In praise of comprehensive schools

[FreshHorizons]

It was cheering to see the Sutton Trust announce that 60% of Team GB medalists came from comprehensive schools.

I have finally come off a thread where certain people can't find a good word to say about comprehensive schools. They equate them with mixed ability teaching, poor behaviour and an inability to stretch bright children.

I would like a thread to celebrate the best of comprehensive education.

In my case it allowed my 3 , very different, children to be able to go to the same school without being judged by outsiders. It meant the stability of knowing one school over a long period of time and them knowing our family. It meant that days off and parent evenings didn't clash and that money was saved by handing down uniform. They were able to move up with the bulk from their primary school. They were able to mix with children of different abilities and backgrounds, as you do in adult life. It meant being able to enjoy education for the joy of learning new things, without the stress of an exam that would determine their path in life, aged only 10 or 11yrs.

Those things didn't really matter, although they were helpful.

What really mattered was that they could all blossom at their own rate.
They all got a good education and are now happily established in careers- the careers that they chose.

It wasn't all about the academic side- there were opportunities in sport, music, outdoor activities etc.

It would be nice to have some success stories. Please don't post about crap schools- start another thread for that if you have grievances you want to air.

It is the summer, the sun is out and some happy, optimistic stories would be nice.

Two very interesting articles:

headguruteacher.com/2015/12/13/the-disadvantage-gap-is-a-chasm-part-1/

headguruteacher.com/2015/12/19/part-2-bridging-the-disadvantage-chasm/

Author has been head of a superselective and currently is Head of an inner-city comp.

And while I'm on my lunch hour:

Another school that RBWM Council thinks would do better as a secondary modern:

www.churchmead.org/85/latest-news/article/22/record-breaking-gcse-results-for-churchmead

A friend of our's found his music qualifications helped with his successful Cambridge application.

And however many times Oxbridge academics say that music qualifications are irrelevant (except for music) you won't believe it.

Why do you think private schools push the extra curricular so much and why do you think they say it's one of the things that give them the edge!

Extra and co-curriculars help students develop many important skills and broaden their horizons. They don't, however, help with university entrance. Again, however many academics come on to MN and say this, and however often university open days repeat this, some people won't believe it.

Of course experiences outside school are crucial for courses such as medicine, but even medicine is not looking at music/DoE/dance, but at specific work experience relevant for medicine.

Hear Hear.

DD's 5 applications were all RG Unis. Her course is Biosciences.

The Universities cannot have looked in detail at her other stuff
if nothing else because her distinction at grade 8 was achieved after they sent out their offers

Four of them sent out their offers electronically within a matter of days.
The fifth one took a lot longer but again cannot have read her statement as they would never have done what they did if they had

If one candidate has 4 As and comes from a privileged family with all the money and opportunity to do music exams, and DofE and all the rest, and another candidate has 4 As and has had to work part time to make ends meet, how is it remotely fair that the first candidate should take priority?

HPFA - there speaks a man used to talking AT disadvantaged families, not with them.

Of the handful of children from dd's primary class who have had disastrous outcomes at secondary - all come from families with multiple and complex social problems, way beyond the remit of anything schools can address.

Parental support is the most important thing in education- whatever natural ability the child has. This is why children miss out because as a parent you have to be on the ball. My dyslexic son only got his level of support at school because I pushed.
Good comprehensives have it much easier if parents are supportive. Earlier in the thread someone, can't remember who without looking back, said their DS was at an oversubscribed comprehensive and in a top set and yet he came back complaining about lessons being disrupted. I asked if she phoned the school about it, but got no reply so assume she just thought it was to be expected. In my area there is no way that parents would have put up with it- they would be on the phone and expect it to be sorted.

Universities are trying to give opportunities where they are deserved, and therefore the pupil with 4As from a disadvantaged background, who has had a part time job, will be given special consideration- because just think what they could have achieved if they had had the advantages of all the music lessons etc!

Oxbridge applications here

More good news about Oxbridge applications

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37250916

And I note this sentence from the report:

House of Commons library figures for the 1970s show state school admissions at Oxford consistently below 50% - and in 1961 there were 34% of Oxford entrants from state schools.

So since we've had comprehensives we've nearly doubled the % of state school students at Oxford - although I suppose that will have nothing to do with comprehensives.

A powerful voice hopefully

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/wilshaw-new-wave-grammar-schools-would-take-country-backwards

Hopefully not someone to be ignored.
He says the obvious - why would 3/4 want a sec mod when they have a comp?

Fresh I'd have preferred him not to use the line about the top pupils raising the rest - I don't think this is our strongest argument.

But yes, good to see him stating clearly that a non-grammar in a grammar area IS a secondary modern - quoting from someone like this is more effective than a long-winded explanation.

There is absolutely no support for this move from any organisation outside right-wing Tories and UKIP - whilst Gove liked to portray himself as battling the Education Establishment he did have support from some sections plus moderate Conservatives. Even then he didn't get through things like the return of O Levels.

So i guess i must be a right wing 'Tory' then !

I suppose that must be an insult....

Wilshaw by using the words 'Secondary Modern' has rubbished many schools !

And here's how grammars will enhance social mobility

twitter.com/TootingJo/status/767417687349878784

Sandy I used the word "organisation" because I know individual grammar supporters will not all vote Tory or UKIP.

Why is Wilshaw rubbishing schools by using the correct term for them? If you think secondary moderns are rubbish you shouldn't campaign for their return.

If anyone has a new term for non-selective schools in selective areas I will use that, but I will NOT call these schools comprehensives when they are not.

I think that is the problem - you call secondary modern schools by their correct name and it is called 'rubbishing them'!! Lots of secondary moderns are excellent, but we can see the general view by that statement.

So people are not allowed to spend their money on improving their families lives !

I am getting 'Sick' and tired of people mentioning 'Social Mobility' , that should have 'fuck' all to do with creating grammar schools.

The grammar school debate should be about providing a type of school wanted by parents , servicing the needs of 'aspirant' parents and children.

They should not be about whether they improve the life chances of the bottom 10% of population !

The improvement of peoples lives in the bottom sections of society is a separate issue to that of grammar schools !

I am not left with much option to vote for when one 'hopeful' Prime Minister wants to sit on the 'floor' of a train ! The other 'MORON' wants a personal meeting with the ' BULLDOZER' in RAQQAH...

Do you not think that the bottom 10% might want to improve their life chances sandyholme and have aspirations?

I want to improve the life chances of all children (particularly those born without them) and if something isn't good enough for your children then it isn't good enough for other people's children!

It's not like your children exist in a vacuum. If the bottom 10% are screwed, that will be at a cost to society.

Could we get away from this idea that there are no secondary modern schools? In April of this year the NASM (National Association of Secondary Moderns) was formed.

They formed this to promote the good work done by sec mods. You can see how far they have to go if their name is associated with rubbish schools!!

As I have mentioned before our whole exam system favours more intellectually able children. GCSE changes next year are to the benefit of more intellectually able children. We have a massive 'long tail' ( on a graph) of less able students who very few people give a flying fuck about.
A discussion about comprehensives is hijacked by grammar enthusiasts and people obsessing about Oxbridge. Bright children are well catered for.
We should be focusing on average kids. Children who want to be hairdressers, mechanics, nail technicians and chefs who are being stopped because they can't get a C in GCSE English.
The debate is all about precious middle class babies who to be honest can take care of themselves. Stop thinking about yourself and your decking grade 8 violin and think about the county you want to live in and the discarded kids.

OK deep breath.