Theresa May to end ban on grammar schools

[noblegiraffe]

Theresa May to end ban on grammar schools, reports the Telegraph.

This is not a policy announcement, rather a testing of the waters, I suspect.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/06/theresa-may-to-end-ban-on-new-grammar-schools/

"bertram vocational to me would be something practical and technical and also creative"
Like what? Remember you are advancing life chances for kids who have failed the 11+. What are you going to teach them?

Interesting that when grammar schools started, nearly 38% of pupils were educated at them

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01398/SN01398.pdf

"Interesting that when grammar schools started, nearly 38% of pupils were educated at them"

It was a different world. The school leaving age was 14 and there was enough manual and unskilled work for everyone. We can't go back in time.

Just had a thought. I suppose with the lack of cheap European labour they are going to need to reinforce our homegrown vocational skills....

Suppose a model which is a very small % to go to the grammars. Maybe 1 secondary school in ten (top 10%, yes?).

Problem in a rural area is: we have one secondary school 1 mile away and the next nearest 5 state alternatives are 8-12 miles away. Expand to 20 miles there are another ~12-15 alternatives.

Folk dislike sending their kids so far away. "I want to keep them close" is a repeated refrain that I hear about secondary school choice. So, If the grammar isn't in our town, parents will not send their kid there. Just by being a rural area, there is a huge disincentive to go to the so-called superior school. Regardless of child's ability.

Why should the kids' education suffer because of the protective instincts of parents? And all that is separate from extra costs of transport or high uniform cost nonsense. My kids chose schools 15 minutes drive away; sending them there costs me £500 per child per year (bus fares). Many parents cannot consider spending that.

The local school should be a Good school that can cater for a broad range of needs and abilities.

I think an opinion poll asking whether people want all schools to be able to meet the demands of all their students would be interesting.

That's odd. Many of the students in my super selective come from areas like the one you mentioned.
The evidence I've seen shows that my school is very good for the vast majority of our students. Our value added is the best in the area. We do have pupils on pupil premium. We do have students with Special Needs. We also have students who just miss out on FSM. We have students whose SEN is not spotted at primary (for a variety of reasons).

Re: Social mobility

"In Kent and Medway, poorer children lag further behind, richer children move further ahead - and the losses at the bottom are much larger than the gains at the top. This is a feature of the selective areas in England, as a whole. Even in the very best areas, it steepens the rich-poor gradient."

From a good article about grammar schools and social mobility here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36662965

Donna- how does your school's % of fsm children compare to the school's catchment?

Here's the data on FSM and grammar schools:

"Research by Policy Exchange shows that, as of 2012, just three of the 164 remaining grammar schools had 10 per cent or more pupils eligible for free school meals. 42 grammars had between 3 and 10 per cent of pupils eligible for free meals, while 98 had between 1 and 3 per cent, and 21 had less than 1 per cent.'

derxa I don't know where you live, but in the farming community here the expectation is very much that children will go into the farming business. Not remotely patronising.

I work within the industry and time and time again I hear parents complaining that their children have to study subjects which are completely irrelevant to their lives. Why should they have to wait until post 16 to learn the skills that they will use on a daily basis? Why shouldn't we teach foot trimming and ewe nutrition to 14 year olds? As an industry we are trying to raise standards and professionalism. If kids switch off in school because they can't see the point in what they are learning then it is very difficult to tempt them back to learning once they are older.

I agree with the pp who said that league tables ruined opportunities for voicational education. Whether the answer is grammar schools or better provision within the comprehensive system I don't know, but at the moment the system is failing our children.

Thanks for that info, antique depressing, but I think that some people believe that grammar schools are the solution to social mobility problems, and that many others want grammar schools to keep their kids from the riff-raff.

Harder to argue with the second lot, because all the evidence shows that if the middle classes want state schools stuffed with the middle classes, then grammar schools are the way forward.

Am out for the day today - will come back to you later bertram.

If I were designing the implementation of this, I'd roll it into the FS programme by allowing new FSs to be academically selective but still have to meet the other criteria of need for high quality education in the area.

Banded admissions can help ensure a range of socio-economic backgrounds

Private schools will hate it

Lljkk we only have 6 secondaries in our entire county. Sending children to secondary schools 10-15 miles away is normal in rural areas.

Before comprehensives a lot of schools here ran the grammar and secondary modern from the same campus as there weren't enough pupils for two separate schools and the nearest town was too far away.

Current grammar schools are nothing like the old ones.

My dad came from a poor working-class background, both he and his brother went to grammar school, which was a huge big deal back then for them, and both have gone on to professional careers and wages. His mum left school at 13 and was barely literate, so this was a great step in social mobility for them personally.

But then, everyone took the test, there was no tutoring, and quite a sizeable chunk went.

Now, only the very motivated and wealthier parents go for grammar entry, it's not the 'norm', and most people either don't want to bother, don't want their children to go there, or couldn't afford the bus fares, so the grammar parents are a hugely self-selecting bunch.

There's little point in re-creating the current system all over the country as it is simply not fair. If it were genuinely a level playing field in terms of allowing schools to cover the right material and for everyone to take the test (or a few tests and take average, to stop 'on the day' fluctuations), then there might be a role for more specialized schools.

Why shouldn't we teach foot trimming and ewe nutrition to 14 year olds?

As it currently stands, there is provision for farming communities to set up a free school in the studio school model which could teach foot trimming and ewe nutrition to 14 year olds. There are already studio schools which specialise in STEM/engineering/media.

lljk

I totally agree with your points about parents not encouraging children to travel further for schools.
We really are stuck here as there is no transport that is easy for children to attend grammar schools which we just fall in catchment.
They really are miles away in opposite directions and are full way before you hit our town. They are the ones that fall under Trafford but are close to border of Lancashire.
No school in our area could cater for my dd, we had to send her to a specialist school where the only practicality is for her to board. I would like to have kept her close and hated the idea of her boarding, but it was our only option, for her to reach her potential.
Parents should be prepared to put themselves out a little if it means a better education for their children.

Sorry, shouldn't have said better, I meant suitable for the child.

Gilly- your dd is a prodigy. Of course no comprehensive school could cater for her. Neither could a grammar school. We aren't, however, talking about prodigies- we're talking simply about "top set" children.

What has that got to do with moving your child for a suitable education.
it doesn't matter whether they are a prodigy, bright, G&T academically, vocational, technical etc. If there is a suitable school that ticks all your boxes and it happens to be in the next town or the one after that, surely parents should at least be prepared to look at it.

We need grammar schools for those who live in areas without them.
I know several children who would have passed 11+ just from the school my dd attended.
So if we figure about 3 from each class, which is a low estimate, throughout our many primaries in our town there would be enough children capable of passing the 11+ for 2 grammar schools.

Thanks HPFA, your posts are good too! I agree we do need to think about how to build an effective opposition to this, especially in the absence of an effective opposition in parliament.

noblegiraffe just had to google studio schools and actually there isn't provision here. They look like a good idea though.

Why are the bad comps bad?

Where I used to live there was one grammar 1 place per 20 applicants - selected on academic achievement plus additional skills music or drama etc so kids were forced into additional outside activities

Then 2 comps known for drugs bad behaviour etc

Most parents moved further out to better schools because there was no way they wanted the stigma of a bad school

This leaves what? Less academic children with less supportive parents? Kids knowing the school is crap?

What if the remaining schools offered something different?

The playing field isn't level (what's left of them)

Why about technology school?

Maths literacy science plus technology -

What about a engineering school - again maths and literacy but with different engineering projects?

Why not a farming or animal school? We need vets farmers and such

A caring school - nurses care workers - real trades

Why not then a middle type school for kids prior to GCSE in the above?

Sorry, shouldn't have said better, I meant suitable for the child.

I think that was a Freudian slip there