Why are there no grammar schools in Wales? They seem like a good idea?

[Peppaismyhomegirl]

I've done a little bit of research, I don't know a lot about the subject but I think I like the idea of grammer schools. I've been having a look locally and discovered there are none in Wales! Is this right? Why?!

[Blu]

Badbadbunny: interviewing is not allowed for admissions to state schools.

[travellinglighter]

Dear livingforever

Speaking as an ex council estate kid, I know how rough some council estates are. I realise that it's a bit of a stereotype but stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason. Ask yourself this question, how many world boxing champs went to Eton?

[houseHuntinginmanchester]

Hmm, that's interesting, really.
Ive always wanted to know how much of the results are related to ability/ other factors and how much to expectations. I have found differences in my dd's eyfs goals when we moved area. The first nursery had assessed her as 'exceeding' in many of the areas. The new nursery re-assessed her as 'expected' for almost all of the goals. They were the same goals taken from the eyfs.
I think a lot about the impact of teacher expectation in schools. I've asked a couple of her new teachers and put forward the idea of a diluted curriculum in less better schools OR lower expectations. They've just reiterated that the NC content is the same in every school and that as professionals all teachers should have high expectations.

[ReallyTired]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-25196974

Its nothing to do with household income.

www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_270749.pdf

Northern Ireland has a lower average household income than Wales, yet Northern Irish children do better at school. (Interestingly northern ireland has a grammar school system.) Scotland (with no grammar schools) has a slightly higher average income than Wales, but they have better educational results as well. Scotland has a bigger

There are schools in London with lots of kids on free school meals that do really well. I am not sure that poverty is an excuse for low expectation. Possibly wales has similar problems to the coastal towns of England or the North East where there has been a culture of low expectation and underachievement. Maybe wales needs to look at schemes like Teach First that have helped deprived areas of England.

[houseHuntinginmanchester]

Really, really ( ) I didn't know that. Does it have something to do with average household income or the like.

[ReallyTired]

Off on another tangent. Why is that welsh students achieve less well PISA tests than students in other parts of the UK? Most of England has no grammar schools so it can't be the lack of selective education. Welsh students under achieve even when factors like deprivation are taken into account.

[Badbadbunny]

I realise I'm going off an a bit of a tangent here but I've been following this thread and I'm beginning to wonder what 'intensive tutoring' actually looks like in practice. Is it a tutor once a week or every day? Is it just teaching of the curriculum one-to-one or is it teaching things that the curriculum doesn't cover ? Genuinely intrigued and if anyone has any experience please do share!

Different areas/schools will require different approaches. Some areas have 3 or 4 multiple choice papers and no interview. Other areas (usually super selectives) have an interview and written papers rather than multiple choice, so are far harder (due to sheer number of entrants and high competition) and are said to have "pass" marks of 90%+ needed in every paper. In those areas, realistically, an untutored child (by a professional or a knowledgable parent) hasn't a chance. That's the unfairness and where money comes into it.

In other areas, it's far more "normal" like it was back in the 60s - in our area, the grammar was half the size of the town's sec mod, so a third of kids went to the grammar and two thirds to the sec mod - hardly elitism! Pass mark for our local schools now is said to be in the 60/70% range, with a good mark in one paper making up for a lower mark (below pass mark) in another as they add all three marks together. Ours were just 3 multiple choice papers. There are only 2 or 3 applicants for each place, so not as much competition, hence the "easier" 11+ papers and lower "pass" marks. Realistically, tutoring isn't required in our area and few kids are tutored. The main local tutor does a course of 1 hour every two weeks for about 3-6 months, so maybe 6-12 hours of formal tuition which covers all three papers. Other tutors do ad-hoc tutoring by the hour covering specific problem areas and areas not yet covered by the school. The most popular thing locally is a mock test done by one of the tutors where he hires a church hall for a morning and gives a mock test exactly how the real test would be, i.e. exam desks, equipment & silence rules, loo breaks, refreshments, etc., just to get the kids some experience of a formal exam setting which is something they just don't get at a primary and which can really affect some. He also includes a short presentation about conduct in the exam room, i.e. ignoring other kids if they wet themselves, start crying, run out, or any other destractions, etc., and also tells them what to do if they need the loo, feel upset, need their pencil sharpening, etc. Really puts their minds at rest. 9 out of 30 kids in my son's primary class went to our local grammar, most of whom didn't have any formal tutoring at all, and we're in a deprived, low income area!

I do think that the money/intensive tutoring required in super selective areas really clouds the issue and fuels this idea that only the super-rich can afford a grammar education. That's not true in a lot of the areas outside London and the SE where it's a lot more normal and low pressure and "normal" bright children can get a grammar place without having money thrown at them!

[ReallyTired]

There are good comprehensives and bad comprehensives. We need more educational research to learn how to get the best out of our children.

In england there is no evidence to show that areas like Kent do better Hertfordshire with only a handful of selective schools. Most children in Hertfordshire do not have the opportunity to attend a grammar school however bright they are because of distance. The tiny number of selective state schools in Hertfordshire do not have enough places to destroy the top set at the nearest comprehensives.

[fatbottomgirl67]

I don't have a problem with Gs. Dd1 is at a super selective Gs and is thriving.. She was not tutored as we had no idea about the system. Can't sing the schools praises highly enough and the range of extra curricular activities is phenomenal . Dd2 sat 11+ but didn't get a place in same svhool( only scored 98%) she then decided to go to local comp . She is really happy. Doing really well she's in year 10 now and this is where we've noticed the difference. In some GCSEs subject there is only one class so teacher has to teach a huge range of abilities. Perhaps means kids not pushed as far as they could be? Ds1 is a same comp - he's very dyslexic. He gets lots of help but finds it all hard. I would love for him to be able to go to a tech - he's very practical. Not an option. Just seems with the system as it stands it doesn't work for all levels. I would love a return to the old system. As my son says why are they trying to get him to write in French when he struggles with English. Vocational training would benefit so many kids like him

[houseHuntinginmanchester]

erg - while some of that sounds manageable (for example, tutor one hour in a week), other parts of that sound absolutely crazy isn't there such a thing as peaking too early?

I remember the way my literacy teacher guided us through our AS/A2 years, and the amount of work she held back on in AS as she always talked about 'peaking early'. Overall, I got an A for my English Literature A Level. While I understand the need for tutoring of state school children in order to have a fighting chance against prep schoolers, I think there's much to be said about my former teacher's methods.

[ErgonomicallyUnsound]

househunting - I guess the correct answer is that intensive tutoring means different things to different people. The way I see it, it's a spectrum, with letting a DC see none or one practice paper before the test at one end, ranging up through a few tests,a few Bond books at home, or a one off tutor session or two, through a weekly 1 hour session with a tutor with homework in between (this being the norm for a year in the 11+ area I live in), to DIY at home which can be very intensive daily work (don't assume DIY is a laid back option, often its way more intense than paying a tutor...) right up to what I would call an extreme which might look like intensive week long tutor sessions in the holidays supplemented with 2 years 2 or 3 times pw tutor sessions at home, with time with parents each day as well, to the point where child has little time for downtime.

[Lurkedforever1]

That's because I have access to secondary moderns with the problems you state. I just don't have access to the grammars. Because in this area they're all called comprehensives and are allocated based on where you live.

Cracks me up that people use the logic a sm is writing kids off at 11, but fail to see it happens just the same in fully comprehensive areas. But minus the chance of an exam.

[JasperDamerel]

I also notice that people tend to talk about grammars being a good idea. I rarely see people saying that they are unhappy with the local comprehensive and think that the government should introduce more secondary moderns.

[JasperDamerel]

I grew up in a grammar school area and am very glad that my children get the chance to attend an excellent comprehensive. The grammar system is full of errors. In the system I grew up in, parents could pay for their children to attend a grammar school if they failed the 11+. Two of the most successful children in my year were 11+ failures. It made me wonder how many other children were just as bright but unable to access a curriculum that would get them into medical school etc because their parents couldn't fork out the money to give them the education they needed.

[houseHuntinginmanchester]

I realise I'm going off an a bit of a tangent here but I've been following this thread and I'm beginning to wonder what 'intensive tutoring' actually looks like in practice. Is it a tutor once a week or every day? Is it just teaching of the curriculum one-to-one or is it teaching things that the curriculum doesn't cover ? Genuinely intrigued and if anyone has any experience please do share!

As you were, everyone

[Blu]

If you are in the position of making a choice, right now, in your own circumstance, and a grammar is the best option amidst failing schools or out-of-reach housing, then who wouldn't take it? Any parent would, me included. If I lived in a fully selective area I would be hoping that my 'high attainer' DC dud as expected on the day and got a grammar place.

That is different to discussing whether in principle, strategically, grammar schools are a 'good idea' and should be introduced in Wales.

There is no doubt that in general grammars work for the young people who get in. But education for a society, a C21 country, needs to be able to get the best of these and all other young people. We need a system that allows children to develop the best of themselves at the right pace at the right stage in their lives. Pick up the maths genius, even as they have only average literacy, recognise the boost of a summer born boy as he matures academically at yr 9, give specialist supports dyslexic children , support children from chaotic homes to reach their potential . Supporting vocational education that matches the modern opportunities, inspiring a curiosity in learning and confidence in their abilities amongst the disaffected .

Ultimately an education which serves every child will benefit the world that the grammar cohort find themselves living and working in.

[eyebrowse]

I think there are fewer families/teenagers about who see no value in education because (1) there are very few good quality traditional working class jobs (2) there are now immigrants who want to achieve in poor areas so there are more role models about. However if the immigrants go to Muslim schools then the local children won't mix with them. (3) Young people like new technology which is a nerdy thing so being clever is not such a problem. Thus the comprehensive model becomes more and more justified and grammar, religious and private schooling becomes ever more reprehensible.

[Lurkedforever1]

Nobody wants their kids sat alongside badly behaved kids who don't want to learn. But when people know full well it won't be their kids in that situation, they are hypocritical enough to judge anyone actually in that situation for objecting.

[CookieDoughKid]

washe 'I also like the fact everybody has a strong work ethic,I'm done with my DC sitting in classes with those who don't want to learn and I make zero apologies for that.'

Totally agree.

[boys3]

I'm responding to people saying the comprehensive system is fairer, when it's absolutely not.

good point.

Another rather surprising set out stats came out just at the weekend from the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-index

The linked page provides access to a full listing for every English local authority area. I thought the worst areas would be dominated by grammar areas, the reality is very different. Not that they populate the top (best) areas either - top 20 almost all London Boroughs and probably reflecting the higher levels of spending per child in London. Investment makes a difference, who could have imagined

[boys3]

Grammar school kids are under represented at Oxbridge too in comparison to privately educated children. There was a study not so long ago.

Clearly not a very good study. Try looking at the actual published figures. Here's the most recent one for Cambridge. Final column of table 1.1 Success rate from Indies and Grammar applications identical - which in itself is of course a whole other problem in terms of wider access.

www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/files/publications/undergrad_admissions_statistics_2014_cycle.pdf

Application numbers obviously differ. However given 7% of DC at Indies, and around 4.5% at grammars (overall estimates suggest % at indies a bit higher at 6th form, so could also be the case for grammars) that should not come as a surprise.

[Lurkedforever1]

I haven't said the answer is to build more grammars and make every area fully selective. I'm responding to people saying the comprehensive system is fairer, when it's absolutely not.

I've said given a choice between selection on ability, and selection by house price, the former is less unfair. That doesn't mean I think the 11+ is fair in itself, or that its the best or only solution. Just that at present it's the least of two evils.

[Blu]

Lurked and WashedIris: why is the answer to not enough good comps , or not enough good comps in affordable areas to create new schools for 25% of the children rather than to make more of the comps better?

Do you think it impossible to have a good school, or a good education in a school which is in an area of economic disadvantage?

About 15% Music places. These are tested on aptitude, not any experience of playing an instrument. As far as I can see these scholarships have been used as a way to attract aspirational parents to schools they would not otherwise have considered , and in 2 schools I know of in S London they have been instrumental in widening the intake and, because any form of selection seems to have this affect , pushing up successful stats and therefore attracting yet more aspirational parents ...

This could actually be part of a solution , Lurker, to one of the issues I think you were describing earlier in the thread .

[minifingerz]

Sorry - the point was I want him to go to a school where there are children of all abilities.