Scrap school catchments now

[Momentumummy]

If Labour wants to eventually end parents buying privilege through private schools, it needs to go after school catchments. How can it be fair to decide schools by distance to gates when it often depends on ability to pay rent or mortgage which will usually be higher in catchment for good schools?

The only fair system is a lottery one by borough (at least for secondary when kids are old enough to travel alone). You should be allocated a place within your borough but it should be randomized and not based on distance to gates.

Yes, I agree. But in comparison with the cost of maintaining the current divisive 11+ system - which has no net benefit at a cohort level - transport costs would be minimal.

Add up all the cost if transport to grammars, and divide by a much, much smaller number of pupils, so 1 in 1000 or less rather than 1 in 4 or even 1 in 50.

Also consider invisible costs of the 11+ - coaching, fees for private primary grammar crammers, mock tests, etc etc. All gone.

That might be bad for the economy as a whole sadly, such a booming industry.

The current EHCP system is a mess with DC whose parents know the system and can enforce their DC’s rights getting better support. Making DC who don’t actually have SEN eligible for EHCPs would make the system even more exhausting for parents of DC with SEN.

Again, grammars, independents and free schools get better results. As listed on the Ofqual website. Nobody is going to abolish those schools in their right mind? It will come back to bite them and their party.
In addition, counties like Kent, Bexley and Bucks like their grammar schools - there is data asking the population there. So who in their right mind thinks they get to dictate to those counties what they can or cannot have? Not least because some of the very new Labour MPs there will lose their seats if you go against what the population wants.

It’s a small crazy minority shouting against private/independent, grammar, free schools etc and it’s entirely political. It’s also discriminatory towards those kids in those schools and in London at least, it is now also officially racist because the demographic in the superselective grammars is now mainly South Asian.

All these threads tell me is that we need massive decentralisation - let local people decide what they want and what is best for their communities. And for God sake level up a la London 15 years ago in the NE and Midlands. Structure of school is irrelevant - it’s parental aspiration that needs dealing with plus kids need online alternatives and mentoring, The infighting between different groups of educationally privileged parents is just a distraction.

grammars, independents and free schools get better results. As listed on the Ofqual website. Nobody is going to abolish those schools in their right mind? It will come back to bite them and their party.

Any person with common sense would look at the underlying reasons why certain types of schools achieve better results. Is it causation or correlation? Is it because of the school itself, or due to the intake or some other form of social selection in the first place.

The cost of transport to grammars to LAs in areas such as KCC wouldn’t be any more than transport to non-selective schools in that LA because KCC only provides free transport to the nearest suitable school. For those assessed as suitable for a grammar school, when assessing the nearest suitable school, selective and non-selective schools are considered.

It’s also discriminatory towards those kids in those schools and in London at least, it is now also officially racist because the demographic in the superselective grammars is now mainly South Asian.

Racist in what form? The education department publish their demographic statistics a racist?

Again, grammars, independents and free schools get better results. As listed on the Ofqual website.

Well, even this comprehensive-school-educated poster can work out that if you start with brighter children with more engaged parents, you'll get better exam results than schools with a broader range of educational ability/parental engagement. I wonder how Progress 8 scores compare across types of school (can't find that data at the moment).

Well if we are going to abolish all types of selective schools (especially those for ability), please could we start with abolishing faith schools first. It's silly to have selectivity there on religion and ban every other type of selectivity based on other metrics parents might want.

The two Free schools around here get terrible results and progress scores! They are lottery entry as well...

It is undoubtedly true that supremely bright dc have a special need too. In some schools there will be very few of them. Even in a standard grammar they aren’t common and certainly not seen every year. Most dc benefit from being well taught AND making friends with other dc who maybe are not quite so bright. Hiving them off into different schools makes little sense in terms of social interaction. I’ve seen dc go to Trinity Cambridge for maths from grammars (Bucks) and they are taught in their correct year and although they are very bright, they join in with everyone else and are treated as “normal”. I also believe they can thrive in a comp with high quality teaching and a recognition of their needs.

It is undoubtedly true that supremely bright dc have a special need too.

Some may also have SEN, but legally, exceptional ability on its own is not legally classed as SEN.

https://www.tes.com/magazine/news/secondary/a-level-results-2024

The regional divide is obviously quite large now for A levels. There are more grammars and private schools in the South East and London, too.

“Free schools saw the largest increase in the proportion of top grades achieved - up from 33.8 per cent in 2023 to 37.1 per cent in 2024.”

There is literally zero argument for getting rid of those schools that actually perform the best. Unless the aim is to drag people down to the lowest common denominator.

In 24/25 and 25/26 there will be no Progress 8 because those cohorts taking GCSEs then did not do KS2 SATS, due to Covid.

So for the next two academic years, it will simply be results. Go figure if a new Government can afford to bring results down in an obvious way by messing with the type of school that some people here object to. It is not going to happen.

The regional divide is obviously quite large now for A levels. There are more grammars and private schools in the South East and London, too.

There are zero evidence whatsoever to suggest the regional gap is due to grammar school having better education value.

Free schools saw the largest increase in the proportion of top grades achieved - up from 33.8 per cent in 2023 to 37.1 per cent in 2024.

Free schools are "all-ability" schools, so they can't use academic selection. We should convert more grammars to free schools.

Why would the result be down by less grammar schools? Another wishful thinking without any evidence?

Poorer results could be linked to ooorer schools. Unless the details are investigated, we don’t really know. It could be more dc from deprived areas. However lots of DC from deprived areas in London appear to buck the trend.

Where I am, all the grammars are academies. Cannot see any advantage in changing. Free schools that are new have been all ability but it’s quite clear they aren’t in the minds of parents who choose the grammars for DC if they qualify.

Research shows time and time again its quality of teaching, quality of SLT and parents that make the biggest difference. Schools can do something about the first two but the last one is a tough nut to crack!

parents that make the biggest difference

No body disagree (and research agree too) individual family environment is one of the most important factor for good attinment for the kid.

However, it doesn't mean bundling up all parents with likemind in a school will achieve better results as a whole.

@Overturnedmum - https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/136621/wilson's-school/secondary

Top 1% for Progress 8 in 2023 as well, top results, top destinations, outstanding Ofsted, 61% of all GCSE grades were a 9 in 2024.

You just cannot argue with that school, sorry to disappoint. It is the cohort, the parents, the school, the full package. Just like some of the top private schools. Outstanding on every measure.

You pick one selective grammar school which the most selective in south London as example?
Why not compared to the Kings Maths School, which most intake from comprehensive schools, and achieved 76% A* Level in 2024, and top school destination. Better than any grammar school in the country.

https://www.kingsmathsschool.com/

It is not the full package, the intake cohort is the most significant factor when talking results. To proof the point can you find an example that a less selective intake grammar school achieve a bettet result? That would convince people more on it is the whole package..

@Overturnedmum

Is it because of the school itself, or due to the intake or some other form of social selection in the first place

I think this is the whole point of the original post? Schools in middle class areas with a set boundary often perform better. People move house into catchment areas especially to make sure that their children mix with the 'right' sort of students. More disadvantaged people either can't afford to do that or prefer not to move away from their support network & so the problem continues.

I suppose if there were no boundaries then this would no longer be possible & in theory it would sort out some schools being labelled as bad.

I think the main issue is having qualifications that everyone can access. Lots of students switch off as the things on offer in school hold little interest for them & they don't see the point. So some students are seen as not succeeding - but give them something relevant to what they want to do in the future & they will thrive.

I think bringing grammar schools into the discussion has diverted the thread. There's lots of areas with no grammar schools & students are still able to achieve good results.

I don't know what estate agents would think about no catchment areas - they make a fortune selling houses in areas based on schools getting good results 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think bringing grammar schools into the discussion has diverted the thread. There's lots of areas with no grammar schools & students are still able to achieve good results

I would think scrap catchment is much harder than scrap grammar. To have the desired effect you mention it should be done in a coherent order :

1. Scrap grammar and convert to non-selective school.

1. Reform catchment intake to make sure social mixed intake so parents focus less on the implicit selection but more on the actual education.

@Overturnedmum

Do you have any evidence showing that top end students in grammar school are naturally brighter than those top end in comprehensive school?

I guess in a comprehensive they are only usually in sets for core subjects & so top set students will have to go slower in some classes where they are not in sets? So it does slow them down a bit compared to grammar school students. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing for students to be mixed up - it makes them more rounded as individuals. But they would be able to work much quicker & cover more content if they were able to stay in top sets for everything.