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/

The sad thing is that if a school asked disruptive pupils to shut up or be removed to a locked classroom showing TV repeats. The kids would chose the locked classroom , showing non stop repeats of 'JEREMY' and an unlimited supply of 'GRAND THEFT AUTO' to play with .

The parents of such kids probably would not give a toss that their kids spent all day watching KYLE and playing GTA. However, the parents would sue for the human rights of their kids being locked up ! not out of concern for their child's education but because they could get money for their alcohol and weed.

Well, that's certainly an interesting argument, Sandy.

The proposal isn't a return to full selective/11 plus for all though just the option for a grammar in towns where one doesn't exist.

If you live in Nelson and are Muslim (like 4O% of the town) your only option without going out of catchment is the 35% pass rate comprehensive. If you are baptised rc/c of e you can escape that way to a school with almost double the pass rate. I can't see how one grammar school in Pendle would make their dire GCSEs outcomes any worse. It would improve the chances of many children especially those whose parents won't or can't pay the bus pass or those who are bright enough to pass for a grammar but not in top couple of percent to pass out of catchment.

Fwiw I went to a comprehensive. I can see absolutely no need for a grammar in my old town but my old school has ofsted outstanding and a 78% pass rate 5 GCSEs a-c inc maths/English. Non selective school in an average northern town.

The current England and Wales primary school reports system does of course require teachers to make a subjective judgement as to 'attitude to learning'. They are scored between 1 and 4 for effort as well as attainment.

It's impossible to tell how much effort a child is making.

I was a very low achiever and can't even remember taking my 11+, so it does not create any 'chips' on my shoulder .

Well, if we're doing anecdotes: one of my family is still so traumatised about failing the 11+ when all her siblings passed that she refused to let her own children take the test for grammar school and moved miles away into a comprehensive area. She has felt a failure her whole life and has poor relations with her siblings who went to grammar school.

Dixiechickonhols then why not plough the money (that would be given to set up a grammar school) into the existing school to raise stamdatds?

2Striped - read back. The difference for the very able is tiny - results overall are no better.

The proposal isn't a return to full selective/11 plus for all though just the option for a grammar in towns where one doesn't exist.

Umm, but in many towns there are only one or two comprehensive schools. So a grammar in each of these would be a full selective surely?

They have tried that though in the adjacent town of Burnley with similar demographics - called the super schools initiative. Have seen £250 million mentioned and it has been of no benefit. standards no better (36/37/38%) and parents who value education bussing kids off elsewhere or moving to edge of the other catchment plus the millions spent on utc I linked to. I don't know anyone at work or friends or acquaintances choosing the non faith comprehensive schools (Dc about to go to yr 6 so a big topic of conversation)

How many towns only have 1 school though? Possibly very rural but then kids will be bussing elsewhere if they don't like the one choice. I live near a small market town and there are several schools and many more within 5 miles.

The town I grew up in had only one school.

"Bertrand actually research has shown that more able kids do better in grammar schools."

Research has shown that more able kids do marginally better in grammar schools- but middle and low ability children do worse in secondary moderns.

But if you think that margin for already privileged children is worth the downside for the disadvantaged then I suppose there's not much point discussing it further. I find the idea that high ability children must take priority in all things deeply depressing. As is the assumption that "we all want what's best for our children" even if our perceived "best" is worse for someone else's child.

So in the market town itself is one grammar and one comp. A couple of miles one way is another comp and a couple of miles the other way a Rc comp. The surrounding towns are fully comprehensive. There is no sniff here it is a fully selective area, yet there is actually only the grammar and one other school in the town itself. Only some choose to sit 11+ many actively choose the good or outstanding comprehensives with much higher than average results.

2StripedSocks Tue 09-Aug-16 17:16:49 Bertrand actually research has shown that more able kids do better in grammar schools.

How does the research address the fact that many Grammar schools cater for the brightest kids in in 20 - 40 mile radius (in the case of QE Barnet 100 miles or more), whereas comps. tend to only cater for a comparatively small number of bright kids in a much smaller catchment area. It is easier to be the brightest child in a small single form primary than it is to be the brightest child amongst all those in 70-80 primary schools put together.

As is the assumption that "we all want what's best for our children" even if our perceived "best" is worse for someone else's child

Depends what it is really doesn't it? Most people buy trainers for their kids which have probably been made by child labour somewhere along the line. I doubt anyone is unimpeachable ethically, even you, BertrandRussell. Some people are just more honest about their hypocrisy.

2StripedSocks Tue 09-Aug-16 17:44:51 High ability children aren't given a higher priority it's the other way round.

This is not the case at my DCs school. In fact, acording their plans, they need to put more focus on the middle achievers and girls across the board in maths and the low achievers in literacy.

The problem with being in an 11 plus area, the school knows that their leavers destinations are a big draw for prospective parents. High ability children are low handing fruit in this respect and as a result the schools puts plenty in place to support them. SEN on the other hand - the School has no SENCo, the last one left after 3 weeks and the one before that after 6 months.

All along this posting it has been argued that the most able should not be prioritised over the least able !

Look at this way the country is carried by the top 30% of earners so it makes sense to spend the most on those who are more likely to be high tax payers i.e high attaining pupils.

This of course will be a unpopular statement , despite being true.

Why waste large amounts of money educating those who will be unlikely to repay the country with NI contributions or tax returns.

sandy so that they can repay the country with NI contributions or tax returns maybe? What a depressingly deterministic view you have.

Bertrand the research shows that disadvantaged but able children do disproportionately well at grammars. Just check out the various Sutton Trust reports if you want to read for yourself.

I agree with those who say that the able are given lowest priority in non selective schools, as a general rule. I can't see any moral reason why the least able should trump the most able in terms of education. Each should have equal status in terms of appropriate educational opportunities. Prejudice against one group is just as bad as prejudice against the other.

Throwing money at schools does not raise standards - it takes so much more

"Bertrand the research shows that disadvantaged but able children do disproportionately well at grammar" Well, the vanishingly small number that get in do- but it's barely statistically significant.
In a world of limited resources, the already privileged should obviously not get priority- surely that goes without saying?