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.

Except most kids in grammar aren’t tutored once they get there

Not true, for thr superselective grammar schools I know, a lot of kids continue to do tutoring for various subjects all the way to turoring for university admission exams and interviews.

and no kid who isn’t bright already is going to pass the 11+

Depends what do you mean by bright, a lot of kids in the heavy grammar area, simply above average level kids with tutoring support can pass the exam, where as a kids maybe at top 25% without tutoring probably won't pass the exam.

The kids in grammar, especially super selective, are all bright. The tutoring isn’t really about content; it’s about exam technique and most importantly, speed. I’ve taught in 2 grammars and have teaching friends in others- it’s actually quite rare to have tutoring after 11 unless a specific weakness has been identified. I can’t speak for a complete grammar area like Kent where this may or may not be the case as it has a far higher percentage of kids in the grammar schools to start off with so tutoring may therefore be seen as desirable as there’ll be a wider range of ability. In the superselectives which have no catchment, though, it’s not common. There’s far more demand in the 5/6 boundary.

Different parts of the United States use many different systems. New York City and Boston incorporate selective exam schools as parts of their school districts, similar to grammars in grammar areas. Washington DC (northern Virginia, actually) has a selective school which draws students from a number of school districts across several counties, more akin to a super-selective. Some states have selective boarding schools; for example, the Illinois Math and Science Academy enrolls about 150 students per year from across a state of almost 56,000 square miles with a population of almost 13 million, similar to what some PP propose for "specialist high achiever" schools.

Chicago Public Schools is an interesting, and complicated case. It mixes some academically selective schools with non-exam neighborhood schools. Every resident student is guaranteed a place at their (one) neighborhood school, but they can apply to any other school, selective or non-selective, in the district - and the district spans 235 square miles with a population of 2.75 million. Places in non-selective neighborhood schools which are not taken up by catchment residents are allocated by lottery in the event of oversubscription, so someone living just outside a catchment boundary has the same chance as someone living on the other side of the city. Transportation is the responsibility of the families and students.

This is just something parents whose kids fail grammar entrance exams say to console themselves. The truth is a child slightly above average in a state school often wouldn’t even understand the question. Any child accepted by a tutor has the ability and intelligence. They need practice

New York City and Boston incorporate selective exam schools as parts of their school districts, similar to grammars in grammar areas.

At what age they took those exam in us? As far as I can tell it is a few years later than age 10.

Or some parents whose kid tutor a lot get in grammar wish to think their kids ability and intelligence is superior? And somehow end up the same grade and same destinations as many other kids who didn't pass or simply didn't take the 11 plus exam?

Granmar school kids never end up in the same destinations. There might be a minute where some may end up outside of Oxbridge/fail etc but the connections they make and the experiences they have ensure they land on their feet.

@Ozanj "This is just something parents whose kids fail grammar entrance exams say to console themselves. The truth is a child slightly above average in a state school often wouldn’t even understand the question".

Many children well above average in a state school wouldn't understand the question either. 11+ questions often bear absolutely no relationship to anything they learn at school.

What is your definition of “tutoring” @Overturnedmum?

I never paid an external tutor for my DC, but I spoke to them constantly as babies, took multivitamins, did not allow screen much, played classical music, made sure they had a ton of different experiences, made sure I read to them every day from birth, counted, ensured awareness of news, did a ton of social capital via museums, travel, made sure they all played 2-3 instruments, did Duolingo type stuff, chess/board games/suduko/boggle/scrabble, word play, constantly make silly type word jokes. And guess what? Once we got to 9/10 and they had of their own accord read a lot of classics anyway, there was hardly any need for tutoring anyway.

”Tutoring” for grammar happens before conception when you eat well and take folic acid you know and just continue down that trajectory.

@Ozanj "Granmar school kids never end up in the same destinations. There might be a minute where some may end up outside of Oxbridge/fail etc but the connections they make and the experiences they have ensure they land on their feet."

I suspect you might be confusing "grammar school" with "Eton"......

I know of two highly selective grammar schools in London where tutoring for GCSE and A-levels is widespread. The tutoring covers a range of topics, from exam techniques to subject content, because some teachers in state grammar schools may not meet the desired standards due to lack of funding. Additionally, the intense competition among students, coupled with high expectations and pressure from ambitious parents, contributes to the prevalence of tutoring.

@Araminta1003 "”Tutoring” for grammar happens before conception when you eat well and take folic acid you know and just continue down that trajectory."

Which is why the idea of selective education as any sort of step out of disadvantage is completely ridiculous. Unless you are suggesting children should be able to dictate their own pre natal nutrition....

In the context of 11 plus exam, I meant Paid or not paid, specifically spend time and efforts for a specific exam. To gain advantage to access to state funded secondary education.

I have no problem other form of tutoring and I do think the government should support more families to involve in education in early years (primary school and before).

There is no contradiction between improve early year education involvement vs remove selective exam for entering secondary schools.

The grammar school connections? Is this a joke?

@user149799568

Notoriously, in Germany, for students with the same achievement, teachers' recommendations about the suitability of Gymnasium were rather different for the children of doctors and the children of dustmen.

That's disappointing to hear! I assumed it would take the stress off (as people in the UK prepare children nowadays for the 11+)

During 8th grade, so typically 13 years old.

Age 10 vs age 13 - that is the key difference, and as far as I know the US state government actually spend a lot of money to support disadvantaged families from Middle school to tutor them and help them pass the exam, and it is inline with their middle school curriculum.

Though I also heard those US exam school, doesn't add value in a way that a lot of parents think it should.

I'd expect that any system that requires a personal recommendation from teachers might be prone to this type of thing.

It probably as bad as doing a test at age 10 for the kids

“Which is why the idea of selective education as any sort of step out of disadvantage is completely ridiculous. Unless you are suggesting children should be able to dictate their own pre natal nutrition....”

@CurlewKate - it is to step out of “economic disadvantage”. Plenty of poorer children have very dedicated and educationally motivated & loving parents you know. And also some poorer people feed their children very healthy home cooked meals as well using cheaper ingredients like lentils.

The data is all there in the FSM ethnic minorities from London, by the way and their educational achievements.

and why those FSM ethnjc minorities not reflected and represent in London grammar schools???? London grammar school had a lot of ethics minorities but the FSM is 5 times less than the average?

In big cities that would be impractical.
In my city there are schools impossible to get to on public transport from my house. Without at least two changes and waiting around for connections. On the other hand there is a school easy to get to within 10 minutes walking.
It doesn't make sense for children to be shipped from one part of the city to another.

It's not practical, it's already tricky and expensive sorting school buses. Outside of London (perhaps Manchester and Birmingham) public transport is basically rubbish and runs to city centres only, schools only 3 miles away can be 1-2 hours by bus! My work is 5.6 miles away and takes 1 hour 45 minutes by bus (I drive). It's essential that local students are prioritised for schools, we only have one secondary in town (outstanding) why should dc from nearby city get spaces above local kids?

@Overturnedmum

But 10 miles is the nearby city, why should dc who can walk to school be refused a place to accommodate the wealthy residents of the city (it's particularly expensive in that area, but our school is better). Rural schools just aren't the same as city schools