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.

@Overturnedmum "
do you think the improvements to inequality will come from the 'advantaged' kids not progressing as well as they would in a grammar"

No. The statistics show that high achieving children do just as well in a comprehensive school as they do in a grammar. However, the children in secondary moderns are automatically limited in their options and possibilities, and the very fact of having very publicly "failed" at the age of 10 is psychologically damaging. There are plenty of stories of people carrying that damage into adult life. I really can't understand why anyone could approve of labelling children at the age of 10.

Welcome to present any measure you want that shows grammar school add value, but I want it to be academic rigorous and peer reviewed publish. Not just saying grammar schools end up better result, we know that already because it is selective.

A lot of school coaches shipping kids for over an hour tour across London to some superselective grammar schools. It is a big business and it is a fact

So surely you should want to keep the grammar schools because they're not as good as the comps and their existence helps to reduce inequality by reducing middle class outcomes relative to comps?

Not the same unfortunately, those sixth-form does not take students at age 11 and do not take 11+ exam at age 10....

That just proof that you don't need a grammar school education to end up as high achievers.

As a former teacher, I disagree with this. In my experience, the factors that determine a pupil’s success are: consistent home life/bedtimes/mealtimes/routines, parents reading to them every day since they were babies, parents supporting child’s nightly reading/filling in their reading journal on a daily basis, keeping on top of the child’s homework/ensuring it’s completed to a high standard/handed in on time, attending all parent evenings at the school. In my professional experience, it was by and large the middle class parents who were demonstrating the parental behaviours which resulted in the best outcomes for their children. The biggest impact is PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AT HOME.

I think it's clear, but you won't admit it because casual observers would recoil in horror, that you know grammar schools provide brighter children with an education they wouldn't ever get at the average comp. That results in them getting places at Oxbridge and successful careers. You want to neuter their potential by forcing them into a comp so that we have equal(ly low) outcomes across socioeconomic groups.

You think this is somehow fairer than massively expanding grammar school provision so that disadvantaged kids also have the opportunity to benefit from attending.

It is clear that you are still living in the fantasy that grammar schools are for bright students who will end up at Oxbridge, whereas numerous research studies suggest otherwise and you chose to dismiss.

@ThisOldThang " You want to neuter their potential by forcing them into a comp so that we have equal(ly low) outcomes across socioeconomic groups."

I am baffled that people persist in this myth-despite data showing that high ability children do as well in comprehensives as they do in grammar schools.

So why are you so against parental choice?

If there's no advantage to attending a grammar, then there's no disadvantage to attending a comp.

What possible reason is there for wanting to close them down?

“It is clear that you are still living in the fantasy that grammar schools are for bright students who will end up at Oxbridge, whereas numerous research studies suggest otherwise and you chose to dismiss.”

Actually I am quite anti Oxbridge. Too woke for me these days. I sent my gifted mathematician to ETH Zurich with MIT lined up. Let him see the real world a little more first and go somewhere with some proper academic funding should he want to go down that route.

All this bollocks of peer reviewed studies @Overturnedmum - I prefer to rely on what the actual teachers on this thread have said. And parental choice.

Well, exactly!

It is not a zero sum game.

Studies have shown that while grammar schools do not provide an advantage over comprehensive schools in areas without grammar schools, their presence can negatively affect other schools in the same area, leading to overall harm in overall educational outcomes.

In addition, students from more privilegedbackgrounds are more likely to attend grammar schools, which can exacerbate educational inequalities. All of above is inefficient of using the state funding.

All this bollocks of peer reviewed studies - I prefer to rely on what the actual teachers on this thread have said. And parental choice.

You are ending up your child to these institutions to use the mathematical skill to conduct these kind of peer reviewed studies which you seem to fail to comprehend.

https://news.mit.edu/2024/perception-good-schools-student-preparation-dependent-0328

I can totally relate to everything you and @Moglet4 say, except my DC went to a very good comp that was regularly in "best state schools" rankings when they existed. DC was in top sets in 6 subjects as far as I remember, not just STEM but languages as well. Being ASD, DC was also tested for IQ and other cognitive abilities as part of clinical diagnosis and was found to be in top 2% of the population. Got no support at comp despite being SEN for a severe motor impairment (because "surely ASD are not SEN" as state teachers freely declare). Survived at a very high psychological cost, achieved 7A*-A and 4 Bs for GCSE and went to grammar.

The difference with the grammar was HUGE. DC's knowledge was nowhere near the grammar pupils', the comp simply didn't teach that much. The comp used easier exam boards to work the system, the content of some subjects was so dumbed down it was incomparable with the boards the grammar used. Interestingly, chemistry was the biggest problem in our case too - I guess some exam boards are just rubbish for chemistry. So in effect grammar pupils with less cognitive ability were much better educated than DC - this is only thanks to grammar teaching! GCSE grades were the same but they meant nothing in terms of real knowledge - I laugh every time I see "oh but my kids went to state and got the same top grades". Yeah, of course they did.

People just don't understand what they are talking about, they don't have first hand experience to compare two systems with the same child and are being totally deluded. I think there is no point to explain, they won't understand (or wouldn't want to admit).

And some how a lot of comprehensive school do better in A level and go to same university? Real life knowledge?

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/selective-schools-dont-increase-pupils-chance-of-university-place-or-job-z0wzp5zj3

"Children who attend academically selective schools do no better in early adult life than those who go to comprehensives, according to a report.

Findings published in the British Journal of Educational Studies suggest grammar schools bring little to no benefit in terms of the likelihood of attending university or securing a job. There are about 160 grammars remaining in England, in addition to many selective independent schools"

I suggest that any mums who want to hear some recent real stories visit the Studyroom forum to learn about the up to date students’ experiences with comprehensive versus grammar schools for sixth form.

Most of the students are mature enough to make their own decisions, unlike the 11+, which is driven by parents and tutoring.

Of course, some grammar school parents will ignore this anyway because they won’t listen and don’t like the facts.

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=7321237

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6671944

Thanks for sharing your experience.

Teaching to the exams and shopping around for examination boards is a major problem at GCSE and that presumably carries over to A-levels.

I attended a Red Brick university (Oxbridge applications just weren't an option given how far behind I was going into 6th Form). I remember there being a lot of first year modules that I was able to cruise through because I'd already covered it as part of the Oxford/Cambridge A-level syllabus.

I agree that those claiming there's no difference between grammars and the average comprehensive school in non-grammar areas just don't know what they're talking about.

The teaching style at A-level was also very different to the comp. It was similar to university lectures with additional self-study which I think also helps with the transition to university.

“You are ending up your child to these institutions to use the mathematical skill to conduct these kind of peer reviewed studies which you seem to fail to comprehend.”

@Overturnedmum - thank you, but I do understand the difference between pure mathematics and social science based on dubious and false assumptions aka grades which don’t give half the picture.

No problem, sure you can dislike things that you don't believe is dubious and false assumptions. But it does not take away the fact that these are proper research conduct from creditable research from top institution using a lot of mathematical and statistical inferences skills.

You cannot honestly claim that social class divide in Germany is worse than British?

Race to the bottom?

I don't understand why people compare Oxbridge coms vs grammars vs private offers as some sort of measure for successful outcomes when it's common knowledge Oxbridge have gone woke and their offers are increasingly more based on non-academic criteria 🤔

Mmm.. Up thread who went to redbrick University from Grammar school many moons ago trying to say "I remember there being a lot of first year modules that I was able to cruise through because I'd already covered it as part of the Oxford/Cambridge A-level syllabus."

And then relate that to the same experience someone mention as comprehensive school experience in 21st century?

@Overturnedmum I'm sorry, but I don't understand your last post.

I'm the person you've quoted, but I'm not the person you've replied to. What are you trying to say?