Grammar Schools (given green light by Theresa May part 3)

[sandyholme]

Part 3 ... Let the sparring continue..

I've got a masters in maths from an RG university and screw anyone who says I'm wasting my time teaching borderline (sorry, 'mediocre') kids to pass their GCSE.

Some teachers are teaching because they get a buzz out of teaching their subject to children who grasp it easily and some get a buzz from teaching children, especially the satisfaction of having a child suddenly 'get it'.
It isn't right or wrong, just different motivations for teaching.

Exactly noblegiraffe.

Of course there are challenging schools.
There just happen to be people on here who equate the word 'comprehensive' with mediocre, mixed ability teaching and behavioural problems.

Why is getting mediocre kids to understand maths topics they struggled with before a waste of time? I'm genuinely interested, that's not supposed to be a goady question.

I am off to bed.
Having established that there is a teacher shortage and the academically able must get the best and shut out the less able who would be wasting the teacher's intelligence- any other reasons for a different school?

Would I want to see a return to the 1950s style of grammar system. No.

But the questions remains, how do you raise attainment without greater provisions within the current system.

How do you change an education system that allows schools (and I mean all types of schools) to effectively choose who they want to educate.

As I see it the problem isn't so much grammar schools but the various admission policies within various schools and parental choice which has created greater divisions within the comprehensive school system.

shark what's the point of a teacher having an impressive subject knowledge, when they're teaching low ability pupils who will never access or understand three quarter of the teacher's knowledge?

IT totally baffles me too Eddie.
Someone who has got bored in the city generally turns to teaching for a challenge.

What a bunch of dinosaurs, discussing the old secondary modern verses the old grammars. Surely we should be discussing how a new selective system would look in the 21st century?

Just a thought about a shortage of specialist teachers (no specific experience myself). If you get a first at Oxford in maths (for example), would you really want to spend a lifetime teaching basic algebra? Perhaps more people would be enticed into teaching if they thought their ability in their fav subject would actually be stimulated?

Why does every teacher have to do 'crowd control'?

Fresh yes, I do equate the majority of comprehensives with 'mediocre' because the UK is currently 20th in the world when it comes to literacy/numeracy rankings..despite us being the 6th richest economy in the world.

Anyone else supportive of their own children being in secondary moderns? Those with children in grammars or with an expectation of their children entering grammars tend to be more active on threads so I'm interested in what those with experience of secondary moderns think.

'Why is getting mediocre kids to understand maths topics they struggled with before a waste of time?'

It isn't - it needs a substantial level of skill.
High levels of poor maths knowledge has a massive impact on the economy. Pupils who struggle with maths need excellent teachers.

Some teachers who got a masters in maths from an RG university, enjoy teaching borderline (sorry, 'mediocre') kids to pass their GCSE. Does that mean all of them do? Does that mean all teachers should be that well qualified in their subject for all pupils?

One of the first reasons people put for sending their child to private school is degree level teachers for all subjects. So essential for private and grammar school kids- not necessary for the other 70ish %.........

I go by personal experience MaQueen and I certainly don't find them mediocre, so we will have to agree to differ.
I do , however, fail to see how putting 75% of our children into sec mods will increase our rankings - or are you proposing that they disappear from the statistics?

Anyway - I really must get to bed and leave you to it.

Ma Queen - Do you know how many of the counties which are above the UK in the rankings that you refer to have a selective education system?

Just one last thought- perhaps the teacher in the comprehensive has the greatest excitement in a child who is a late developer, suddenly 'gets' it and moves to the top sets.
Before anyone says 'unlikely' we have 2 in my extended family alone.

How would 75% of children in a sec mod get us up the rankings? Curious on that one. Is the comprehensive child going to blossom when changed to a sec mod?

Do we really need over 50% of our children to go to university? Is it really good idea to rely on immigrants pick our food, fix our boilers and build our houses? At some point doesn't going to university become a waste of time.

Why would anyone with a first from Oxford go into teaching if the attaction wasn't the potential get through to kids at all levels? If someone has a first and only wants to work with "high level" school kids they are still going to be pretty bored most of the time - surely that person would be happier in academia or as a quants analyst in an investment house.

The people I know with really good qualifications (so loads of other options) who became teachers did it because they wanted to teach and that isn't defined by getting the brightest to work at their full potential, it means getting all kids working at their full potential.

I don't remember any "crowd control" at my comprehensive.

So at 11 we decide who is going to fix the boiler and who is going to get the degree? No thanks.

My MIL was a teacher. She took time off after having DH and later taught adult literacy. She absolutely loved it, experiencing the difference it made to people's lives.

EddieStobbart, "Why would anyone with a first from Oxford go into teaching if the attraction wasn't the potential get through to kids at all levels?"

Maybe they love the subject so much they want to pass on their knowledge to children who want to learn. Can you only be a teacher now if your able to cope with children who have no interest in learning what you know?

I got my first maths qualification at nearly half a century.
I tell you, those in my class could all have done with excellent maths teachers as children. Some of us were written off.
A teacher who cares for and is capable of teaching all abilities should be essential in a school.

Can you only be a teacher now if your able to cope with children who have no interest in learning what you know?

No, but just because a kid isn't excellent at maths doesn't mean they have no interest, why would it?