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

[sandyholme]

Part 3 ... Let the sparring continue..

Last year I taught top set maths and Further maths GCSE. I also taught GCSE resit. I think I was more proud that all my kids passed their resit than they all passed Further maths.

I teach A-level Maths, I know what level those kids are at. Do I think that someone with a C at A-level would be as good as me at teaching C grade GCSE kids? No. I'm a better mathematician than them. I can think of different ways of explaining things that are mathematically correct. I can look at a question someone has done and I can not only quickly see where they went wrong (trust me, that's not easy), but I can figure out why. If someone comes up with a weird method for something that works, I can tell if it's a fluke that it works or whether it actually works, and why. I am mathematically confident. C grade A-level kids are not.

EddieStobbart, I am not saying a kid who isn't excellent has no interest. I am saying not all kids are interested.

I have thought about being a teacher several times in my life, I love science/maths and have a degree in them, have private tutored from primary age to a-level. But I have no ability in crowd control or trying to get children to learn who have no interest. So I can't be a teacher. I think that's a shame because I am a very inspiration teacher of STEM (or so I keep getting told).

But I have no ability in crowd control or trying to get children to learn who have no interest

But you know that all teachers have to learn those skills, right? It's not like some natural ability, it's learned from books and other teachers and trying stuff out.

Even an very clever cohort isn't necessary going to care about the teacher's specific subject. They might get their head down and get it done but not with challenging questions etc.

There seems to be an assumption that less bright children will be boring to teach and their class would amount to "crowd controls". I don't see why this would be the case - I don't recall the lower sets at my school being one long riot. An inspirational teacher in that setting could make all the difference to a child's life - they could be captivated in a way they hadn't been before (and even move into the top set).

I'll tell you something about teaching children: it's never boring.

noblegiraffe, But you know that all teachers have to learn those skills, right?
Yes I do and I could. But I dont want to, because its not what I want, I wouldn't want to teach in private either (I do a lot of free tutoring). I could be persuaded to teach Chinese children but in England its a free for all. Sorry I just dont have the temperament.

Hegarty maths is an great example, ironically it takes you OUT of teaching!

I could be persuaded to teach Chinese children but in England its a free for all. Sorry I just dont have the temperament.

I find this odd. With the maths example a good teacher will tackle the fear of maths and the I can't do it attitude that can prevail. Poor behaviour in a maths class maybe due to lacklustre teaching to a group of children who have completely lost confidence. I could even see this attitude in the adult learning group I was in! I regressed in a different way and froze and became tearful. The adult learner teacher built us up again so we could learn. By secondary level most of us in the class felt defeated by maths. A skilled teacher who cared about us seemed a consistent missing part of our educational jigsaws.

It is refreshing to come back to this thread and see some common sense and the real motivations of why people go into teaching.
Noblegiraffe has hit the nail in the head with the statement that teaching is never boring. You will find that people go into it from other professions simply for that reason.
It is good to teach children who are likely to understand easily and fly along in the subject. It is equally good to have the challenge of thinking of ways to get the less able child to understand- an enormous satisfaction when they do. There is huge satisfaction in getting a child who isn't interested hooked on the subject . Most people - of all abilities- can name a teacher who really inspired them and that was generally a teacher interested in them as a person. Good teachers are not the ones that can just stand in front of the class, interested only in their own subject and the high ability child.
Being a teacher is about learning how to control a class- you certainly need it is a grammar school where the intelligent children can spy weaknesses and undermine in subtle ways- very difficult to deal with. If you think that teaching is about crowd control and that you couldn't do it then you wouldn't be able to do it. Behaviour is a whole school policy and not one teacher in a classroom.
I don't want a system where you look at a child at 11yrs and say 'this one may be a doctor, this one can be a plumber and this one can just pick fruit'. The joy of being a teacher is getting each child to fulfil their potential - not knowing what that is. It isn't saying the doctor one must have the Cambridge graduate, the plumber can have the 2:2 graduate from a mediocre university and the fruit picker can make do with a non specialist teacher.

I have at least had an answer to my question. Apparently they can't be in the same school because there is a shortage of teachers and the good ones have to be rationed and kept for the high ability teachers- therefore those of lesser ability can't be in the same building.
Logic then tells you that if there is no shortage of teachers they can be in the same school.
Any further reasons? I am not keen on that one- it makes me more sure they are better off in the same school.

I would also love to know how we would go up the world rankings if 75-80% no longer have a comprehensive and access to the best teachers, but are relegated to secondary moderns and the best pupils and best teachers are creamed off. Are the results of the 20-25% supposed to shoot us up to near the top?

You are quite right about adult learners PonderingProsecco. I went to German classes at one time. We started with a lovely woman teacher who was German- I don't know what her qualifications were but she had married an Englishman so I expect evening classes were a nice little earner that fitted into her life. She made it very interesting, made relationships with all the class, told us about life in Germany, brought us in gingerbread at Christmas etc and we all loved it - the whole class gelled.
We all got enthusiastic and signed up for a second year. We got a male teacher- I expect he was well qualified and it was clear that he knew his subject - however he was as dull as ditchwater and he made it all seem so difficult. He wouldn't interact- he refused to call us by our first names, despite a spirited attempt to make him! The inevitable happened and we dropped by the wayside - I doubt whether many made it to the end of the year. This happened with adults who were motivated to do it in the evenings and pay for it and we were all abilities- some highly intelligent.

Apologies- my post of 06:33 should of course read high ability pupils and not high ability teachers!

If there is a teacher shortage then why is a comp system fairer? The teacher/pupil ratio across the country doesn't magically change because of the type of school. But I suspect people know that, and are happy to ignore the fact that in a comp system it won't be their dc who end up in the schools with the biggest shortages.

If it's so wrong to limit a child at 11 because of an exam, why is it ok to do so on postcode?

"If it's so wrong to limit a child at 11 because of an exam, why is it ok to do so on postcode?"

It isn't. As everyone keeps saying. But which you won't accept because it doesn't fit your narrative that everyone opposed to selective education has children at grammar/private/top comprehensives.

Ok then, who is anti-grammar on this thread and has sent their own dc to comprehensive schools outside the top 5 (for results) in their county/local authority? If outside the top 5 were they outside the top 20%? I can only think of Talkinpeace who has paid to bus her dc to a different local authority as the comprehensive schools in her own local authority were so much worse. She now pays £800 a year bus fare for one dc at sixth form college (there are much nearer sixth forms in her own local authority for those who can't afford the bus fare).

I am anti grammar and would have been delighted to send my children to a comprehensive school. However,I live in Kent. There aren't any.

who is anti-grammar on this thread and has sent their own dc to comprehensive schools outside the top 5 (for results) in their county/local authority?

I did. One has now got degrees from two RG universities; the other turned down places at RG Universities, (to stay with now ex-boyfriend), but now works in an RG University.

Outside the top 20% as well Peregrina? How many years ago?

I could add that the two comprehensives my children went to both feature on Bristol Universities contextual offers list. There aren't any grammars here, but a large number of independent schools skew the intakes. Skew them in two ways - cream off some, but by no means all, of the academic children, and cream off some of the 'nice, well-behaved' types, especially girls.

A few years ago I admit, but I don't think the schools have got worse then. Indeed one has gone from RI to Good, in Ofsted terms.

My ds starting comp that was in bottom 10 for results in country not that long ago.
I like the ethos of the school and the fact it is pulling itself up from its boot straps. A complete belief that every child should do the best they can. A focus on the whole person/ rounded children.
Chose this over a school that is in top 100 of comps in country.
Could have got into either. PP children well above average at school ds will attend and below at the other school.

A couple of evasive answers so far:

Bertrand - you have no experience of sending your dc to a comprehensive school and you obviously live alongside an area which has some deprivation - you may well have not been in the catchment area of a good comprehensive school.

Peregrina - could be 20 years ago then - perhaps in top 20% at the time?

PonderingProsecco - your child hasn't yet started secondary school. I'm curious - are you based in London (double the funding compared to other areas)? Otherwise I cannot think why you would not choose the 'golden ticket' school (your description) for your child as everyone else on here has certainly chosen the best school available to them. Did you take your dc to look around the top 100 school? My ds starting comp that was in bottom 10 for results in county not that long ago. How long is not that long ago? Were you influenced by the choices of your close friends and neighbours or are you of the belief that 'a bright child will do anywhere'?

"A couple of evasive answers so far:

Bertrand - you have no experience of sending your dc to a comprehensive school and you obviously live alongside an area which has some deprivation - you may well have not been in the catchment area of a good comprehensive school"

Don't understand. You do know that I have a child at a secondary modern, don't you?

Not in London.
You are not alone in doubting my choice.
I went around both schools.
Golden ticket school is how others feel about the school.
Talking approx 5 years ago re bottom 10.
My ds best friends going to other school which gave me a wobble or 6.

How the hell am I being "evasive"?

I feel a name change coming on as am not being 'evasive'. .