If Labour make private schools charge VAT then they should allow new grammar schools to be created

[iPaddy]

I live in an area with zero grammars, no real choice in secondaries other than (often failing) local comprehensives or private.

I appreciate the arguments against private schools (creates unfair advantage) but what about areas with grammars? That's also an advantage. I'd love the option of a grammar school for the kids locally. The bright ones are being let down by the current situation. Has Labour said how they will address that?

Thank you! It must be a very difficult job dealing with so many issues. That was the primary school experience for my DD and for my son who is still there. He's aiming for grammar too.

@iPaddy are you sure your Royal Navy friend gets FSM? Schools get pupil premium for service children (the service premium) but this is not the same as FSM. You only get FSM if your income is below £7400 and/or various benefits.

Great idea and could feasibly be housed in the same campus and often already is.

@Coldcaller and you'd propose making those decisions when children are 10?

Why, would you have bright, motivated kids in rough working class areas subjected to 5-7 more years of shit behaviour in the local comp?

Children 'who are making teaching and school life intolerable for the majority of staff' often do so temporarily, for example after major trauma and life events. With good support they can go on to achieve very well.

What would you do with a grammar school child who goes through a difficult teenage patch, and starts behaving badly making life intolerable for staff? Transfer them to the shit comp with the rough working class kids?

Also @Madrescuechicken don't worry, those rough working class kids will be doing essential jobs in a few years, you know, the sort that you and your bright motivated family rely on.

Hilarious- you obviously didn't read my first post. I grew up in care in one of the shittest parts of the country. I lived it and breathed it. I speak about rough working class comps from my own lived experience of spending far too much fucking time in one 😆 ... and yes, experiencing it first hand did motivate me to do better. I am very much aware that I am in the minority with this. Sorry if that offends you and doesn't fit in with your narrative and view of the world.

Bloody hell you're green 😬 😆

So why is your solution to improve things for just a small percentage via a grammar school? Why not all children?

I would love to have had the life experiences you clearly have had in order to be able to make such a statement - this is literally the epitome of that fucking privilege you despise so much.

The problem is that many areas only have poorly performing comps and are not in a grammar area. If you want an academically selective school which performs well you have no choice but to go private in these areas.

All schools should be improved, for sure. This will be done by making more alternative provisions available and not less, especially at the bottom end. I passionately believe in more special school places for example. We will not get anywhere by pretending that a one size fits all comprehensive education is the best for everyone, especially in poorer areas that are riddled with deep seated social issues. You would not want your children to go to these schools, believe you me.

I agree with this @another, that was the situation I found myself in.

I'm sure that they have school dinners and don't pay for them, whether they come out of PP or FSM I don't know.

The point is that it's very hard to set national policy that accurately predicts which specific children are disadvantaged or not. Postcode is another very blunt instrument. Rural poverty is not as well understood as urban poverty. Intersectional effects of race/gender/poverty etc. etc.

@Coldcaller

We had one of those in the 70s. It was called C block because our school was already overpopulated (built for 1400 max and 1800 students) so C block was a place offside which gave it a reputation of its own.

Problem back then was it was the troublemakers and those that struggled which included quite a few disabled/possible learning difficulties. Once there, they rarely ever integrated back into the main school building. At least with sets, movement is relatively easy.

I know things are different now with the equality act and more diagnosis of SEN, but this would be a huge worry for me. My son and daughter went through comprehensive, not without hurdles it has to be said, but in a very, very, inclusive environment.

Erect Grammar schools in only poor performance comp area will make the existing comp schools even worse.

So bright motivated children in those areas are expected to struggle through poorly performing comps, whereas other children in other areas of the country have the benefit of calm classrooms and an environment conducive to learning? It’s utterly ludicrous that a child’s chances in the state system is entirely dependent on where you live. Either scrap grammar schools and academically selective schools altogether, or expand them so that more children have the same opportunity.

Or just pivot the resource of grammar schools or high performing schools from other areas to the area where needs most? The suggestion to make it more divisive in the state education is probably the worse.

I don’t think taking resources away from good schools is a way forward - school budgets are so stretched everywhere that even the best walk a financial tightrope.

What is needed are resources not only for the schools themselves, in more challenging areas or with more challenging cohorts, but also for the web of support services whose decimation has led to schools having to take more and more on. Fund social services, housing, health, Ed Psychs, SaLT, advisors in all forms of SEN, CAMHS so that schools can just teach, and fund a huge expansion in special schools and short stay schools so that there are proper places for those who cannot and should not be asked to manage in mainstream.

The most challenging schools will benefit most from the true funding of all of this, but it must be done without taking funding from other schools, rather by new budget.

@cantkeepawayforever I don’t think taking resources away from good schools is a way forward - school budgets are so stretched everywhere that even the best walk a financial tightrope.

I agree on this. I suggest it because it is the lesser evil compare to have Grammar school in the already poor comp areas.

I agree that access to decent state education needs to be made more equal across the country. We now have the situation where those who have no choice but to go private to access an academically selective school are going to be penalised with VAT on fees, of several thousand pounds a year, whereas those in catchment of a state selective school don’t have to pay a penny.

I agree that every child, of all abilities, aptitudes and needs should have the right to attend a good, well-resourced school.

I don’t agree that that has anything at all to do with academically selective schools (especially as the latter are actually selective for social class, coachable ability in a small range of skills in a deeply flawed and non-reproducible test, on a single day at age 10)

I'm interested to know what people in favour of comps only would feel about a lottery system for school place allocation. It seems abundantly clear that there are good comps and bad comps, unsurprisingly (but not exclusively) linked to the socio-economic status of a postcode/s. In effect, atm we have selection by postcode for our comprehensive schools.

Would people be in favour of no parental choice if this meant that school places were allocated on a ruthlessly fair basis?