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?

The major criticism is that they do not allow social mobility because basically poor kids disproportionately don't get into them regardless of ability.

Wouldn’t it be better to improve the quality of schools so that all pupils would benefit, rather than just the few who already have an advantage by virtue of being smart? Most smart kids will do well wherever they go. They’ll likely be streamed in maths and English, do higher triple science, take an extra subject, etc. etc. so they will still get an education that stretches them. That’s what happens at my DD’s school anyway.

Do you disagree with sets in school? This is a form of academic selection; a grammar school applies this at a larger scale.

Sets are by subject not one set for everything. It is also an awful lot easier to move a child up or down a set than move schools.

Grammar schools are just another way of giving more privilege to privileged children.

No they need better comps with streaming. I live in a non grammar area the comps in the affluent areas do amazingly. The solution would be a completely comprehensive system with good funding.
Grammar areas actually disadvantage the children who end up at the secondary moderns. This is because the top achievers have been creamed off and the children who failed the 11 plus are left feeling a failure at age 11= low self esteem= affects how they perform.
In a streamed school they can work harder and go up and if they don't work they go down. But they still have that chance.
It would also cut out the ridiculous tutoring that goes into getting into the grammar schools. It's not always the brightest getting it rather those with parents who have funds or time to tutor them to pass.
Also yes more specialised schools that take children with behaviour problems / SEN would help massively and reduce disruption in the comps.
So my suggestion is
= Fully comprehensive with proper streaming ( obviously well funded). So top stream= the super bright etc.
= Specialized schools or units within schools for behaviour issues. ( so remove the disruption from the classroom and provide the required support)
=More SEN provision.

Obviously fantasy land as would also want well funded resources and passionate well paid teachers.

Kent has the most grammar schools of any county in the UK, it is also the least socially mobile.

Dd school there are 4 sets of kids with exceeding maths sats.
But the issues with such a big school are behaviour. Kids picking on kids they dont know at all.
The swearing
But also the biggest diff between my private school in 90s and state secondary now is yes obviously behaviour. But also teacher error and effort.
And currently very little homework and zero marking..
Its like an apathy.
And having never had a detention myself it seems they are handing out warning for very little cause.

(We werent allowed to the toilets in lessons either but they werent lockedl)

What a joy to read the usual socialist race to the bottom responses. God forbid that bright kids get help. What next? IQ tests to ensure the brightest can’t get into Oxbridge, because it might embed their “privilege”?

@noblegiraffe but I suppose I mean you disagree with the principle of setting children or not, rather than the logistics of it. (I'd add that in some schools I've worked in, sets are 'set' and movement is very rare/ nonexistent due to the top set being incredibly full (32+). Additionally, I've worked in multiple schools were set 1 English is always the same as set 1 maths, rather than varying. They often set based on CATS i believe - appreciate this is just anecdotal, but thought it worth adding.)

Labour also hate grammar schools and one of their previous moronic (for other reasons) shadow education secretaries made the election pledge to obliterate them in an election they never won, so if they get in they're probably coming for grammars soon, too.

I don't really know how I feel about that, the current system in grammar areas is frankly horrific. Even the ones that pass only have a 50% chance of actually getting a place around here.

I live in London and there are openly selective comprehensives.

If they are selecting by ability they are not comprehensive, even if they call themselves a comprehensive.

I find this so odd. I live in a fully comprehensive area. Plenty of children go to oxbridge. A comprehensive can stretch and support bright children. There are lots of very succesful comprehensives.

If the private schools become even more expensive, two things may happen.

Middle class parents will buy their way into houses in catchment areas for successful comprehensives.

Middle class parents will buy more and more tutoring for selective schools.

Both of which will disadvantage bright kids with low income (or less savvy) parents.

Investing in Special Schools, PRUs etc would improve comprehensives too as some of the social problems would be handled by settings that could deal better.

Where do the intelligent kids in your area go to since they can't all be in private. Why are the comprehensives in your area failing them ? That is a problem that needs fixing.

Labour also hate grammar schools and one of their previous moronic shadow education secretaries made the election pledge to obliterate them in an election they never won

A previous idiot Conservative Prime Minister made an election pledge to bring back grammar schools in a disastrous election which lost her her majority so I don't think many people were that keen.

Yes to this.

According to this, grammar schools are not actually beneficial for the most able:

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2023/aug/no-evidence-grammar-school-systems-are-best-brightest#:~:text=While%20there%20was%20a%20slight,was%20detrimental%20to%20high%20performers.

I suggest you visit a conprehensive school and a grammar school and you will soon see !

@Teentaxidriver labour was initially split on the issue in the 40s - Fabians saw them as increasingly efficiency, creating fairer conditions for the working class. Others in the party saw them as an obstacle to true "equality" and there were serious campaigns by the latter in the 1950s. I suppose it reflects the changing preoccupations of the left in the UK - the conservatives were fairly indifferent

@Teentaxidriver I would ask if you live in an affluent or at least middle class area? That will make a world of difference.
@Fogwisp the promise of comprehensives is that they provide the same standard of education as grammars without the hated, exclusionary test. With the best will in the world, this is patently impossible.

@iPaddy, as long as your kids get in eh? And why do people never campaign for more secondary moderns, it's like nobody realises they are the corollary

@Spendonsend well said!

I am very familiar with good comprehensives, so dont need to see anymore. I havent seen a crap one luckiky for me. But I can well believe they need investment and improving. I dont see how a grammar would make the comp (or secondary modern as it would now be) better or improve anything.

I would have to travel to see a grammar to see if it was somehow better than a good comp but Im very pleased with my sons comp experience.

I agree with this. Both my kids doing well at good comprehensives, in an area where there is plenty of choice of good comprehensives.
Don't ask me why this can't be the case everywhere in the UK....but I feel very lucky.

I think they are unlinked issues.

The only state school educated Prime Ministers we have had have attended grammar schools. Not sure if that's an argument for or against! But a vignette of social mobility.

Is their attainment down to selection by ability, or because the able tend to be less disruptive? Because recreating grammar schools would not be needed if the top sets in comprehensives really did function in the same way (and of course in some they do)

Improving state education would cause private education to dwindle, except for boarding schools, specialist schools and those who want to have (and pay for) on-site facilities and much more sport.