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.

Because they could be educated (in the case you use as an example) more effectively using more sight based activities than listening! I spend my whole life proving most of the educational establishment wrong. All my teaching is tailored to the individual so they learn more quickly & effectively

I said home educators tailor the education to the individual all the time, not that all Sen should be home ed!!!

But why should the very able deaf child (now flying at Oxbridge) be separated from the specialist teachers of their subject available at their mainstream school / mainstream university, rather than accessing them fully using 1:1 help in the form of sign language interpretation, and as you say, some simple differentiation by the teacher / lecturer involved?

As a home educator, one of the reasons my child returned to school was that I believed they needed specialist teachers in each subject. I would not want to rule that other children should be deprived of high quality specialist teachers just because the fact that they ALSO have an SEN puts them, in your proposal, in a wholly separate institution from those specialists - in the same way as an extraordinarily able mathematician who fails the 11+ due to being poor in English cannot access the high quality specialist maths teacher they need, who is located in the grammar school.

But often these same kids will do better if at some point in their education (maybe not all the way through) they were taken out & taught in a way that helped them even better! One size does not fit all & mainstream inclusion should not be the primary aim

String,

But you are suggesting that they are put in a separate institution entirely, at 11.

I agree entirely that interventions / specialist teaching, even some lessons within a specialist unit co-located with a good mainstream comprehensive, can be very beneficial for children with SEN.

But why a wholly separate school? Why not supported, with some specialist input or separate teaching for some portions of the day / week if required, in the same school that can meet their educational needs the best?

& your suggestion that this child is now 'flying' at Oxbridge proves my case entirely. What if he had been able to access the type of education he has now (with much more personal reading & 1 to 1 regular tutorials) when he was younger? Possibly doing even better?

(The very able child with sensory impairment I am thinking about did attend a mainstream primary with a small specialist unit - therefore with a hub for specific expertise and specially trained staff who in turn trained the main teachers - but was fully intergrated into the mainstream primary for all academic lessons. 1:1 support to overcome sensory impairment but fully integrated for mainstream secondary with no specialist unit)

I don't know what you count as 'doing better' - better than the string of 5s in SATs, a*s in GCSE and A level? You are deliberately misinterpreting - look at the Oxbridge entrance stats of specialist colleges for those with sensory impairments and tell me whether a child from one of them would be likely to even have the chance to 'fly' - ie continue to fly, having flown throughout education- at Oxbridge.

I'm In a selective Kent area. My husband and his sister both got into grammar schools and no offence but both aren't exactly bright. My husbands parents never did well at school either. No tutoring for either kids. They just passed.both went to grammar but didn't do anything with it, neither went to even do a levels or go to uni. A lot of the kids didn't from both their years either. I think that programme just highlighted the grammar school thing is out dated.

'1 to 1 support to access.....'
Exactly my point - help needed to access rather than self motivated study. & why would you suggest that you wouldn't get specialist teachers in a special school? Again - trying to pick the best option for each individual which is exactly what I am advocating. But in each case you absolutely must ask yourself the reasons why & who will benefit

1:1 support can be needed to dress yourself if you are physically disabled, sign language interpret a lecture if you are deaf, carry out necessary physio of you have cerebral palsy.

it doesn't mean that you are not self motivated to study. Just that you need some one - or some technology in some cases - to break down the barriers between you and the advanced content you need to study.

Special schools usually have much, much smaller academic departments than standard secondaries. There might be a single Maths teacher, rather than 15, a couple of science teachers, rather than 10, 3 with PhDs in their subject, only 1 Languages teacher rather than 5 teaching 4 different languages, maybe 1 peripatetic music teacher rather than 8 teaching different instruments. For the potentially gifted in one or more of those areas, the limited size - and in many cases slightly more limited ambition, as most rally highly qualified teachers of a subject will tend to ant to teach it in mainstream - of the teaching pool is limiting to attainment.

My point entirely- you have to weigh up each individual situation. Remember I did say further up thread that I would not discourage any SEN from applying to more specialist schools. You have to remember that I see many kids every day who are being failed by 'inclusive' mainstream education. Many with undiagnosed learning issues, many with mental health problems caused by being taught in an inappropriate setting for them. My frustration is that people are blinkered to the fact that one size fits all certainly doesn't in many cases!

I would not discourage any SEN from applying to more specialist schools.

That is backwards.

i would encourage all children to be fully supported within mainstream schools, including those with attached specialist units, UNLESS their needs are so severe that they cannot be sensibly accommodated within mainstream, even with reasonable adaptation, either because their needs require such a wholesale alteration of the environment (as is the case for some children with severe autism), curriculum (as is the case for very severe cognitive impairment) or because they benefit from and require such specialist / extensive equipment (PMLD), and even then, ONLY when the alternative provision is demonstrably better educationally, socially and emotionally than suitable support within mainstream and is actively chosen both by parents and by specialists supporting the child.

There may also be a need for temporary or permanent placement in SEMH specialist units, combined with intensive work with families, but again this may only be considered once intensive work with the family combined with professional in-school support has been tried.

the problems you see may not be because 'inclusion is failing' - much more because inclusion is not being properly funded'.

Ploughing funding into specialist support WITHIN mainstream seems to me a much better use of [presumably new] funding than creation of a multitude of specialist schools.

So all those parents in denial that their child isn't coping in mainstream get the final say whilst disruptive behaviour has an impact on all those around them? Not fair on any of kids as far as I'm concerned! Alternative education can be better for all involved

Why are you conflating 'disruptive' and 'SEN'?

You still haven't explained why either of the children with SEN I have mentioned are 'disruptive' and thus 'need to be removed'?

If what you mean is 'children whose SEN falls within the area of SEMH', then say so. As I say, I would support specialist provision for such children, combined with very intensive family support. But you seem to be using 'disruptive' to cover 'everyone who is of low ability and has any SEN', and that's just wrong.

Your attitude seems to be 'If you have any SEN, then if you are very good, and don't need any help, you might get to apply to a school with a particular specialism. However, if you're not very good, then you will be defined by your SEN and sent to a DIFFERENT school so that you don't get to disrupt any, you know, 'normal' children.'

'And we will pretend that you will do better in these DIFFERENT schools because, well, they know how to teach people like you, even if they aren't quite as good at their subject as the teachers in the other schools are, and most importantly you won't disrupt ANYONE in the other schools. Won't that be nice?'

Because any situation where a child is unable to access mainstream education.... mental health, dyslexia, autism to name a few is an SEN as far as I am concerned whether labelled as such or not.

Disruptive behaviour is anything which distracts the teacher from teaching. I see on average 2-3 children per class who are not ready to learn & therefore disrupt others. This cannot continue or our education system is dead. It can take over 20 years to mentally recover from bad school experiences this is not acceptable

Because any situation where a child is unable to access mainstream education without appropriate support.... mental health, dyslexia, autism to name a few is an SEN as far as I am concerned whether labelled as such or not, and therefore those children should be supported fully to access mainstream education wherever appropriate, or, in consultation with parents and a range of professionals, may access high-quality specialist units or specialist school on a full time or part time basis if considered best for that specific child.

Corrected for you.

I can, btw, name, in any given lesson on a particular day, 2-3 children who were 'not ready to learn' in my rather old-fashioned selective girls' school 35 years ago .. education system is not dead yet

No because you are presuming that the only people affected by the decision are the SEN's. When really those who are most affected are the kids who need quiet to concentrate & don't get it therefore perform badly by comparison to what they could achieve!

I presume you would also say that there are a huge number of children with SEN of all types who are not disruptive at all, and therefore, while there is a small overlap between 'disruptive' and 'SEN', mostly in the area of SEMH, many disruptive children have no SEN, and many children who have SEN are not disruptive.

You do write as if you believe there to be a complete overlap, so I am just checking the obvious....