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/

I think there is an important place for middle schools and then different routes after that. Unfortunately, middle schools have (I think) been removed from all LAs now (cheaper to have fewer, larger schools).

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 What proportion of the children want to learn animal husbandry? Who would teach it and where would they learn it? My brother and his friends got their academic qualifications and then went to college and university to get ONDs, HNDs and BScs in agriculture. It was also a chance for them to get away from the 'family farm' for a bit and experience life away from home. Most farmers I know are encouraging their sons and daughters not to become farmers. There's no money in it unless you farm on a big scale. Anyway if their parents are any good at animal husbandry then those skills will be passed on to their children at weekends and holiday times.

Where I live is dairy farming country and old established businesses are being sold right left and centre. Farming is a choice now not an expectation.

Both my kids get free school meals..they are both at good grammar schools....just saying

Codyking But vets, for instance, need incredibly high academic qualifications - how are they going to get those in your farming school?

Thank you noblegiraffe Deep down I find the idea of separating children into sheep and goats at 10 so abhorrent that I find it hard to stick to evidence and reason in posts. So its great to see loads of posts making the case so well.

I'm not sure of the figures (on mat leave this year) but they are only slightly out of step with the other schools on our side of town (a Catholic secondary and a notoriously difficult to get into (puts huge premium on house prices) comp (it is a comp, we're a superselective covering huge area).
The issue we have is that many people don't even apply that should (until sixth form). They think it's not for them. They think they'd have to pay. They think the uniform is expensive (the blazer is (shortage of suppliers) BUT there are ways around this). Our pupil premium students I do know of (ones that are still with us from previous years) are performing exceptionally well.
When we try to encourage people from schools where we haven't had many students we meet with resistance as many teachers don't approve of us.
I've just finished doing a year 4-6 summer school. It was fantastic. It was a pay what you want, some over paid and some barely at all. All were really able students who are going to go on to do brilliantly. One girl was sad as she thought she wouldn't be allowed to come to us for sixth form as she was 'just' going to a comp, not the girls' grammar or a private school. She was thrilled to discover that that wasn't true. Now, she may well change her mind in a few years but there we go.
We need more diversity in sitting the exam itself. We're trying our best there.
As for tutoring, we have a writing test on our entrance paper now. It is obvious who's been over tutored as they write formulaic pieces that they think we want and take no notice of the purpose of the task. I hope that this will start to make a difference.

The problem is allowing children to feel like failures if they don't pass the required GCSE's and A levels to gain a place at Uni.

If there were alternatives to degrees for the non academic subjects then employers wouldn't be seeking a degree and kids wouldn't need to strive for Uni.

We need all kinds of workers some which need an academic profile and others that don't. Distinguishing between the two will stop those not reaching the academic heights feeling like failures.

"We need all kinds of workers some which need an academic profile and others that don't. Distinguishing between the two will stop those not reaching the academic heights feeling like failures."

But there are not just two clearly separabel groups of children - the profile of 'academic ability' is a bell curve with a high point in the middle, not a graph with 2 peaks with a cleart low point in between.

So what grammar schools go is put a hard line down in the middle of a large group of children of almost identical academic ability - in fact, I would guess that on a different day, you might well find hundreds of children who just passed the test just failing, and vice versa. But then you treat the 'passes' and the 'fails' as if their academic ability is hugely different, when it is not.

"Sorry, shouldn't have said better, I meant suitable for the child."
Yeah, 'course you did!

teacher

I'm not too good at explaining my point, sorry.
An example was the actress who plays Tracey in Corrie in a radio interview.
She was talking about coming out of uni after graduation and gaining her role on the street, and her coworkers not needing degrees all those years ago, but studying acting/ drama at Drama college.
The difference being that you don't need a degree to do the job, but training.

My point is there are many jobs that a college education/ vocational training would be more fitting than having to take an academic degree at uni.
So, if you aren't academic ito GCSE's and A levels you can still gain a place on a less academic vocational course.
Employers wouldn't ask for a degree in a subject, if none was available.

Getting back to the few per cent attending uni, as in the past wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, if it meant those not going could still join the workforce in their chosen career and not feel failures for not being academic.

Brilliant news.

I'm not sure many people object to high quality vocational training being available to students alongside academic qualifications aged 14, or vocational training routes being available post-16. This is not the same as splitting kids aged 10 into two different school systems.

Does Gillybeanz have a prodigy child?
On this thread Gilly says that none of her children had the ability to pass the 11+.

Oh well. My youngest is 8yo so this is now a potential problem for my grandchildren.

Her child is not an academic prodigy.

Gilly, but what you are talking about is post-18 - or at earliest post-16 - choice.

Not a segregated school system between 'highly regarded schools' and 'regarded as second rate schools' [because whatever we call them, the non-grammar schools are not held in the same regard as the grammar schools] based on a single day of testing at 10.

My dc aren't very academic, although one did go to uni.
He struggled through GCSE's and one year of A levels as did my other ds.
Their schools were dire, didn't give any extra help and were disinterested.
The G&T academically were allowed to coast and also not encouraged.

I believe if our town had a grammar school it would benefit the more gifted like my dd friend who is at least 3 years above her age in Maths and top set for English.
From what I hear about grammars unless I'm mistaken is they encourage children to be good, not ignore their talents.
They are with other children who want to do well and not sneered at as some kind of weirdo or geek.

I do believe that there is a place for a small number of specific schools for 'rare groups of children' - vocational schools for dance, for music, for severe SEN, for those whose very high academic ability is itself so rare as to qualify as an SEN - with a nuanced and individual-based admissions process.

But not for a school system that crudely divides children of academic ability well within a 'normal' range, who can efficiently be educated in a comprehensive system, on the basis of a small number of coachable tests at 10.

"They are with other children who want to do well and not sneered at as some kind of weirdo or geek."

Oh, ffs. Because that is just routine in the top set of comprehensive schools.

Teacher, I think it's a top down attitude that needs to change.
So utopia isn't a place at uni, unless of course the child is academic.
There would be less angst about grammar schools if everyone wasn't so intent on an academic education.
Some kids haven't got it in them. I didn't and my dc don't.
There are children with SEN who have to go through endless exams as children, with lots of pressure to be as good as their able peers.
I know there are lots of shades in the middle, but to me the more variety ito education provision the better.
However, it's probably easy for me to talk about when I haven't experienced the down sides of the present grammar school system.
For our town and others nearby, grammar schools would be a God send.

"They are with other children who want to do well and not sneered at as some kind of weirdo or geek."

But my - very able, both passed 11+ well but chose to go to the comprehensive - children have exactly this experience at a comprehensive (technically the 'other' school in a grammar area, but much closer to a comp than is normal). It is absolutely not true that children in comprehensives do not want to do well, not that high ability is inevitably seen as weird.

From what I hear about grammars unless I'm mistaken is they encourage children to be good, not ignore their talents.

You need to strike out grammars and replace it with 'good schools'. There are plenty of comps that do that too. Your problem there wasn't the lack of a grammar, but the lack of a good school.

"However, it's probably easy for me to talk about when I haven't experienced the down sides of the present grammar school system. "

Well, that at least is factually accurate.................

The whole debate about grammar schools also ignores the real determiner of academic success - family background and support.

teacher

In many schools round here your children would be bullied or ignored if they gave the attitude of wanting to do well. I don't think it's the same everywhere.
These ingrained attitudes need to change and I think a grammar would help, here.
Believe me your children wouldn't prefer a school here if they were offered a grammar and had a good attitude to school work.

Bert

You seem to know so much about the area I live in, enough to believe my experience is inaccurate.
Maybe you could enlighten everyone as to what it is like where I live.
You really make yourself look daft with your oh so cutting comments.

You seem to talk as though it is the same everywhere and you know so much. Do your children attend schools in a variety of areas North, east, South and west?

On the other hand, I'm only interested in giving my own personal experience and learning about other areas as stated above.