primary because he was on the top table and supposely gifted and talented at his rough primary. He got a shock when he got put in the second sets at secondary which takes rich kids.

It is really hard for a gifted kid to do well in class where no one else can be arsed or even wants to learn. It is socially isolating to be the only child who as aspirations of going to uni when your peers want to get pregnant to get a council house.

I feel that the eleven plus is far to young. Thirteen years old would be a better age to have selective education. It is ridicolous to select children on the basis of one test. I would like children to put forward a portfolio of class work, have a head teacher's reference, prehaps an interview with an educational pychologist as well as an entrance exam for a grammar school.

[morethanpotatoprints]

I don't agree that abolishing selective schools won't disadvantage current users.
There aren't any selective near us but we fall into catchment (just) for a couple.
Secondary schools are dire around here and if the nearest selective were abolished, those who attend from round here would be clearly disadvantaged.
The state system that is so bad needs to be improved so all dc have a fair chance.

[ReallyTired]

" There is no explanation there why private school kids should be five times more deserving of an elite Oxbridge education."

I shall say the unsayable. I realise that that there are a huge number of extremely able state school kids. Ofcourse there are some exceptionally thick private school kids, but they are the exception to the norm.

The brutal truth is that it takes intelligence to create the money needed for private education. There is strong evidence that intelligence is genetic. I suspect that the average IQ of a private school child is higher than the average IQ of a state school child.

[ZeroSomeGameThingy]

Talkin Surely what your last post (Winchester) showed was that, first, exams get you to where money is being spent on education?

[Procrastreation]

My intelligence was higher than the average anybody's child.

It's still buggering hard to make up a whole missing A Level worth of material on the hoof (and probably much more in terms of support, extension and encouragement).

Being coy about academic selection is basically handing a massive competitive advantage to private school kids - yiur stats average out the fact that on some Oxbridge courses there are virtually zero state school kids. You used an example of a hugely successful selective school on a thread about 'why do we need selective schools'.

[ZeroSomeGameThingy]

Thirteen years old would be a better age to have selective education. It is ridicolous to select children on the basis of one test. I would like children to put forward a portfolio of class work, have a head teacher's reference, prehaps an interview with an educational pychologist as well as an entrance exam for a grammar school.

ReallyTired What you're arguing for is beyond Common Entrance. Under your regime every child in the country would take a Public School Scholarship exam.

[pointythings]

morethanpotatoprints I am not at all opposed to academic selection. Where I come from (Netherlands) the entire system is selective - first at roughly 11, then again at 14. The difference is that there is flexibility. Saying 'life's not fair' as a way of defending the current UK system is missing the point - the economy is missing out on giving talented late developers the education they should have to maximise their potential - their earning and tax paying potential included. That is a waste we cannot afford.

No-one would lose out if we invested in introducing more flexibility for those children who don't develop academically according to the accepted norm.

I just see the process of internal differentiation as is done in good comprehensive schools as the way forward - and even there we need to lose the mindset that labels children so that there can be more movement between academic ability groups.

[Procrastreation]

Yes - like I said upthread - the labelling of children at 11 is an undesirable side-effect of needing critical mass to allow children to specialise & stretch within a like minded peer group.

[gardenfeature]

"Thirteen years old would be a better age to have selective education. It is ridicolous to select children on the basis of one test. I would like children to put forward a portfolio of class work, have a head teacher's reference, prehaps an interview with an educational pychologist as well as an entrance exam for a grammar school."

Even this lot would beat the gifted child with dyslexia.

[creamteas]

Much the endless debates around this issue ignore the commonalities

Those in favour of grammar schools seem to want:

Good schools which do tolerate disruption
Academic subjects
Children taught with others of similar ability

Well guess what, those of us in favour of Comps want this too.

But we want this in a single school for all abilities not in different schools. We feel that dividing kids at 11 (or 13) pigeonholes children which limits the choices of the many in favour of the few.

[creamteas]

do not tolerate

[TalkinPeace]

I only picked on Winchester as its near here - it is not representative even of private schools
BUT
it is a basic fact that fee paying schools kick out those who will not get decent grades for them
state schools have to take everybody (I include all the colleges in that figure) so have the kids who would not want to go to Oxbridge

MN posters forget how tiny Oxbridge are : that is why I prefer the Russell Group measure as every (non sec mod) school should be able to get at least one of its kids into an RG
but there are pockets of the country where careers advice is just crap

BUT AND ITS A HUGE BUT
Kent is fully selective
Hampshire is not selective
and across the whole LEA their results are indistinguishable
surely that is proof if proof were needed that selective schooling does not result in better outcomes
(just lots of money into the pockets of prep schools and tutors)

[pointythings]

Exactly, creamteas. We need to look at what the really good comps are doing and replicate that. We need to stop writing children off based on the backgrounds they come from - if there are challenges, then there needs to be joint action with the school, the family, social services if necessary, to ensure everyone gets as much of a shot at a good education as can be delivered. AFAIK some of the Academies in London do this by providing support in the school with homework during extended hours and so on - that sort of thing needs to be available more widely.

I also agree that tolerating disruption is not on - however this is not a plea on my behalf for senseless rules on school uniform and other draconian measures - firmness coupled with common sense, please.

[TalkinPeace]

AFAIK some of the Academies in London do this by providing support in the school with homework during extended hours and so on - that sort of thing needs to be available more widely

AAAARRGGHH

it is done outside London, lots and lots and lots
all over the country
but policy makers are scared to step outside the north circular and look

even my crap local school has before and after school clubs for revision and support

better schools have breakfast revision clubs where the FSM kids magically do not pay for their breakfasts

libraries and community lounges staying open till 6pm
parenting classes being run at the same time as catch up sessions for the kids who need it

FFS DD is in school three days this half term on revision / catch up classes

its normal but the twerps in policy do not want to look

[Procrastreation]

The really good comps IME do one of two things

1. set up in a leafy suburb of a university town & suck up the offspring of academics
   
   
2. run martial law style discipline to eliminate distractions, and strongly funnel DC towards KPI (ie 5 A-C)
   
   
3. we can't afford/don't live near.
   
   
4. are rightly focused on raising level of overall attainment in challenging circumstances. They are often great schools - but still don't meet the critical mass test to have proper stretch and support for the brightest kids.

[pointythings]

Talkin that is shocking - surely they should be shouting from the rooftops what a fab idea this is???

Procrastreation I'm not sure about this, but then DD1's comp is only rated 'Good', not 'Outstanding'. I hope they don't change, they do well (pupils making better than expected progress), GCSE results on a rising trajectory, sensible uniform policies (i.e, children allowed to take off blazers when it is scorching without needing to ask), and a Head who still teaches on the shop floor on a regular basis.

We aren't in an exclusively leafy town, some areas score very high on social deprivation indicators, other areas are vair naice. A mad mix.