http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/13/grammar-pupils-progressing-faster-than-their-peers-in-non-select/

[sandyholme]

I am pleased that finally there is a piece of evidence highlighting that grammar schools do improve performance for middle ability pupils.

All the evidence given on these threads has been to continually state the case for Comprehensive education.

My DD chose her school. She looked at comprehensives and grammars and liked one particular school. If by taking her round to look at schools and help her be informed Talk - by your estimation that makes me a pushy parent. I think denying a child that opportunity, that chance to choose, go for what resonates most with them is allowing them to sit in a world that doesn't exist. Choice, competition and variety exist in the world of work too, or at least for most of us.

Petts you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that entry to grammar school is something that pupils can choose. It's not, the grammar chooses to take a pupil or not, based on a flawed testing procedure.

But in Winchester and Romsey and Lymington and Basingstoke and Andover they could not give a shit about a "cut off" as it has not existed for 40 years
and why on earth would anybody want to bring it back?

At KS5 we have a variety of options, but the kids themselves choose them, rather than pushy parents

I can't think of more 'old fashioned' type Tory towns than the ones mentioned !

Good Grief the Conservative vote in North East Hampshire is 65% expected to go '68%' as Conservative as Wavertree is Labour !

I find it hard to believe their are few pushy parents in Hampshire ! Unless of course Anybody who is anybody , Children are at Public school and only the Plebs use the Comps.

And the Falkland Islands use Peter Symonds....

There are few pushy parents...

PettsWoodParadise Sun 16-Oct-16 21:56:50 She looked at comprehensives and grammars and liked one particular school

The more Grammars that exist the fewer comps. there will be to choose from. Perhaps then DCs will find their choices a little more limited and certainly, for some, a lot less appealing.

Noble - I am not under any misapprehension. If she hadn't tried she wouldn't have had the chance. Ambition and goals at 10 seem to be acceptable by some and criticised by others. I accept that. A debate is healthy. My DD had the capability, chose a school she was aiming for (with no external tutor, but yes home familiarisation). As we have the schools and opportunities I feel I would have been denying the best opportunities had I said - just go with the comp that is miles away and an awkward journey (several nearest comps we are not in catchment), has loads of teachers who keep leaving and is a pain to get to and by the way doesn't do the languages you want to do to work at the Job of your dreams (I understand it may change but dreams and ambition are not bad) vs our closest secondary school geographically that you really want to go to which by chance happens to be a grammar. I know some really bright kids whose parents chose not to sit them for grammars as they wouldn't be able to be with their friends. Truth is they didn't end up with their friends in the same class anyway. Many comprehensives set or stream so makes a mockery of comprehensive education anyway. I am resigned to the fact that most (not all) of MN hate grammar schools.

PettsWoodParadise I am resigned to the fact that most (not all) of MN hate grammar schools.

I don't hate them, I just don't think there is much benefit to be gained from them.

If the progress 8 is anything to go by a fair deal of benefit.

PettsWoodParadise If the progress 8 is anything to go by a fair deal of benefit.

Really so you think all the Grammar schools across the country have outperformed all the comps. across the country with regards to progress 8?

Not all, but circling back to the start of this thread the evidence seems to support it to a large degree.

PettsWoodParadise Sun 16-Oct-16 23:21:59 Not all, but circling back to the start of this thread the evidence seems to support it to a large degree.

I must have missed the evidence. I have another look through the thread for the progress 8 evidence.

We know that the existence of grammar schools screws over disadvantaged kids. That doesn't sound like a great deal of benefit, except for selected DC.

If she hadn't tried she wouldn't have had the chance. Ambition and goals at 10 seem to be acceptable by some and criticised by others. I accept that

It's not about ambition and goals, it's about some schools, who find it easier to hire and retain teachers and who are more likely to be Ofsted good or outstanding being reserved for some children who go through a selection process which favours the more advantaged classes. These schools aren't open to all and you can certainly increase your chances of getting into one with money. We're talking about compulsory free state education. If you think you can work hard with the 'ambition' of getting into a grammar school then you are also apparently entirely missing the point of what a grammar school is supposed to select for.

There has been some comment on Bucks Grammar schools up thread that is incorrect. The pass mark does not change. It used to be that only children who lived in Bucks, or were moving to Bucks by a specified date, could take the test. Now any child can take it whether they reside in Bucks or not. This is to comply with admission law. The fact is that there are very few middle attainers in Bucks Grammar schools. Historically there were about 10% but due to the influx of non Bucks children, this percentage is now very low. Indeed some Bucks Secondary Modern schools have in excess of 30% high achievers.

Also, high achievers, middle achievers and low achievers are not 33.3%, 33.3% and 33.3% anywhere! The definition is based on achievement, not neat percentages. You would expect an area such as South Bucks to have a healthy proportion of high achievers, and it does. Some areas of the country will have very low numbers of high achievers. Therefore the percentages vary from location to location.

Where there is one super selective grammar school it is obvious their results will be better than county wide grammar schools although there is a pecking order within the Bucks grammars.

I would like all schools to aspire to a grammar style education. I don't mean an elitist academic education, but one where opportunities abound and all teaching is outstanding and each schools has excellent leaders. This is what stops all schools being good and limits the progress of some children. A move to a grammar school system where it does not exist can only help a few. Why should the other children not have the best teachers and opportunities too?

Lastly, on funding, Pupil Premium has, largely, not gone to grammar schools - as you would expect. This is why grammar schools now say they are underfunded. Some I know have pulled in huge funds from parents which of course is possible with next to no FSM pupils. Many of those parents are no longer paying prep school fees or tuition, so they give to the grammar school. The AWPU has not been reduced for any type of school but some pupils get more funding through pp.

Unfortunately this sort of data cannot differentiate between added value of school and that provided by education invested parents, including the extreme of those who tutor before and during a grammar school education.
As a parent I observe that bright DCs are stimulated, stretched and motivated by academics if there is a critical mass of teachers who are bright, well educated and love their subjects. These teachers provide teaching that is not just utilitarian for exam grades; they also expand horizons and advise appropriately for subject choices and higher education.
As noblegiraffe says that must be principally be about teacher recruitment and retention. However I guess that a significant proportion of those type of teachers would be attracted to teaching higher ability DCs but not have the skill set for lower ability and therefore prefer to teach to their strengths.

I also observe that bright DCs are also stimulated, stretched and motivated by a critical mass of other bright and brighter DCs, because of learning from each other according to different strengths and some competitiveness. They also develop a sense of proportion for their own abilities That critical mass is more likely in selective schools but will also be present in the top sets of large comprehensives that are favoured by a certain population bias (and that is not just about MC affluence). Sometimes that critical mass can compensate for poorer teaching.

I am not sure what the answer is for areas with poorer schools but I can see that improved aspirations for bright DCs need at least one of the above ingredients. I think the first is the most important but most difficult to achieve.

The Progress 8 story in the Telegraph has already been debunked:

educationdatalab.org.uk/2016/10/provisional-ks4-data-2016-grammar-schools-reporting-fantastic-progress-8-scores-not-so-fast/

This is a critical article on Progress 8 in general: headguruteacher.com/2015/05/02/progress-8-looks-like-data-garbage-to-me/
I would need noble to explain the Maths to me though - while the author claims the Maths should be accessible to a GCSE student my 34 year old C at O-Level certainly wasn't up to it.

The more Grammars that exist the fewer comps. there will be to choose from. Perhaps then DCs will find their choices a little more limited and certainly, for some, a lot less appealing.

Spot on. There's a thread at the moment about Lord William's school in Thame which is a very good comp but close to the Bucks border. A couple of people currently choosing between it and trying for the 11+ in Aylesbury have said "it's a very good choice to have" . Which is fine, until the Aylesbury grammars decide they'd like to open an annexe in Thame.

How many Mumsnet threads have you seen beginning "Where can I live to try for the grammar and still have a good comp as fallback?" To which the answer is always along the lines of "live in a comp county close to a grammar", never "just move to Kent"

I'll make a promise now that I'll support grammars if every parent who enters their child for the 11+ has to sign a legally-binding document that their child will go to the nearest secondary modern if they fail. No going private, no border hopping. Just as comp advocates shouldn't be choosing grammars for their own kids (except in selective counties where they have no choice) grammar advocates should not be evading the secondary moderns they think are fine for other people's kids.

bojorojo Mon 17-Oct-16 05:33:34 There has been some comment on Bucks Grammar schools up thread that is incorrect. The pass mark does not change.

I thought the pass mark in Bucks was standardised rather than raw score? If it is standardised the required score to qualify could vary from year to year? This is how it was explained to me by a parent with a DC at DCHS so happy for you to correct me on this.

HFPA The basic criticism there with progress 8 is akin to buying 8 items at two different supermarkets, rounding each price down to the nearest pound (which is essentially what happens when you assign a GCSE grade to a raw score in an exam), adding the scores and dividing by 8, getting a decimal answer and then using that decimal answer to compare the two supermarkets to say which is the cheapest.

The confidence interval is a big thing with progress 8, and yet the league tables completely ignore it.

"grammar advocates should not be evading the secondary moderns they think are fine for other people's kids." Absolutely correct. Funnily enough, it was the same aspirational m/c parents who helped bring about the end of the grammar system when their kids failed to get places.

Thanks Noble I took your advice from a previous thread, got out my pen and paper and worked out some sample supermarket prices. So beginning to grasp the issue.

In a further post he same blogger seems to think that Progress 8 can be a useful measure for the school itself to measure progrees over time headguruteacher.com/2016/09/30/dissecting-progress-8-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
it's the use to make value judgement between schools that seems to be the problem.

In a little confused about funding.

Thought pupil premium was for specific kidd in fsm and additional money targeted and spent on those kids ie intervention /clubs/ trips ect so ring fenced not added to schools main budget pot to spend as they like.

So if a school any comp or grammar says part if why we underfunded us we have less pupil premium then I find that odd.

There are anomaly in funding each local authority gets different amount per pupil ours is top 10 lowest lea in England .

I suspect many parents do have private as backup .
Many parents move from private to state sector save fees a on a grammar

Must admit living in a really with no grammars it seems complex to understand
In bristol we have 2 well performing faith schools.
2 ex independents now random allocation with 12 places musical aptitude and 14 languages.

Both have aptitude tests .
But only Colston girls does fair banding non verbal reasoning to ensure comprehensive intake as everyone who sits the terms is put into 5 bands then randomly allocated .

A lot say random allocation / lottery is fair way of doing things.

But really is a type of selection.
Having an organised parent who familiarise child with Verbal reasoning tests.
Additional supplementary application form with a due date of 24th sept when the deadline for senior schools is 31st October
Then in 1 date only 8.30 sat morning driving across town to drop child off for verbal reasoning and language test.
Last stage is add it to preference to online form to lea.
The open days for both ex independents hugely busy lots of private schools uniforms looking round.
We go state so do wonder speaking to freinds in prep if their kids are better prepared for tests and have some advantage.

We decided to drop cathdral as only 24 random allocation places last year and over 900 applications .

Many just like grammar areas apply for the very top schools and have private as backup then seldom just make do with the local comp.

The top performing comps as in over 80%pass rate are In very expensive areas.
The majority bog standard comps score between 50_60% pass rate .

We only have 3 preferences I cannot say any certainty which one we get if at all as each school applies different admissions criteria we putting a bod standard comp on the up as 3rd but not our nearest 2 badly performing comprehensive who both score below average for progress 8.
Our 2 nearest better performing academies who got 73% both in requires improvement only scored average for progress 8.
1 is in very affluent catchment so lots high performing middle class kids from good state primaries feed into it.

The other is based in less affluent area.
Area slightly deprived but due to fair banding and test takes kids from all areas of city so it's not technically a local school.
Ofsted says teaching ok just management and behaviour.
We may have considered it but dident want to put 2 lottery preference down .

Must be nice get scores this week and find out you in.

Or maybe spend couple years working towards entry and feeling like you had some Influence over admissions.

I don't think selection by faith or postcode is any better.

Random allocation feels like gambling.

3asAbird Must be nice get scores this week and find out you in.

Not so nice for those who have just found out, rather unexpectedly, that they're not.

There also appears to be a number of parents who make their DC sit the 11 plus without first checking their DC has a hope of getting a place from where they live (due to distance cut offs).

I imagine it's even more dissapointing for those who made their DC sit the 11 plus in three or more areas to find they can't realistically get to any of the schools in less than an hour and a half and even then the journey is very disjointed.

Random allocation feels like gambling.

You may be surprised at the number of parents who make their DC sit multiple 11 plus exams and then post on forums to ask if their DC could get into a Grammar School, any Grammar School, with the score they have. This, to me, is gambling. I can't imagine how their DCs feel after putting in a huge amount of effort only to find out it was all for nothing because they didn't make the qualifying score in one area and won't make the distance cut off in another.

I think pretty much every flaw that can be found in a comp. education system, can also be found in a Grammar system.

This is an interesting take on selective education from the New York Times 1985.

/www.nytimes.com/1985/03/19/science/about-education-is-it-fair-to-have-selective-schools.html

'In a democracy,'' ''you can't just tell people what's good for them and then impose it on them whether they want it or not. Yet that's what we have always done in public education.''

I particularly like this quote from the online article.

This is exactly why parents that want the option of grammar schools , should have that option available to them.