Who saw BBC 2 Grammar schools - who will get in " last night?

[Foxy333]

Watched this last night with interest. We're not in Grammar school area and generally I think it was / is a bad system that works for the top abilities but not for the middle and lower ones. However I've seen my daughter suffer in years 7 to 9 or a comprehensive from not being stretched and teachers concentrating on the most demanding pupils who need lots of help and ignoring the quiet well- behaved pupils who going to pass GCSE's anyway. Often some pupils disrupt the class and the whole class gets punished.

They only set them for 2 subjects and I've heard that's changing in future to one. so I see why a Grammar would suit some. But why cant all schools be good. Is it stricter discipline that's needed?

Felt for the children in the program, so young to face this divisive test.

me too.
He did have medicated ADHD mind. (and was up at 5.45 am I noticed!!)

I think the dad was saying that his son saw the exclusion as a bit of a holiday. Sadly the son didn’t seem to have any engagement with his education at all. I think there were hints at a troubled background that hadn’t all been detailed there. The dad mentioned older siblings who were in/ had been in prison. I felt the dad was trying hard in very difficult circumstances.

“think there were hints at a troubled background that hadn’t all been detailed there.”

What- hints like the absent mother, the sofa surfing, the siblings in prison, the ADHD, the obviously inadequate housing.........

I found Bradley and his family circumstances very sad. The dad is clearly trying his best.

Equally I hope none of my children end up with similarly disruptive kids in their classes. But chances are that at least one will at some point.

Maybe hints is the wrong word. I was just replying to the criticism of the father. And yes there were things unsaid ie why the mother is absent, living a single father is more unusual.

Completely unrelated but I love Moonrise Kingdom!

Me too obviously!

Well, I rather assumed ...

Bradley is an example of a child that should not be in mainstream education ! He is not able to behave in reasonable manner, nothing arduous about the behavioural expectations at Erith School.
As a mother of a son with Autism amongst 'ADHD' It gets me angry when posters/ people use SEN as a get out of jail free card.

My son despite being terribly mistreated by other pupils and his disabilities unaccounted for by the 'outstanding' comprehensive . He never ever reacted in aggressive physical or rude way to other students or staff . In fact the only positive o come from that school was that his form teacher described as a lovely boy and that his behaviour was always exemplary.

We moved him to a non selective independent that acts like a grammar school (where he has gone from expected level 1-2 English/Maths GCSE to level 5-6 in 18 months) was dauting at first with its homework and organisational expectations. However, now he really enjoys the discipline of the private school.

Hopefully he will be able continue there for sixth form in September !

Despite his disabilities being unaccounted for in his Ofsted graded 'outstanding and posh' comprehensive !

letstalk2000 you keep mentioning how the comp. failed your DC. How do you think he would have got on in a Sec. mod. like Erith? Do you think he will made much better progress there?

Letstalk,

My understanding is that you are a supporter of the bipartite selective system, and an opponent of comprehensives.

It seems likely that your son would have attended the secondary modern part of the bipartite selective system, had this system been universal in your area (ie no comps available, as in Kent).

Does that mean that you are an ardent supporter of the bipartite system because you believe that your son would have done better at a Sec. Mod. than he did at the comprehensive?

Or are you just angry that, in the event, the particular comprehensive he attended turned out, against your expectations, NOT to be better than the secondary modern so you had to opt him out of state education entirely?

Or do you believe that he would in fact have been selected to go to a grammar in a selective county, and you want more grammars to make them less selective and thus make this more possible?

I actually believe he would have fared no worse at a Secondary Modern school than his comprehensive. He might even have done better if such schools were not dragged down by disruptive pupils! Remove disruptive pupils therefore enabling secondary modern schools to concentrate properly on children with difficulties and slow learners.

This being a reason why I advocate a 40% grammar school system . In a 25% system there are children that should/could be of grammar school standard languishing with some 'dregs' This disables this groups learning immensely. It also means a modern school is not able to concentrate on children with educational difficulties or slow learners.
This being due to teachers chasing round the school five days a week a core number of 'wastrels'. This being children totally wasting their time in a school environment.

This is where vocational and technical school should come in, taking these children and offering something away from Maths/English .

So you believe that 60% of the pupil population are 'dregs' / 'wastrels', because you only want to 'save' 40% [I suspect because you believe your son would be in the top 40% but not top 25%].

Or, as other posters have said, is it better to 'save' 95% in a true comprehensive BUT the 5% who need specialist schooling due to SEN or behaviour should be educated separately, in well-funded, well-staffed, uniformly spread geographically, special schools or specialist units,, at least for a time (2 way street, as others have said)?

Can we be totally clear: comprehensives in poor areas have lots of disruptive children. There are many RI and failing comprehensives that are no different to Erith and some will have worse exam results. I really cannot agree that Erith is worse because it is a secondary modern. If it was comprehensive, the top layer would be there, but the bottom layer would not have disappeared!

The big issue is: there needs to be more special schools for children who plainly cannot cope in mainstream school becaue of ebd. Bradley is a classic example. He probably should not have gone to a mainstream secondary and he certainly needs a statement!

The demogaphic in the neighbourhood is no different in Erith to plenty of other places. The only difference is that there are fewer brighter children in the Erith Secondary modern because they are in the grammars. That does not make it uniquely different to other schools where there are few bright childrenin the neighbourhood.

The terms "dregs" and "wastrels" is utterly insulting and frankly offensive when talking about an 11 year old child. Can you not understand, letstalk, that Bradley has unaddressed needs. He is not the same as your child where you have addressed needs. Each child has different needs and I suspect you are not in the same position as Bradley's home life. His parent cannot pay.

By your reasoning, 60% of children should have a lower standard of educational offering because they are "wastrels". I can tell you that, in Bucks, plenty of our secondary modern educated children go to university. Plenty of them go and train, via a degree, to be nurses, teachers and construction managers. Jobs we value and need. These schools are not special schools. To educate children with complex needs, you require a much higher ratio of teaching staff and they need to be specialist teachers in SEN and behaviour. We need special schools for a few children who find learning difficult and have behaviour problems. It would be better for everyone, in secondary moderns or any other school, to have children with complex needs educated elsewhere but inclusion dictates they are in mainstream. It was not clear that anyone thought Bradley should have a statement. It would have been top of my agenda. Instead, they want him out without putting the correct effort in. They have a highly paid member of staff rounding up children like she's the Pied Piper of Hamlyn and Prison governor rolled into one.

A secondary modern school (or any comprehensive school) will always struggle to educate the slower learners and children like Bradley with complex needs because they do not have the staffing levels because they are not funded to have a ratio of 6:1 like a special school. I cannot believe anyone thinks children should not be taught English and Maths!

Actually a good special school is a two way street. Children can reintegrate back in Y9 or even Y10 if there is good reason to think they will succeed and their statement puts sufficient support in place. Statements should be reviewed anually Children do not stay the same forever if the intervention is good.

I never said 60% of children were 'dregs' I also meant it tongue in cheek !
However, there are a core number of kids behaving as 'wastrels' and destroying the educational outcomes of everybody else !
If such children were removed and placed in either vocational or technical . Secondary Modern schools could get on with educating children like my son !

If being a year beyond and attaining at expected level 1 -2 at Maths/English GCSE is top 40 %.....

Any grammar school head who whinges about not getting pp funding is, by definition, a git

Agreed. Likewise in relation to the whinge about not getting SEN funding. If you must select out children with SEN, you can't complain about getting the funding that supports them.

Secondary Modern schools could get on with educating children like my son

You do realise, creating more Grammar Schools won't actually ensure an improvement in the educational provision for DCs like your son. In fact it may divert funds away from helping DCs you your son.

"If being a year beyond and attaining at expected level 1 -2 at Maths/English GCSE is top 40 %"

The test is taken at the beginning of yr6 so would have taken place before your DC joined the "comp. that failed him".

I am not fully following you lets but are you saying 60% of children get grade 1 - 2 in maths / English GCSE? Because that is plainly not true. It varies obviously form school to school, and will be a higher% than most in a sec mod but nowhere near 60%!! I imagine most students in a sec mod will get grades 6 - 3 in English GCSE.

And dregs, even when speech marked is never tongue in cheek.

Bradley is an extreme case : but there are probably a higher concentration of Bradleys in sec mods (and, ironically, in really good comps with reputations amongst parents for inclusion as a student with an EHCP can name their school). which is a definite problem they face. I am not sure what the answer is - but I doubt it's grammar schools.

I am looking forward to next week's programme. I thought prog 2 was interesting, more so than prog 1 which just made me a bit sad.

*Bubbles8 is not one of the differences that in Bucks they call the schools comprehensives and , in Kent, they still seem to sue the term Secondary Modern , with all its connotations?

and you do still seem to think 'wastrel' + lowest educational achievers who somehow all need vocational education. That may well be an eventual outcome but the two are not always connected, especially at age 11. Some of the most disaffected and disruptive students are somewhere in the just below middle ability range, I'd say.

People seem to have missed the fact that Bradley was not being educated with everyone else- he was in a separate unit so that he didn't disrupt everyone else and so that they could try to meet his needs. Exactly what people are suggesting should happen. And Chi Chi was both disruptive and high achieving.

I know 60% of children will not achieve at the new level1-2 at GCSE ! However, you keep assuming I think my son could get in to a grammar school despite being '17,' (and out of year ) if the goal posts changed .
It is ludicrous to think that if my son had stayed in the state sector he could have entered into any selective environment.

The comprehensive school target grades for my son at GCSE were level 1-2 new or in old money F-G .
My son now has ambitions to get to University now

Finally I am sorry for using the term 'dregs'. This being describing some children with behaviour problems and home conditions beyond their control.

I didn't miss that bert !

That's not me lets . You disagree with so many people on this thread you have lost track of who said what. I have never referred to you DS. Clearly his first school was either wrong or, more likely, using one of those silly flightpath things where the likely outcomes go up over time.

I think we all know what the term dregs means.