Selection get out clause

[mrz]

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/grammar-get-out-clause-confirmed-selection-permissable-within-trusts/?utmcontent=buffer81f1c&utmmmedium=social&utmsource=twitter.com&utmmcampaign=buffer

Odd, isn't it Greenleave? It benefits us all as a society to have children as capable and educated as possible. The most effective way to aid children's development is through the family. But, if parents "enrich" their children's education outside of school, it is "cheating" and needs to be discouraged or even penalised. Very odd.

Enriching kids is fine. Teaching them the exact same stuff that they are meant to be learning in class a few weeks later is just a pain in the arse.

I doubt many parents could do that. They don't know your lesson plans.

Teaching them the school curriculum in advance of it being taught at school is going to be an issue whenever it comes up in class. Seems to happen more with maths than other subjects because parents can't think of anything enriching to do with maths other than buying a CGP revision guide and slogging through it.

In the context of the grammar school debate I think the argument would be that its giving your child a double advantage. Everything we do to enrich our DD's education gives her an advantage over some of the other children in her comprehensive, of course it does. But if us doing that meant she then had the further advantage of grammar school and other kids the disadvantage of going to the secondary modern (and there is plenty of research evidence to show that there will be a disadvantage) that's giving her one hell of a leg-up.

If I lived in a selective area and couldn't move of course I'd tutor the hell out of her - I couldn't let her suffer the disadvantage if it could be avoided. But I'll continue to argue against returning to a system that would give her more of an advantage than she already has.

Greenleave I don't think you should be so hard on yourself. No matter how lazy you think you are, it is quite evident from your posts that your DD is anything but lazy.

Is there anything specific you think you should be doing that you're not?

Greenleave

That is exactly the problem. I have been told by teachers and parents, right from reception upwards, "its your own fault your DC is bored in school, you shouldn't be teaching them at home", and I wanted to punch them in the face

And imho that is the problem with the comprehensive system attitude, for it to work everyone has to be dragged down to an average. I reckon my DC would be 3-4 years behind where he is now if I had accepted my place in life and stopped fighting for my DC to achieve something better than I have.

Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.
Thomas A. Edison

No, it's not that they're bored so you shouldn't be teaching them at home, they're bored if you're teaching them at home exactly what they'll be learning in school.
It'd be like knowing that they're going to read Romeo and Juliet at school and instead of taking them to the theatre to watch some other Shakespeare, getting them to study and do some standard essays on
Romeo and Juliet. It's daft.

mathsmum314 Wed 05-Oct-16 21:23:10 And imho that is the problem with the comprehensive system attitude

So what will a Grammar school system do for your DC that the comp. system doesn't?

Perhaps you DC will be happier at a Grammar that offers a 3 year GCSE course?

mathsmum314 out of interest, how far ahead is you DC in all their other GCSE subjects?

MumTryingHerBest, Obviously grammars are to late for my DC. But I would hope a grammar would do several things: Have a large enough concentration of academic children to enable subjects to be taught at a higher level. To have more academic subjects. To stretch and challenge the brightest children. To have a culture and expectation that an A* isn't the pinnacle of achievement. To have extra curricular activities suitable for academic children. To NOT have teachers that tell you to stop supporting your child to learn as much as they can. To support application to the best uni courses. etc etc

My DC is ahead in all GCSE subjects, in old money he will get A* in at least 10 (+2 out of school). New 9-1 its hard to be so specific but will be expecting at least 8-9 in most subjects (Maths and Science he is usually 97-100% in all past papers).

noblegiraffe
I really despair at your perspective as a teacher and it reinforces why the comprehensive system is so flawed. I have never specifically taught my DC any of the schools curriculum. I have always taught my DC in a way that makes learning fun, which leads to wanting to learn and increases his knowledge to the extent where the curriculum is so fecking easy its boring. I mean your implying what his reception teacher said a decade ago, "stop teaching your child to read, what are we supposed to do with him if he already knows how to read".

You seem determined to paint me as a shit teacher along with being a socialist, of which I am neither.

I'm saying that there's way more maths out there than the school curriculum, and there's way more stuff out there than the school curriculum, so to spend your spare time teaching them things that they're going to learn in school anyway seems like a waste.

No, from what I have read on here you appear to be a good comprehensive teacher. Your politics... I have no idea of but you do seem to be socialist leaning.

there's way more maths out there than the school curriculum I have NEVER specifically taught my DC the school curriculum. Its not possible to work on very difficult maths challenges without first learning addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Are you suggesting schools issue guidelines saying, "please keep you children ignorant of multiplication for the next four years so they are not bored when we teach them it"?

Its not possible to work on very difficult maths challenges without first learning addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.

Which they learn pretty early on in primary school.

And even without that you can do stuff which will support maths, like chess, coding, music.

So teach them anything but Maths?

And even without that you can do stuff which will support maths, like chess, coding, music

Won't that upset the music & computer science teacher?

I can't believe a teacher is arguing that a parent should stop teaching their children because they are learning to much and will be bored. I am starting to understand what the 'blob' is!

You don't understand what maths is if you don't get the value of chess/coding/music in improving maths ability.

Learning an instrument is popular enough not to affect music teaching, don't know about coding, that particular curriculum is all over the place.

Which they learn pretty early on in primary school

Sorry to take it out on anyone here but it fucking pisses me off. OK they learn it at primary, really? Because the top set in my Dc's Y10 top set GCSE @ comprehensive school have spent past few weeks practicing addition and subtraction of numbers with a decimal point.

Been on waiting list for wealth selection school for 4 years now....

You don't understand what maths is if you don't get the value of chess/coding/music in improving maths ability

I am ready to throw things at the wall, I understand Maths, my Y10 DC is studying maths at undergraduate level, he doesn't need chess or music to improve his ability FFS.

noble, you haven't a clue.

And FYI he will likely get an A* in computer science

mathsmum314 Wed 05-Oct-16 23:45:33 MumTryingHerBest, Obviously grammars are to late for my DC.

You do know that you can apply to the 6th form of a Grammar?

Chess/music/coding was a suggestion for primary level when you were saying they needed to be taught further along the curriculum to do tricky maths problems.

Learning adding decimals in top set Y10 isn't anything to do with comprehensive education, but crap teaching most likely due to a critical shortage of maths teachers. Maybe the £50 million for grammars could be spent on that.

Your DS wouldn't be taught undergraduate maths at a grammar either (I thought he was doing additional maths?)

mathsmum314 I think the following thread migh give you a better idea of how advanced the maths teaching is at some Grammar schools:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=48340

twitter.com/SGorard/status/783677705908813824

New evidence. I hope that behind the scenes Heads are organising to the best way to stop this practically. They have a clear moral duty not to co-operate with a system forced on them without a mandate from the electorate which is clearly not in the best interests of most children.

This document may be of interest to people:

www.royallatin.org/images/YearSevenCNW/ThreeCurriculumBookletFifteenSeventeen.pdf

On the last page it gives the average NC Levels (in old money) achieved by their pupils at the end of Year 7 and 8. Found this very interesting to compare DD's levels last year. She got a 6c in English (this grammar's average) and that was from Set 4. In her Maths Set the top girl was apparently on 7c (they're very open about Levels at her school) so presumably the top set in Maths was all at Level 7 which again is the GS average.
Of course this is only one grammar but I think we can take a Bucks grammar as probably being fairly typical of non-superselectives.

Your DS wouldn't be taught undergraduate maths at a grammar either (I thought he was doing additional maths?)

Hmm, yes, she's hardly being self-consistent about her claims, is she?

And the advice on not pre-reading the school curriculum for additional maths but doing something outside the curriculum isn't just coming from the maths teacher on this thread - it's coming from a maths academic too. One who is presumably also intend on dragging down children (despite coming from one of the best departments in the world).

Agree with many other posters that grammars don't do more with their pupils in maths than top set maths at comprehensives does. Quite a few grammars don't get involved with Olympiads either - the Olympiads are still quite dominated by boys from the top private schools.