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.

I do wonder whether 'Alison Mc govern' ex head girl (and right winger) of Wirral Girls Grammar will help she does not have to make a comment on grammar schools !.

She has previously acknowledged the opportunities her wonderful school afforded her , so it will be a bit of a 'back stabbing' if she slates grammar schools .

Belvedere (Ester Mc vey's old school) Birkenhead High School In Liverpool and Queen Elizabeth's Grammar in Blackburn are selective private schools that became all ability academies in the last 5 years or so .

There is a question with the new proposals whether schools like this may be able to go down the Watford Grammar, Dame Alice Owen route and ingeniously found themselves with 70% high attaining pupils.

Will hope !

Sandy Toby Young has been pushing for partial selection to be allowed. To be honest, I wonder if this is a deliberate leak to push Theresa May towards that as a compromise. I can think of fiddly ways you could handle this to prevent neighbouring schools losing out too much. I'd sooner we didn't do this but it is a possible compromise.

sandyholme There is a question with the new proposals whether schools like this may be able to go down the Watford Grammar, Dame Alice Owen route and ingeniously found themselves with 70% high attaining pupils.

I seriously hope not.

I really wouldn't wish this system on any one. It involves every form of selection possible except faith:

Distance
Music ability
Sports ability
Technology ability (more like a mensa test though)
sibling
x-sibling

And by the way, anyone who thinks this is about choice should take note of this helpful little explanation from Bucks County Council:

There are 2 types of secondary school in Buckinghamshire – upper/all-ability schools and grammar schools. The Transfer Test decides which type of school will best meet your child’s needs.

So parents don't decide, your child doesn't decide, the Test decides. There from the horse's mouth

HPFA I'd sooner we didn't do this but it is a possible compromise.

Believe me, semi-selectives are an even worse option. A DC needed to score in the top 5% - 10% of an examined co-hort of 3,800 last year to gain an academic place at the top ranked SW Herts consortium schools.

Take a look at the ability intake, SEN & FSM figures for Parmiters, St Clement Danes, Watford Boys, Watford Girls, Rickmansworth, Queens & Bushey Meads (slightly different approach as fair banding).

Fortunately the non ranked schools don't do too badly because the consortium schools get hammered by children living in Harrow and North London (due to good transport links) so a lot of local children loose out on places anyway.

lets go for a 40% selective option then !

sandyholme lets go for a 40% selective option then !

That would make it worse. Some siblings would get a place and others wouldn't. This will drive people to buy/rent (the rental option is particularly popular around the semi-selective schools) on the doorstep of the school. This will drive up property prices meaning those with money will gain an advantage (which they already do).

Lets all go to schools then where parents want to home 'educate' because their children can't wear trainers or short skirts !

I wonder if 'Sir Roger Manwood's' sent 50 pupils home today because parents are so 'inept' and behave like kids themselves in complaining !

Sian Williams' daughter Aleasha, 11, is now considering home schooling her after she found the experience - on her first day - so distressing.

'Demand' for Grammar school education will increase just to be away from idiots like her mother'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3775968/Police-called-school-sends-FIFTY-children-home-day-term-weren-t-wearing-right-uniform.html

There could not be a better advert for grammar school education than this !

I don't think that ill informed twaddle from Daily Mail readers is an argument for anything. Dictatorial heads like that one appears to be don't usually last long. They put the backs up of the staff too, who start leaving in droves.

I found this on a comments forum in the Guardian - it was in response to someone complaining that his able daughter should not be expected to help other children:

My daughter was in a similar situation.I figured that being used as a free TA was actually good for her. It taught her patience, empathy, and gave her a clear view of the subject from more than one angle. Rather than getting the subject and moving on, she had to think about it and relay that.

Don't know why but it brought tears to my eyes - I love the fact there are parents in the world who think like this.

That's great. But I do wish they wouldn't say "acting as a free TA" when they mean children helping each other. It's so devaluing to the role. And it also suggests that the school are doing it somehow to save money.

Sorry- quibbling, I know. But I think it's important.

I remember my mum (who was a very good and well respected English teacher who inspired an enduring love and appreciation of English amongst her pupils) explaining to me the benefit of pupils explaining to other pupils to their own learning. It helps embed their knowledge.

It's not a substitute for teaching (and teachers) - but it's something good teachers may well incorporate into their teaching plans.

Bert Quite understand but I thought the idea behind the quote was so lovely.

I must admit I'm a bit bemused by how many people are so opposed to this notion of children helping each other. Isn't it a really useful skill for real life to learn how to explain things to other people?

Another poster posting in the wrong place!

I posted it even though i disagree because its good for the debate

GoosePimple100 Wed 07-Sep-16 11:35:10

Selective education promotes social segregation. There seems to be an assumption that everyone would use it 'if they could afford it'. We can afford it and there is no way I would ever promote social segregation to my children in this way. We're not all 'jealous' - theres a whole host of parents who are very happy with state education and would not consider selective education for their own personal values, nothing to do with affording it or not. My friends who moan to me about what a pain it is having to end their summer hols early so they can put their child through a few weeks' intensive tutoring for the entry exam dont get my sympathy im afraid - they have the luxury of choice. Paid for/ no fee selection does not automatically = 'better

lets go for a 40% selective option then !

I agree Sandy. I would want as many children as possible to have a grammar style education. I wouldn't create any artificial ceiling by squeezing place numbers.

So what is a "grammar style education then"? And if you want "as many children as possible" to have one, why stick at 40%? Why not 100%?

At GCSEs everyone takes: Maths, Triple science, English, English Literature, one MFL, and at least 2 humanities. All classes pitched at children expected to be capable and working towards and A/A*.

So, a consistent environment that normalises academics and doesn't deplete resources by trying to be all things to all children. I want to see as many DC get a rigorous, academic education as possible as efficiently as possible because we don't have an endless pot of money.

All classes pitched at children expected to be capable and working towards and A/A*.

But 40% of kids can't get an A/A. I don't just mean that they not capable of an A/A (which they aren't), but that the grade boundaries are fixed so that the same percentage of kids get A*/A as are expected to from their SATs results.

I understand that. I meant that the DC themselves are potentially capable, so therefore they deserve the chance to be in a classroom pitched at that level.

I hope nobody is going to pick me up on my grammar, my use of coma's or capital letters, like some 'rude arse' on another thread has !

40% would seem like a sensible number for a grammar school style education, judging from the fact that 40% of current pupils are expected go to university at present.

'100%' is clearly a mickey take Bertrand !

Some Comprehensive schools fail their struggling students by insisting they take up to 10 GCSEs , when they are unlikely to attain more than a C grade in English and Maths !

Sorry- but that doesn't make sense.........

It's a bit like Michael Gove's "everyone better than average" remark.

Very late to this, but why segregate? I honestly don't get it. My son's at a mixed inner city comp. They stream into sets so high attainers work with other high attainers. If a child who comes in aged 11 suddenly zooms academically aged 13, they have a chance to move up to higher sets and work with other high attainers. You can't do that if you're in a different school, because at 11 you've been labelled as less able. How is that ever fair?!

I just posted this on another thread

We can all aspire to get every school in the country to be like fab with millions of GCSE options and extra curricular activities but I suspect it will not actually be financial affordable. Bottom line is, it won't be cost effective.

Maybe instead of grammar schools we can have academic learning hubs, where there are centralised resources to provide extra GCSE options, specialist lectures, access to field experts, trips etc for every school to send their most capable children to spend part of their time at? I don't think the current comprehensive system serves the most academicly able children well, or else surely they will be more state school children in Oxbridge? I think a lot of able children are thriving despite of school and not because of school, and can achieve so much more if the opportunities are there. They should not losing out to the privileged private kids because at their local comp they get a so so education with no way out.

Elly I teach at a comprehensive school. Some of my students got As this time around, some got Es, most got in-between. How were the A students disadvantaged by this? They still got A*s.

I teach Music, by the way, which I consider a 'hard' academic subject, as well as having an enjoyable practical and compositional element.