so, how quickly could these new grammar schools actually open?

[megletthesecond]

Obviously I know it won't happen overnight and these things take ages to go through parliament. How long is a piece of string etc....

But when could they start opening? Three years, ten years? It seems like a personal campaign for May in which case would she want to push it through before the 2020 GE?

I found this from a contributor on a Facebook site opposing the new grammar annexe in Maidenhead:

I asked TM about this recently during a school visit. She said mockingly that someone had written to her suggesting RBWM schools would become secondary moderns, as if it was a ridiculous notion. I assured her they inevitably will. She didn't get it.

Now, obviously I have no idea whether this is true or not!! But if it is, it does exclaim a lot about this policy. I suspect like many true grammar believers she genuinely thinks that comprehensives and secondary moderns are all the same and that therefore it doesn't really matter whether comps are destroyed or not. Her MPS who have nice leafy comps in their constituencies may find that many of them do not agree.

If you have selection they can choose who they admit ...cream off the most able

I don't think any thought will be but into location, much like free schools and new academies they won't open where there is a shortage of places.

2striped Already we can see that's not so. Maidenhead is not a deprived area, has decent comprehensives, and in fact people can already access grammars in nearby Bucks and Slough. If you're looking at places where grammars might help disadvantaged kids (and I don't agree that they will) its one of the last places in the country you would build one.

The only disadvantaged kids this will "help" are those who a)Can pass the exam b)can't afford the bus fare to the neighbouring grammars and c) can somehow afford the tutoring or have parents able to coach them. Building a whole new school and turning good comps into secondary moderns is a rather inefficient way of helping this one child.

It's also a waste of much needed money in education. I teach in two departments in my grammar school. And in one of them we can't afford to buy any new resources. So we don't have enough text books for any year group, can't replace the ones we have which are falling apart and can't buy any new resources for the unfunded change of specs at GCSE and a level

It's also a waste of much needed money in education. I teach in two departments in my grammar school. And in one of them we can't afford to buy any new resources. So we don't have enough text books for any year group, can't replace the ones we have which are falling apart and can't buy any new resources for the unfunded change of specs at GCSE and a level

I suspect a bit of thought will be put into it.

With all due respect, thinking appears to be the last thing Theresa May's Government is capable of.
We have:

Hinkley Point stalled just when the French and Chinese were due to sign, causing a loss of face.
Brexit ministers constantly making gaffes - the latest being Fox telling Business men that they were fat and lazy, guaranteed to win confidence.
Theresa May given a difficult time at the G20 summit, it being clear that she hadn't got a strong hand to play.
Even this GS policy - leaked via a stupidly having the documents in a clear wallet, although I suspect that was a leak.
A comprehenesive Education Secretary from a very non-leafy area, who has done well educationally and was clearly floundering when trying to defend the policy.

And here, a policy which was not in the manifesto, but seems to be yet another policy pandering to the right wing of the Tory party - who will be wealthy enough to pull their children/grandchildren out, if they don't pass for the Grammar schools.

HPFA The talk by Tim Leunig is online here livestream.com/L4L/rED16/videos/135298702

He isn't allowed to say whether he is pro or anti-grammar because he is a civil servant but it is heartening to hear him say that the consultation isn't a sham and the responses will be carefully considered in terms of the evidence.

What he does say is that the policy is popular among voters and that this is important. If grammar school critics want the proposal binned, then they need to consider why people want them.

Good point, noble (about critics needing to consider why the policy is so popular)

The strength of the free school programme is that it allows a bottom up approach to new educational provision, with local groups being able to propose a new school rather than relying on top down, central planners deciding that there is a need. The weakness of the free school programme is that it requires a bottom up approach to new educational provision, with local groups being able to propose a new school without allowing top down, central planners to act where they identify a need.

I suspect the new grammar school programme will be the same: existing schools can apply to become grammars (but they will need to show that they are able to work with the LA and other local schools to manage the admissions process, particularly around later entry points beyond the 11+ and the transition process). Groups who want to open up new schools will be able to include academic selection in their admissions criteria, making them de facto grammar schools. If local parents feel really strongly about any of these proposals, they will be able to protest them.

Remember me saying how Heads should resign en masse?

roberthilleducationblog.com/2016/09/10/selection-brings-policy-carnage/

This guy doesn't go that far - but he's not far off.

The flaw with free schools is that £ millions have been wasted on schools that never opened collapsed or were in areas with no demand

Noble He's saying they're popular but according to this poll only 30% of people most likely to have children are in favour of new grammars being built.

twitter.com/Samfr/status/774342938562289664?lang=en-gb

That's not really a ringing endorsement.

If local parents feel really strongly about any of these proposals, they will be able to protest them.

Trouble with this, if you look at Maidenhead, the Council has made clear that the only people who count are the people who want grammars! They don't care about the people who don't want their comprehensives turned into secondary moderns. So even if the majority of people in an area want to stay comprehensive they won't be able to choose to do this.

I tend to think campaigners have to get a bit more Lynton Crosby about this - many people probably have no idea that their brilliant comprehensive could be destroyed by a small minority.

This

twitter.com/SianGriffiths6/status/774156432933474304

From The Times, which I have only read the first paragraph of:

Plans for a new wave of grammar schools have already been drawn up by councils just days after Theresa May announced that more schools could be allowed to select their pupils by ability.

Can Councils actually do that these days? Isn't one of the problems with the current shortage of places due to the fact that they can't plan and open schools, but have to persuade Academies or Free schools to do so?

In short, TM's ideas, seem like a dog's breakfast.

The Times headline has been simplified to 'Councils that wanted to open grammar annexes still want to open them'

twitter.com/richarda/status/774726480781860867

Bottom line here is that at present this is all hot air and people should wait until the actual green or white paper comes out and we can actually see what is in it.
There does seem to be a lot of commenting based on assumptions which may well never see the light of day in the green or white papers.
I think they will find it a lot more difficult than they think to just introduce new grammar schools firstly because of the law that says no more grammar schools but even when that is removed the admission regulations will also have to be reconsidered so that these can be met. Expending current grammar schools is perfectly reasonable suggestion but in many cases that is not realistic because they simply have no more space to expand. So the short term answer can only be to allow more annexes of existing grammar schools but even then you will have to find the site and build it. Given this and the need to modify the admission guidance this is not going to happen before September 2018 entry.

I suspect that in the mid sixties when Comprehensives were brought in, that there was a certain amount of expediency on behalf of the Local Authorities. The huge increase in births from the baby boom years had just about tailed off, so it would be increasingly difficult to justify the excess places in schools, and would have made more sense to amalgamate them, and have one school of 800 than 3 of 200, 300 and 300. Add to this the anger felt by parents whose children failed.

What will happen as the current shortage of primary places works through to secondary schools?

I agree mrz an expansion of faith schools in concerning.

I agree mrz, an expansion of faith schools is concerning.

If evidence counted for anything this would be devastating:

www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/12/tutor-11plus-test-grammar-schools-disadvantaged-pupils?CMP=share_btn_tw

But it doesn't.

Nick Timothy is the man behind the policy:

Have a look at his brilliant idea for encouraging more good people to become Heads. Its at the bottom of the story

johntomsett.com/2016/09/10/this-much-i-know-about-the-grammar-school-debate/

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Green-Paper-One-Page-Guide.pdf

The full green paper is released, and I'm having kittens already. :(

I could write 1000 moaning words, but I'm just going to ask this:

What does the paper mean by good school places. ? The phrase is never defined.
Apparently GSP can exist in selective or non-selective schools. In fact, more selective education will make good school places happen more often in both selective and non-selective schools. Whatever GSP are. They seem to be very important. Can someone tell me what the Green paper means by good school places ?

I think the phrase is meant to be "good school" places, aka ofsted good or outstanding, but agree that it isn't properly defined! Thanks for the link, will carry on reading...