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

[sandyholme]

Part 3 ... Let the sparring continue..

maths
About the Ofsted report into most able learners:
"The report, which is based on government data plus visits to 10 primary schools and 40 non-selective secondary schools, as well as evidence from 130 routine inspections, raises concerns that achievement of the most able students suffers if they are from disadvantaged backgrounds, or if they are at a school with a low proportion of high-attaining pupils."

So grammar schools, which don't admit their fair share of disadvantaged pupils, and which would create more schools with a low proportion of high-attaining pupils would not solve these issues.

This also from the Ofsted report

37. Regional differences result in some disadvantaged students being even more badly served. For example, of the 500 or so disadvantaged students in Kent, only 2% go on to attend a top university. In Manchester, this rises to 9%. Disadvantaged students in Barnet are almost four times as likely as their peers in Kent to attend a prestigious university.

Link to the whole report here:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-most-able-students-an-update-on-progress-since-june-2013

Yes, MathsMum I have experience with gifted children. I have been explaining most of the thread!
The boy who got the top maths A level result in the country for his year was not gifted- he was just very able in maths.
The one who had master classes from year 5 and had to be a social case in the comprehensive was gifted.

I said on thread 2 that I had nothing against a super selective for the top 2% but got slated for it so shut up! I was given a whole series of reasons as to why it was unworkable and a mistake.
I still think that there might be a case for the top 2% . The 20-25% that are in grammar schools are certainly not gifted.
My DS who went to a RG university was fairly run of the mill- he wasn't selected for any of the gifted and talented things at school. He was not the top 2% in the country.

If we selected the top 2% it would cut out any tutoring. It really would get the highly intelligent who are way above your normal grammar school pupil.

I still think that even that isn't really necessary. A comprehensive ought to be able to cope, and socially would be much better.

Special case and not social case!

FreshHorizons

My children didn't go to one of the top 5 in the country.

I asked for confirmation that the schools were not in the top 5 or top 20% for the county or local authority not country. So far I think I've only had one positive reply from a current parent (littlelate) - other replies are from posters who have dc that haven't yet started secondary school or left 10 years ago.

Why would places like Keswick, Harrogate, Horsham, Ascot - to name just a few- not have comprehensives with a large top end of high ability

Why, indeed - affluent towns and selection by postcode.
I looked at Keswick and Horsham:

There is only one secondary school in Keswick - Keswick High - the free school meal rate for 2014 was 2.8%, A - C was 75%. Keswick High was the 3rd best state school in the whole of Cumbria for A - C GCSEs.

Horsham has three state secondary schools, all comprehensives: Millais (girls only) 85% A - C in 2014, Tandridge House (mixed) 76% A - C and The Forest School (boys only) 60% A* - C in 2014. Millais was the highest performing state secondary school in the whole of West Sussex in 2014 and Tandridge House was 4th best. Second and third best performers were faith schools (unsurprisingly) with faith-based admissions criteria.

How highly did your ds's comprehensive come in your local authority? If your "ds who went to an RG university was fairly run of the mill" at his school (and the school had its own sixth form) then I can only assume that the school was ranked quite highly.

Hooray- glad to see that we have found that all comprehensives are not 'bog standard' . I chose places with no grammar schools and so they have the top ability pupils.
My children went to one that won't come into the Times top list, but won't be far below, and some of the others in the town make it some years.
I deliberately moved out of a grammar school area- of course I chose one with good comprehensives.
I was lucky to be able to do it. I was trying to establish that vast areas of the country have great comprehensives.
It is naive to say that grammar schools escape this. The main marketing of my house, when I moved, was 'in the grammar school catchment'- it makes your house worth more!
The sec mod will depend on the area that it has as catchment.

I was told only last month by an estate agent in a grammar school area that Brexit wouldn't affect their house market because people 'move for the schools'- and he sure didn't mean the sec mods!
I think it is very unfair to say that comprehensives are bought by your house price and grammar schools are not. Anyone who moves specifically for the grammar school is taking a place of someone already there.

By 'there' I mean already living in the town.

A quick Google of the worst schools for able children throws up comprehensive areas, as does general 'worst UK schools'. I suppose the Isle of wight, Oldham, Derbyshire and the rest of the worst areas that came up must all be creaming off their able dc to the trafford grammars, after all, the only other explanation could be that too many comprehensives aren't good enough.

I see none of the 'Comprehensive' advocates moved to Clacton or Burnley then !

Why should you have to be 'gifted' top 2% as opposed to being above average say in the 25-30% ability range to have a grammar school education !

Hooray - glad to see that we have found that all comprehensives are not 'bog standard'. I chose places with no grammar schools and so they have the top ability pupils.

You have also found comprehensives with some of the lowest free school meal rates in the country.

Is it just me???!!!

I was slated last time sandy so am not going to go in for a second dose!
I was replying to someone who asked if I had experience of gifted children. I do - but 20% of children are not gifted.

I don't know Kent or the schools, but I know that there will be a pecking order of grammar schools and people will move for the best! ( the same as they do for comps)

Of course they have! I chose them deliberately. It was to show that comps, in those areas are going to be good. Parents are not going to stand for mixed ability or lack lustre teaching or disruption of classes.

Oldham does not send any children to Trafford ! Oldham has one decent private ex Direct grant grammar school (Hulme Grammar) that had to merge the boys/girls divisions to survive.

There are a couple of decent Church Comprehensives Crompton and Blue Coat . Knowing Oldham 'well' i can assure you 'everyone ' would find god even the biggest atheists.

noblegiraffe, just because current grammars do not admit a fair share of disadvantaged pupils, does not mean we can not have a new type of selective schools that do!

FreshHorizons, I agree that selection should only be for the top 2% (or something similar). And if comps can adapt to provide for that then it wouldn't even be needed. But lets be honest that right now all comprehensives do NOT provide for gifted children. Don't see teachers liking that without more money!

sandyholme "Why should you have to be 'gifted' top 2% as opposed to being above average say in the 25-30%"

Ummm... Because within 25-30% you are still close to average. The top 2% is abnormal and very different. aka SEN

So for the pro-grammar people, those with very gifted children want them for the top 2%, those work children who fall below that level want them for the top 25%. It would be good to hear what is wanted by those who don't think their children would get into the grammar school?

Grammar schools were not meant to be for the 'elite' just for those who showed academic or a propensity to learn.

I agree with you there should also be schools that 'specifically'
cater for High Functioning Autistics or those with (sen) who are 'Academically capable with the correct help.

Hopefully, today children like me are not labelled as 'thick' or 'Dangerous' because we can't hold a 'pen' properly or sit in a classroom in terrified silence !.

eddie selection by postcode seems to be a popular one.

Lurked, how does that answer my question?

noblegiraffe, just because current grammars do not admit a fair share of disadvantaged pupils, does not mean we can not have a new type of selective schools that do!

People are prepared to put in serious pew time to get their kids into faith schools. What would they do to get their kid labelled disadvantaged. A period of unemployment?

Anti-grammar doesn't mean pro-crap comprehensive. People seem to miss that.

There are lots of initiatives to improve bad comprehensive schools. Giving the powerful and interested-in-education parents an opt-out isn't going to help.

So would you noble if you lived in Oldham !

Education policy should not be decided on the basis that some people live in Oldham.

A rare thing indeed : The Independent making the case for a modern take on Grammar Schools.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/grammar-schools-like-the-one-i-went-to-are-good-for-social-mobility-the-public-schools-most-a7178836.html

Actually noble the powers that be should listen to the likes of 'Gillian Duffy ' and white man in Rochester ,not lecture them for Example on what schools they want!