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/

What money will need to be spent to convert schools to grammars? Whether it's a good idea or not, I imagine it is a pretty cut price way to do a headline educational reform (which is no doubt a big part of the appeal).

Author stalk?

The Shanghai figures are hugely unreliable- there are many children not in education at all. And I thought there were issues with the Finnish model as well, although I can't remember what they were........

It's bound to cost far more than you imagine countess, there will need to be consultations, new admissions policies (and probably other policies) and tests set up and administered, arrangements made for transport, appeals, new management, re branding, probably including uniform changes etc etc.

One hopes they will do plenty of impact analysis and public consultation too

Like they did for academy converters you mean?

The English Ed system is very complicated. All the different types of schools all the different exam boards. It's much simpler in Scotland. Catholic State/Protestant State/private. One set of exams.

Do you mean the academy converters where the school management chose to convert and pretty much nothing changed, or the failing schools that were forced to change and had new management imposed, much cash injected and in some cases new buildings built? More like the latter, but with the added complication of taking into account effect on other schools in the area too.

The law will need to change to allow new grammar schools. That will take up a lot of DfE time and energy when they don't have time and energy to spare because of GCSE and A-level reforms.

I don't know what the panic is all about, just because it would/will be legal for a school to select on ability ,does not mean the majority of good schools will do so !

The banning of the building of new grammar schools in 1998 and the abolishing of the assisted places were two childish acts. Neither of those two acts have improved education, they just reduced opportunities for bright children , under the guise of 'justice' for the many not the few !.

The new reformed GCSEs and A Levels are not geared to the needs of the less academic so if 'secondary moderns' were re-introduced to cater properly for the needs of those DC then I don't see it being a huge problem. The current reformed exams completely disregard a large constituency of DC who simply won't be able to handle them. How that doesn't fail them I don't know. Large numbers of DC will simply be left stranded, with no decent qualifications. That's the current and looming situation Bertrand; how would you set about fixing it?

just reduced opportunities for bright children

What it (abolishing grammars) actually has done is improved chances for poor children, while slightly reducing the chances off well-off children - which are already well above those of the poor children anyway.

goodbye the GCSE reforms are certainly a shambles, but that situation won't be improved if the DfE has to spend all its time getting legislation through parliament to sort out this grammar school proposal.

But, regarding the GCSE reforms, there are many DC who are not grammar school material who, nonetheless, are capable of passing (grade 5) the new, harder GCSEs. I would be horrified if there was a suggestion that a return to a grammars should also be accompanied by a return to a two tier education system whereby the 'less academic' are relegated to different, inferior qualifications, tier of entry decided aged 10.

What proportion of DC would you estimate are not capable of passing the new GCSEs in maths noblegiraffe?

I obviously differ from you in that I quite like the end product of the reforms to both GCSE and A Level, but for able children. I do however think the less able have been largely ignored. It must be true that more children will fail the new exams, surely?

My ds goes to a secondary modern school- he's in year 10. Lots of them are predicted 5s and higher in the new GCSEs- although who knows, really? Time will tell.

There has been a voiciferous campaign in my neck of the woods for a new grammar school, the way that they have got around current legislation is to call it a 'satellite' and link it to an existing grammar.

It's a real shame and will affect the current non selective schools in Sevenoaks which some choose instead of travelling to the grammars in Tonbridge and Tunbridge wells.

Sevenoaks is heaving with people who have moved for the grammar system and now they are stamping their feet to have one on their doorstep.

sevenoaksgrammar.com/

Private schools (educating about 8% of the population) will be terrified about this news. The thought that millions of poor children could benefit from the selection process that they enjoy, for free, will not go down at all well. They will lose a lot of customers I expect.

Not necessarily. I could already send my DC to grammar schools but the £5000 per year education they would get there is not comparable to the £15000 per year education they get at private schools. Only if the state secondaries had more resources would I be more interested in them.

And as others have said above there will be a market for private schools for those who don't pass the grammar school exams and for prepping for the exams. (Kent has its fair share of private schools while Hampshire, a county with good comprehensives, has rather few private day schools already.) I agree with a pp that some grammar schools supporters might get quite a shock when they realise their DC aren't actually going to get in.

Even if Theresa May repeals the Blair legislation blocking new grammars from opening, it's far from clear that lots of new grammars would open. Between 1979 and 1997 there surely weren't new grammars anyhow? And in a county where e.g. most secondary schools are privately run academies (and no new schools are needed), I'm not sure how the process of creating grammars could work in practice - they can't all become selective, but how would it be decided which ones become the grammars? Why would parents support their local school becoming a grammar, with a 75% chance their children won't get in and will have to travel to a more distant school?

This is an interesting thread. I will be surprised if this gets through - the PM will need a big enough majority to do so (which I am not certain she has).

I think David Cameron was probably also in favour of grammar schools but never brought in new ones.

haybott what does your £15k buy that the state fundd £5k doesn't?

haybott You have summarised the practical issues very well. In our town there are three comps. How would they decide which one was to become the grammar? Would the other two just sit back quietly and agree to become secondary moderns?
The people who could stop this immediately are existing secondary school heads. They need to announce (through the National Association of Head Teachers perhaps?) that in the event of this coming into law they will all on the same day apply to become grammars. Then watch the D of E try and sort that out!

£15k buts you contacts - mixing in the right circles. Who you know is more important that what you know.

You

They need to announce (through the National Association of Head Teachers perhaps?) that in the event of this coming into law they will all on the same day apply to become grammars. Then watch the D of E try and sort that out!

Great idea!

However, I can see Grammars being a popular option for the stretched middle classes whose children at present go to the slightly less good Independent Schools - not the ones going to Oxford High or Magdalen College School - but the schools which are a rung or two lower than this.

Meh- I pulled dd1 out of Oxford high and she went to a Sec modern in Kent. She was much happier in the sec modern. Much sneering towards me for that.