Labour to reduce number of Grammar/Selective school places?

[Another76543]

This thread is not about private schools. It’s about the Labour Party’s dislike of state grammar/selective schools. Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has, in recent years, stated that she wants fewer children in selective schools, and more in comprehensive education. Angela Rayner has also expressed her dislike of the grammar system.

Does this mean that, under Labour, the number of selective places will be reduced? Will parents have less choice over the type of education their children receive?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=OW21Tu38Txo

Never claimed that. Claimed it was less and, in single-sex schools, doesn't look like boys raping girls.

@Peregrina a small town near me is a useful exemplar. Almost all the children go either the the grammar or the secondary modern-the two schools are about a mile apart and have the same catchment. I can't remember the exact figures, but the grammar has about 6% FSM- the SM nearly 40%. Make of that what you will.

Does a grammar school always guarantee better class management? A highly competitive atmosphere can lead to anxiety, conflicts, and disruptive behavior among students. Are they free from mental health issues?

300 boys rape their classmates on school premises each year in England and Wales. That's just the reported rapes, not the ones that are covered up or where the victim never reports.

You want to risk your DDs, you do you, but I refused to take that risk myself.

My PTSD isn't caused by my grammar, but by my primary.

@MaidOfAle It sounds as though you had a singularly terrible experience at school. But it is simply not true that bright girls everywhere need to go to single sex grammars to do well or be safe, as my experience and those of countless other girls attest.

Do you really think that the kids on free school meals aren't shunned by the others? My primary teachers put the kids into three lines at lunchtime: packed lunch, paying, and FSM. Made it easier to hand out the FSM token of shame if all the kids were in one line. Also made sure that the entire class knew who was on FSM and who wasn't.

Comps aren't a magic bullet that will solve all social ills. As I said, middle-class Left pipedream.

You probably want to propose girls-only primary schools too? Maybe even an exam at age 3?

300 boys are reported to have raped their classmates on school premises every year in England and Wales. Rape is notoriously underreported.

Clearly, that bullying prevention work needs some refinement. If I had daughters, I'd send them to all-girl.

Three is too young to assess a child.

All-girl primary is a fantastic idea! Thanks for suggesting it. If my primary had been all-girl, I wouldn't have PTSD now.

The biggest human rights crisis in the world isn't unequal access to education, it's male violence against women and girls.

Perhaps full segregation all the way suits you best. Nothing to do with grammar or 11 plus.

When men and boys stop battering and molesting women and girls, I'll stop demanding female-only schools.

When bullies stop swot-bashing, I'll stop demanding grammar schools.

Deal?

It's telling that your response to a child sexual abuse survivor demanding an effective mechanism to keep girls safe in education is to mock me. You hate girls, that much is clear.

Funnily enough invested parents will want a say in their children being "put into comprehensive school, without the availability of other selective schools."

I looked at around 27 different secondaries for DD. The state comprehensives were all Outstanding. There was one we both ran away from the open day because it felt so oppressive.

Not one of the schools was a carbon copy of another.

I have a large number of siblings, as does DH and we all have similar age children in different state schools across the UK. All Outstanding according to Ofsted, very varied in reality.

One comprehensive is having to teach an entire year group of 150 collectively in a hall for 3 subjects because they only have 1 teacher. DN is now having private tutoring as they are subjects they wanted to pursue for A level. Her classmates have been very badly let down.

I do not really care what “type” of school my DCs go to as long as it is an outstanding school and they are challenged. Where I live the superselective grammar was the best fit for the older 3. I am so grateful we got a choice! And have excellent public transport and cultural opportunities in London. And our grammars are not full of rich kids, far from it. Maybe not on FSM but definitely not “rich”, at least not by my definition.
Just getting the public bus and living in London, they are plenty exposed to normal life, thank you very much! And no, I don’t want them to go to elite unis either, I want them to go to London unis or European ones, to get an “experience”. But they have their own opinions on what they want. Strong characters here, even aged 10. Nothing to do with being a pushy mum. They wanted to take the 11 plus. And no, we did not tutor! Few work books and a couple of mock exams, that is it.

“All Outstanding according to Ofsted, very varied in reality.

One comprehensive is having to teach an entire year group of 150 collectively in a hall for 3 subjects because they only have 1 teacher. DN is now having private tutoring as they are subjects they wanted to pursue for A level. Her classmates have been very badly let down.“

@OhCrumbsWhereNow - do you think this is a post pandemic issue? It was not like this pre 2020. Are these old “Outstanding” ratings.

I think the teacher recruitment crisis is indeed very acute. But how do we actually solve it?

Labour are coming for grammars.
If you don't subscribe to state ideology then you are fair game. PEPF advise Labour.

So glad I never had children.

Feel free to demand whatever fantasy you want, but you probably won’t get any of these because they are not the solution of the problem.

I don’t think Starmer will be coming for the remaining greater than 50% Outstanding grammar schools, he cannot afford to do that. Maybe there is some hard left lobbying to that effect, but I do not believe that they will get rid of grammar or even get away with taxing private schools. But we shall see…interesting times. Let the hard left dream.. they are great at doing that.

It's well-known that separating men from women reduces the opportunity for men to commit sexual offences. That's why we have sex-segregated loos, changing rooms, dormitories, and prisons.

Given the vulnerability of girls, particularly disabled and SEND girls, single-sex schools make sense for their safety. They absolutely are the solution to the problem of school sexual assault.

Abolishing the 11-plus exam won’t diminish the excellence of these schools. However, some parents are fixated on maintaining selective admissions because they believe this is the only factor for these schools being "outstanding"

Yes segregation as long as you see it fit. I'm not engaging you on this topic in ths thread.

It's a contributor to it because selection minimises the amount of crowd control the teachers have to do.

And possibly increase the crowd control that other schools have to manage? So changing it could make some other schools better?