Theresa May to end ban on grammar schools part 2

[noblegiraffe]

Continuation of the first thread from here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/2702565-Theresa-May-to-end-ban-on-grammar-schools

Well it's part of a nationwide strategy teacher and led from the top, so not quite as piecemeal as your description makes out. Also, equally, my own position is very clearly that of believing that grammars do significantly more good than harm but that the access issues are critical.

Just adding to my 'window dressing' point earlier - 1.6%FSM at the local grammar, whereas at least 30% come from private primary schools....

teacher sorry, I missed your response to the window dressing post. You've picked one small aspect of what schools are doing, or beginning to do, to justify your comment. What do you think of the results in Birmingham for instance?

X=post, goodbye.

So if 30% of current intake are from private primaries, and there is a 43% difference between the %FSM of the grammar school and its surrounding community, how do you propose that that the strategy that you advocate can arrive at an admissions process that genuinely and reliably identifies and admits the most able, regardless of background?

Cross post! I wouldn't like to comment on the grammar in your area teacher but certainly the school my DC attend takes an average of only 6% from the private sector (although this average varies a bit year on year).

Goodbye, can you elaborate? As it's your area, if you could give what they have done, and how it has changed the profile of candidates admitted, both in terms of their socio-economic profile and their primary education, that would be really helpful.

Another cross post! Obviously there's something not right if the numbers are as you say. Something needs to be addressed but one would probably need local knowledge to do so. It's just not possible to comment without that. All I can say is that your numbers don't in any way replicate those that I'm familiar with.

Interesting on % private.

I have just investigated all the local grammars.

Essentially the % private decreases with decreasing selectivity, and the %FSM increases with decreasing selectivity..

So they range from 1.6% FSM / 30% private, via 3% FSM / 14% private to 8% FSM / 5% private, though interestingly the last one had an improved Ofsted quite recently, so its FSM has dropped in the most recent data to 5.8% and % private has gone up to 8%.

(Average %FSM across the area appears to be around the national average - 24 -25%, though the specific area around at least one of the grammar schools is very deprived relative to the rest of the area, and as say, nearest non-selective school is 44% FSM)

Goodness we're good at cross posts :) I'm under pressure to go out and enjoy the rain but in short: the measures outlined in the earlier thread - with the double caveat that our situation hasn't historically been anything like as bad as yours in terms of narrow social profile also that the measures being adopted by schools across the country won't change profiles overnight. A lot of primary heads needs winning over as do a lot of pupils/ their parents who just don't have a grammar school education on their radar. It's not a snap your finger magic type of thing. As with Oxbridge, these kids won't get in if they don't apply, hence trying to go out and get them! Of course prioritizing them on the eligible list is only a tiny part of the whole picture.

Carl in a way I think that the WP issue is one of the things that makes the idea of grammars/SMs more complicated and problematic.

The idea of the grammar school was to give the kind of education which would allow pupils access to universities, which then took about the same proportion of the population as grammar schools did - but now, since basically almost everyone goes to university, would you have to make it explicit that Grammars are for Oxbridge and RG, and SMs for those who will apply to 'the rest'? The huge changes in HE make that distinction at 11 so much less meaningful or apparently logical than it must have seemed in 1944.

It is difficult, because we do all talk about our local areas, and from our own experience, so we really do need the 'aggregated' national data on both selective and non-selective systems to be able to look at them as 'systems'.

Hmm, re selectivity. Our school is generally top or towards the top of the tables, although as with other schools such as Pates, there are sometimes technical reasons for a blip.

Since basically almost everyone goes to university, would you have to make it explicit that Grammars are for Oxbridge and RG, and SMs for those who will apply to 'the rest'?

This would seem to be at odds with measures to encourage RG universities to take more students with BTEC and other vocational qualifications. But anyhow, as said many times on this thread, the change being proposed is probably the creation of a small number of new grammar schools, rather than every school turning into grammar/non-selective.

Goodbye, I am going very much on 'local lore' and historic patterns of which marginal students meet the 11+ cut where when I look at selectivity - tbh I can't quite decide whether I'm amused or shocked that this 'gut feel' about selectivity and the %FSM / %private marry quite so well - a little bit like I couldn't believe how neatly Ofsted rating matched %FSM when i did that ranking for local schools (50% = RI or lower)

It's just, I can't see that even this lot will wish to reverse the situation we have now where going to university isn't for the few but for most 18 year olds - so rather than grammars 'training' for HE and SMs 'training' for vocations, you surely just entrench who is going RG and who isn't at a really early stage?

I think it's not as selective as most, in terms of raw numbers applying. I think that's an advantage socially though, particularly since it seems to get the job done. I'd say the top 10% perhaps. But numbers applying can be misleading in terms of the ability of the actual intake so these numbers have to be treated with care.

goodbyestranger Thu 11-Aug-16 12:19:35 the school my DC attend takes an average of only 6% from the private sector

Where did you get the figure from?

Unless the job requires professional qualifications or the employer preferres them e.g. 10 A will not trump ACCA accreditations. You do not need A to get ACCA accreditations. I’m sure there are many more professions where this would also be the case.

Completely agree that in theory you don't need A* grades to get ACCA, but that's not my point. My point is that in reality, employers who may have say, 100 applications from school leavers for an ACCA trainee position will have to weed out 90 of those to get down to a reasonable short list of 10 for interview - GCSE/A level grades may be one of the criteria they will use.

Just the same as some FE college courses often saying that GCSE grades C and above are the minimum entry requirements -both my niece and nephew got GCSE grades averaging Cs, a few Bs and a few Ds but got C in Maths and English and thought they'd be OK for the FE college courses, but when they applied they were both turned down (different courses) despite meeting the entry criteria and without any form of interview nor covering letter nor CV - they were simply turned down because other applicants had got better grades - there were no other allowable criteria.

That was my point about reality of the current situation in that it's highly competitive to get jobs and further education, so you really do need the highest possible levels of exam grades that you can possible get to beat the competition, not just meet the minimum entry requirements.

MumTryingHerBest from the results of the various admissions rounds in the past ten or so years.

Mum, an easyish way to get a rough idea is to look at the school performance tables at www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/find-a-school-in-england.

You then need to expand 'Performance by prior attainment at Key Stage 2'. The final fighure is 'Proportion of pupils included in value added measure'. Subtracting that from 100 will give you a measure of the % of the intake who arrived without KS2 SATs results. The vast majority of private schools don't do KS2 SATs, so that % is a reasonable measure of the private school intake.

It is an approximate measure, of course - some private primaries do do KS2 SATs, and there are other reasons not to have KS2 SATs, for example moving from abroad.

I can't see that even this lot will wish to reverse the situation we have now where going to university isn't for the few but for most 18 year olds.

I think it's more complicated than this. The correlation between university fee increases and TEF (teaching assessment of universities) is clearly aimed to create a multi-tier university system. The top universities will be allowed to charge considerably more, while the lower tier universities will within a few years be driven down to fees comparable to what would currently be £6k. (The coalition government believed that lower tiered institutions in 2012 would not charge the full £9k, but without any disincentive to do so they did. Now the government will force fee differentiation.)

Meanwhile the research sector is seeing considerable cuts in real terms, with much of the available money being concentrated into the top tier of universities at the expense of the bottom. Brexit will most likely reinforce this further.

So within 10 years I would expect a multi-tier university system to be clearly in place. (This is not necessarily a bad thing, if it allows our top universities to be world leading and our lower tier universities to concentrate on what they are best at.) Grammar school pupils will indeed be aiming for the top tier (mainly) while those with lower A levels and BTECs will be encouraged to aim (mostly) for the lower tier.

However, policies are not always self-consistent, as there are also draft proposals for penalties for the top tier of universities not broadening their intakes and accepting more students with non-traditional qualifications.

Badbadbunny Thu 11-Aug-16 12:41:14 100 applications from school leavers for an ACCA trainee position will have to weed out 90 of those to get down to a reasonable short list of 10 for interview - GCSE/A level grades may be one of the criteria they will use.*

If some of those applicants already have exemptions from professional exams, then they will go to the top of the pile. It will be cheaper to get them fully qualified. GCSE/A Levels would likely only be used as a tie breaker. However, I know a number of people who selected their courses specifically based on the exeptions they gave to professional qualifications not because they were an Oxbridge degree. Interestingly a number of them went the BTEC route.

teacher Your dc did not score highly enough in their 11 plus exams for your nearest grammar school (a super selective) - surely you would not have refused them a place if they had? Lucky coincidence then that your nearest comprehensive school consistently ranks in the top 30-40 comprehensive schools in the country.

The fsm rate at your dc's comprehensive school must be amongst the lowest (for a comp) in the country and comparable to the grammar schools they did pass for - in fact I wouldn't mind betting that their comp is slightly more middle class than these grammar schools.

My own dc1 did not score highly enough for Tiffin - he goes to an independent school because our catchment comprehensive is probably not even in the top 1000 schools.

goodbyestranger Thu 11-Aug-16 12:42:05 MumTryingHerBest from the results of the various admissions rounds in the past ten or so years.

Where are those results published, if you don't mind me asking. I'm not questioning what you say, I was not aware that specific date on secondary school allocations included the number from preps.

I knew there are at least 3 prep. kids in my DCs class as they wore their leavers hoodies to the year 7 intro day.

Primary schools places are freed up at the end of years 2, 3 & 4 due to children moving to preps. and then a few more places are freed up in year 5 when families move closer to the secondary school they want.