Labour advised to finish closing all grammars

[twistyizzy]

Advice currently being given to Labour by same group that support VAT on private schools.

If i take all the reviews on TripAdvisor of restaurants and then compare them to Michelin star restaurants I can prove using statistical analysis that McDonald's and Greggs offers the better food satisfaction outcomes than any expensive restaurant.

Not every GCSE is the same, not every subject is as academically rigorous. A dual science GCSE is not as good as three separate sciences. Some exam boards are less well respected by top universities than others.

The difference between a comprehensive and a grammar school is quite tangible even when banding takes place.

Not the same, Grammar do not have better teachers than other secondary schools.

But that isn't anything to do with VAT on private school fees going into a general pot of money, is it?

They tend to have more qualified and more experienced teachers, to the detriment of other schools in the area.

Schools in deprived areas struggle way more with recruitment than grammars.

That's all entirely irrelevant to the issue of whether the intake of grammar schools reflects the local population.

You can take triple science in all the local comprehensives I’ve ever asked about it. Which is quite a lot. You can also do a wide range of GCSEs and A levels. You learn in streamed sets for core subjects.

As I’ve said, I’ve only ever known comprehensive schooling as a child and as a parent and I don’t recognise the picture people are painting of them. Unless of course they are describing local schools which are the non-grammar option, and therefore don’t offer children all the opportunities they could as a result.

And yes, I know there are some shocking schools out there. There shouldn’t be. Kids are being let down. But there are plenty of effective comprehensives too.

If your tantrum is that ‘elite’ is better, you are wrong. I went to a very expensive ‘elite’ boarding school. It was crap. My children went to comprehensives and came out with much better grades than I did. One went to uni but not the ones you mention because she didn’t like the syllabus on those ‘elite’ institutions and the picked a superior course because it was exactly what she wanted. Waitrose - yum keep those but reduce the prices so people below 60 can also shop there. Good garages are good garages- they’re not elite. Same with the others you then get a bit silly about.

Actually, the impression Labour gave was that VAT on private school fees was not going into a general pot, that it was earmarked to fund additional services. As they did not address the rest of the pot, I, and possibly others, drew the implication that it would not change. The Education Policy Institute called them out on this and they remained silent.

In my view this is a case of misleading by omission. It seems that your view differs. Can we agree to disagree on this point?

I'm sorry to be rude, but I'm going to stop now. It's late.

You said that they implied that the VAT money would be used to increase general school funding, now you're saying that the impression that they gave was that it was to fund additional services. Which was it?

I know they didn't mention per pupil funding in their manifesto. I haven't drawn any conclusions because there's a lot going on there.

Grammar schools are not "elite", only snobby parents want people to believe it belongs to part of the elite spectrum.

I believe that they implied that the VAT revenue would be used to fund additional services. As they made no mention of existing services, I believe that they implied that other school funding would continue at current levels. Therefore, I believe that they were implying that there would be an increase in total school funding.

What delicious irony if supporters of VAT on private schools are hoisted by their own petard.

I hope it happens.

I didn't even know grammar schools were still a thing. I thought they all closed in the seventies or whenever it was. It's an archaic system. I'm sure people will cope.

Still with the "Tory" accusations for anybody who criticises Labour policy?

yes that is correct, decades in comprehensives. Years in grammar schools, and have also taught in prisons, sen schools and private schools too.

I have known thousands of grammar school children.

And what is being said about state grammar schools on here is very ignorant.

A lot of the data about grammar schools lumps together private and state grammar schools

why would you consider closing of grammar schools being "hoisted by their own petard"?

Even if it happens it is a slow evolution in each school, over 8-10 years, doesn't affect anyone in a grammar school now. Even if it did, where does the petard bit come in?

I don't think you understand what grammar schools are or why people choose them. Because they are the best fit for their child out of what is available. And if they were not there, then all schools would be different , and people would choose the best fit for their child out of what was available in the different system. And there would not be a lot of difference, as many schools would still be selecting on ability, and banding, and even if there was a difference, I still don't see where you are getting "petard" from.

When this vat on private schools starts bringing in money for state schools, the schools will be better funded. Whether schools are called grammar schools or not will be irrelevant. Grammar schools are always the least well funded, so grammars becoming comps would increase their funding, without changing anything very much else.

So what you are saying is you want something upsetting to happen to children in state schools? because you are upset at having to pay vat? on something you should always have been paying vat on?

so you want something upsetting to happen in state schools, but you don't know enough about state schools to actually have any idea if a proposed change would be upsetting, or even a change?

Says a lot about you, your attitude to state school children, your blind privilege and your ignorance.

Looking forward to spending your (unearnt) money in my state school, (whether it is still a grammar or not) when it is taken off of you

And yes, I know it is unearnt, because no one so uneducated and ignorant could be actually worth the money they are earning to put children through private schools

of course they will. Relief from the tyranny of the 11+ and extra work for sign painters would be the main differences.

Also known as 'I'm alright so sod the rest of you'.

I'm sorry you didn't receive good outcomes from your education. That happens to people at all sorts of schools.

I made the point about how ridiculous the arguments for closing grammar schools are.

So you want to close grammars and also believe in discounting Waitrose prices for over 60s? Interesting set of beliefs.

What is very odd for me to understand is why parents are opposed to anyone who invest in the future of their children in an academic sense?

How does closing high performance schools help people out? They don't cost the state anymore money per pupil than a comprehensive. You recognise the stupidity of closing top universities but don't see that same stupidity for schools? There is a disconnect in your logic.

Your opposition to elitism and training doesn't exist for sport but it does exist for education. So it's okay for bodies to be trained but not brains? It's to recognise and stream sporting ability but not academic?

The views of the majority on here are let's tax private schools, lets oppose extra tuition (because education is bad?). Let's oppose grammar schools where kids do mountains of homework for hard working teachers to drive high results. Let's tax everyone who earns above average, remove free childcare from them but let's throw money around like confetti on benefits.

It's all part the same deal - people who don't want to take responsibility for their outcomes in life and don't like people doing their best for their kids.

Countries in Asia and the Middle East copying top British schools, taking their teachers and headmasters. They aren't copying comprehensives. These countries want higher rate tax payers, they want highly educated people, they want economic growth. I advise these countries on growth, they actively seek out universities and schools from the West to open additional campuses.

The UK is making itself poorer.

@Dorisbonson

In comps they can still set for subjects, and even stream if they so desire.

It means someone with a skewed profile, or who is a late developer, or has a disorganised parent can still access top sets where appropriate.

Schools can give top sets more homework if they think it appropriate.

Kids don't need to do tons of expensive tuition age 9/10 or have to be bussed to the next town past other schools.

'High performing' schools can be because they took in bright kids, it doesn't actually make them better schools just because they select.

If we were in a grammar area (we are in Hants) my DD1 wouldn't have been able to do 2 MFL for GCSE as there would have been insufficient demand in a secondary modern, but in her comp she could, and they were her best results. Similarly kids can do triple science which again may well not have sufficient demand in a secondary modern. This comp can also turn out kids with strings of 8s and 9s, as well as support other kids to do a Level 1 Construction course or whatever.

Modern comps can be amazingly good, as you can see across the country.

If the grammar/sec mod system was so good then you wouldn't have parents going for grammar or else private. They would be happy with the non grammar option too if their child didn't make the cut.

The difference you're attributing to the school is actually just the difference in the pupil intake.

The only value in a grammar system is social segregation. People who value that should just be honest.

Recent research has shown that when looking at outcomes for similar pupils, the best comprehensives outperform grammars - they educate better.

Anyone commenting that the VAT from private school will “help fund education” is delulu. The funds are not automatically funnelled into state schools. That is where the governments, any party, is sneaky.
The state currently makes half a billion pounds a year on paid immigration, I.e. legitimate citizenship applications and claims this goes towards funding other immigration issues but I think we can all agree those issues are not being handled efficiently.
The notion that ending “elitism” by cancelling grammar schools and taxing private education will somehow result in thriving well funded comprehensive schools is insane. The money will simply go on building more shitty schools in line with Labours plans to urbanise as much of the green belt as they can. They won’t address the root cause of why some of our state schools are so bad that people scramble for grammar and private education.

Our local grammars (superselectives) do have better teachers than the local comprehensives, especially right now in the teacher recruitment crisis.

What is more, the grammars (and privates) continued to teach properly during the pandemic online and the parents supported as a group at home. Since the pandemic, the gulf has therefore significantly widened between the comps and the other category (grammar/private - those are selective too primarily ). People looking at the schools immediately after the pandemic realised this.

Any outdated research looking at cohorts before the pandemic is entirely irrelevant now. Many grammar schools are outstanding, as judged by Ofsted. It would be madness to mess with that. They are better schools on the whole, whether people like it or not, especially in the post pandemic era.

Unfortunately the properly outstanding schools (especially leadership & management) just before the pandemic that got their act together quickly and continued to teach during the pandemic and got themselves organised properly afterwards - the gulf to even the Good schools has widened significantly. Now with the teacher recruitment crisis, it just gets worse and worse. And no, it isn’t fair. Some kids are getting a fantastic state education and many are not. In fact, a significant minority of children are getting an outstanding quality of state education. But to go and destroy the last remaining schools where they are -grammar, church etc, makes zero sense.

If a grammar school is rated outstanding due to its excellent teachers, converting it to a comprehensive school shouldn’t affect its quality in delivering high standard education.

Isn't it a scream that the champion of equality and the race to the bottom was quite happy to accept a knighthood and call himself 'sir'.