People who are in favour of grammar schools....

[BertrandRussell]

....what is your proposal for the majority who are not selected?

In some areas a lot of children would go private if there were no grammars, but in the areas where there isn't that kind of money, it isn't an option. It really depends on the area. Just like going to the local comprehensive differs.

A lot of rich children may go private if there are no grammar. Doesn't mean a lot of able children can suddenly afford to go private. Money does not equate to ability.

My knowledge is 25 years old and Northern Irish, and I haven't RTFT. I passed the 11+ without tuition as did my siblings (parents could have afforded tuition but reckoned that if we needed it to get into grammar school we would struggle and be unhappy at the school). I am thankful for my excellent and free education and all of us went to university.
Those who didn't get in (closer to 50% than 80% I think, and we did not live in a rich region) went to a high school/ secondary modern. After GCSEs some people left grammar school and a good few more who had done well at high school came to the grammar schools to do A levels. I don't think they got given a shitty time or taunted for not being posh, because there weren't many posh people at the school- being the child of a solicitor was as posh as it got. (The tiny handful of really, really posh rich people got packed off to boarding school in England).

I don't know how they select now, but the recent picture in the local paper of the top handful of high achievers at A level from the grammar school I went to vincluded the daughter of the man who has worked on our farm most of his life and I don't think did A levels (neither did my dad). I don't think her mum went to uni either. She's just a naturally very talented child with very caring parents and is starting university this month.
In the global knowledge economy you need a good chunk of people as well educated as they can be- worldwide industry in our global capitalist system does not give a shit about fairness so if 20% of our children can be given an edge in the global market then fine.
It's not as if the rest are left to rot. The high schools here are decent and if anyone falls into a pit of misery and destitution it's more likely due to crap family attitude to education, sectarian shite, or the large amount of under resourced MH issues here.

boys3 from your table the number of applicants from Comprehensives are quite disappointingly few at 3065 with Grammar school applicants at 1805.

Success rate 22.3% from Comprehensives and 32.6% at Grammar.

Surely there are a few top comps but it seems grammar is a better bet for those with Oxbridge ambitions still.?

I would not disagree always - it worked for DS1 - , and indeed the Grammar success rate is only marginally less than that for indies. However the data is only for Cambridge, and is only for one year. The comp success rate has been a bit higher in some of the previous years. the school list is however a bit depressing in terms of suggesting a "not for the likes of us" attitude may still be prevalent in quite a lot of some schools

Cambridge and Oxford are, as has been rightly pointed out, not the be all and end all, and there are apparently other universities :) Would be interesting if more than just Oxford and Cambridge openly published this data - applications and admissions by school sector and for individual schools.

I live in a part of Switzerland with a grammar system, that most people seem to think is quite fair. Entry is at 12+, 14+, 15+. Entrance at 12+ is half on grades from the teacher, half on an exam, at other ages it is just by exam.

What I think makes the system fairer here is that children who get into the grammar only get to stay in if they maintain good grades. At 12+ 20% are sent back to secondary school after 6 months and they can also be sent down in later years. It's really targeted at the top 10%, rising to about 20% by 15+, and the secondary schools are also good.

boys3 Oxford and Cambridge are not for everyone and not providing all subjects, but they are still hubs of academic excellence and I wish more talented state school kids can have their chance to go, not losing out to less bright but highly privileged private kids.

Really I am fed up of choosing between a bunch of privately educated public school products for future PM. I want state school educated children of today to reach the highest office in the future. Updated Grammar system might be better at giving the truly talented a chance of achieving this.

beresh system sounds pretty fair but quite brutal! It suits a society who embrace competition.

The Swiss system sounds fairer beresh. That is what doesn't happen here, usually. The odd one or two get a second chance perhaps to move to the grammar school, and perhaps the odd one or two leave, but there is no real movement until post GCSE.

If such a system was introduced here I could imagine it causing howls of protest, from the grammar parents who had invested in a lot of tutoring.

I live in a grammar school area and am strongly against their reintroduction. The grammars are excellent with an 100% pass rate at GCSE this year but most of the children who get in went to private primaries and were heavily coached- they are all doctors and lawyers children. We also have 2 failing secondary moderns, an academy that hasn't had a stable head for 5 years and had some of the worst results in the south this year, and a catholic school. The only sixth form is in the grammars so most others don't go to sixth form and have to go to college in the next town 40+ minutes away. Grammars fail those who don't get in and are hothouses for those who do- I'm not in favour.

Tea the grammars do not fail their students. It is the secondary moderns who are failing their intake, and should be aggressively improved.

I can only tell you my experience of Grammar Schools as someone who went to one and who has the misfortune to live in a GS area. Everyone who passed from DS's class had a tutor. 75% of the class were tutored because the school our DCs would have to go to if they failed is simply not good enough (repeatedly rated inadequate by Ofsted, history of bullying etc), Not one child went there - those that failed either moved to the next county so they could go to a comp, went private, or the parents found God so their kids could get into the Church school.

Does Theresa May actually know anything about what goes on in GS areas?

Alwayssurprised Theresa May went to state school.

Local grammar school selective, local academy 'selective' (but not officially!), good faith school also selective ( in a much harsher way than the grammar)
The impact is on the comprehensive schools who are open to all.

mums Yes I know, or else I guess she wouldn't risk so much of her political honeymoon to try change the system. Way easier for her to pay lip service to improve and not do anything. Or just tinkle with the private charity status a little bit to keep people happy.

I agree always. What education needs is less politics. Otherwise even more of my colleagues will leave. I can't do much more (I shouldn't be here and should be marking but this is more fun).

I agree, I can't understand why TM would drop the G-bomb in the middle of Brexit! She already has plenty do. Perhaps this is a tactic to divert and dismay the left, while she negotiates unhindered in Brussels.

Or perhaps it's to try to disguise the fact that she hasn't a clue about what to do about Brexit, and the mantra has now worn thin, and her three Brexiteers seem to be worse than useless.

So stir people up with debate about a return to grammars.

I think grammar schools issue must be close to her heart to have this piority treatment. She probably can't tell how long she will be PM for really, so seize the day!

Zodlebud Thu 08-Sep-16 17:43:51I am in favour of grammar schools ... I have one child who is very bright and one who is towards the bottom of the year academically but excels at sports and practical subjects.

Oh, you're going to love the Grammar system, NOT. Good luck with that one.

mumsneedwine Fri 09-Sep-16 21:55:21 Alwayssurprised Theresa May went to state school.

mumsneedwine Fri 09-Sep-16 21:55:21 Alwayssurprised Theresa May went to state school.

According to Wiki:

Her father was a Church of England clergyman who was chaplain of an Eastbourne hospital.[6] He later became vicar of Enstone with Heythrop and finally of St Mary's at Wheatley, to the east of Oxford.[7][8][9][10]

The Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Wheatley, where May's father was vicar and where May married.[11][12]

May was educated primarily in the state sector ( was this a faith school?) but with a short spell at an independent Catholic school. (How long was the short spell?)

She initially attended Heythrop Primary School, a state school in Heythrop, followed by St. Juliana's Convent School for Girls, a Roman Catholic independent school in Begbroke, which closed in 1984.

At the age of 13, May won a place at the former Holton Park Girls' Grammar School, a state school in Wheatley. During her time as a pupil, the Oxfordshire education system was reorganised and the school became the new Wheatley Park Comprehensive School.[13][16] May then attended the University of Oxford where she read geography at St Hugh's College, graduating with a second class BA degree in 1977.

A lot of private schools were private Direct Grant schools before 1975 and converted to state schools as a result of changes to funding systems at the time.

Demographically the families who used secondary education before 1944 (when it was fee paying), most private day schools, and today's state grammar schools, are effectively the same group of people. They just rotate around the selectives and fee paying sector as they see fit.

I am going back to the original post now. My proposal is that we have state of the art academic and vocational facilities with masters' trained teachers or people with massive industry experience teaching kids in groups of 20 whilst providing a top flight sports and nutrition package to turn kids into a kind of supermensch.

The ones that pass the 11+ can have the leftovers because they are too bright to need my special arrangements.

I want someone to ask her why she thinks that the answer to poor outcomes in some comprehensives is to remove as many high achieving children from these schools as possible.

I don't think Holton Park Girls Grammar was Direct Grant - I think it was an 'ordinary' LEA school.

Holton Park Girls Grammar joined up with the Secondary Modern in Wheatley with the Sec Mod building becoming redundant and now being partly used by the village primary school, (also C of E) and other assorted educational buildings.

The Direct Grant schools were ones like Abingdon School (boys) and St Helen's (girls), Abingdon, which were Independent before the 1944 Education Act, went into the state system, (sort of) post then, and then turned Independent again when Oxfordshire went Comprehensive.

I'm curious as to what Holton/ Wheatley l was like when TM was there. Was she happily ensconced in a small girls grammar of c 300 pupils, and suddenly there was an influx of kids from what was the Sec Mod?

I have been inside Wheatley Park, and there used to be (still is?) a school photo on the wall, in the GS days, showing TM, who was then just a politician (in the 'nasty party' days. )

I love the grammar system and I was brought up In a grammar area and both me and my brother failed the 11 + and went to the local secondary moderns. I now live in different area with grammar schools and my dd is in year 6 but won't be doing the entrance exam as she isn't academic enough. In my opinion u need to be naturally gifted and academic to pass the test with no tutoring to succeed at grammar. I do know a few people who privately school their children to pass the 11 plus and when they have got to the grammar they have struggled. I really don't understand what the problem is in giving the bright children especially those bright children from poorer homes the chance of a fantastic education to suit their ability. When I took the exam 30 years ago I agree the system was then flawed as everyone took the exam and u either passed or failed and me and my brother felt like failures for a long time. However the system is so much better now that only children who have a high chance of passing actually take the exam. How can something that gives anyone rich or poor the chance of a top notch education be so wrong??