Article on Toby Young's west london free school - I don't understand admissions

[PollyParanoia]

Ok article is here from yesterday's standard.
I do find all this stuff about "we want a school with high standards" a bit strange - is there anyone head or parent who actively wants a crap one?
But my main question is one of admissions. It says that the site is 3 miles from Toby Young's house. Presumably that would mean that his four children wouldn't get in if it's done on catchment. Is this the case? If true, it seems strangely admirable and altruistic of him to be doing all this hard work. I suppose I should be applauding his philanthropy rather than assuming he wants an education he can't afford to pay for...

That's the risk of lowest common denominator.

Plenty of private schools take children who aremn't bright enough for selective privates or they are in areas of the country with no good selective privates and still add good value based on small classes etc.

However the very bright seem to do best with the bright. I find it really really dull if I am talking to someone whose brain works at the fifth of the speed of mine and really lovely when I meet someone who is fast. It's wonderful when it works but if you're in a class of slow dullards you have no one to bounce your ideas off.

Obviously, Xenia, you have interacted with few 'slow dullards'. In my class last year, the low achievers often came up with far more imaginative ideas than the academically more able children, they just couldn't put it down on paper.

Obviously your genius brain hasn't quite grasped the meanings of empathy and compassion.

I'm just astounded how someone so purportedly bright thinks it's okay to refer to anyone or group of people as the 'lowest common denominator' so repeatedly.

self-purportedly, I think you mean, yellowsub.

If that was meant for me I don't think I've ever used the phrase loest common denominator. I find bright people more fun to talk to and I think clever chidlren do best in schools with other clever children but I would never use that phrase as far as I remember.

I think we were talking about teaching to the 'lowest common demonitor' or in my words 'mediocrity for all'.

Bustergut So in your class - the pupils who have the most imaginative ideas are considered 'low achievers', and academic ability is solely measured by what a pupil can write down?

Low achievers are indeed measured by the ability to read and write in our education system. Unfortunately academic ability is largely measured by what a pupil can write down. (I'm not saying I agree with this, but it's a fact of life.)

Xenia seems to think it is not worth talking to anyone whose brain works 'slower' than hers, and I believe she is quite keen on measuring academic ability by exam results and selective schooling (i.e. education based on literacy skills).

I was merely pointing out that other mortals, who Xenia may choose to ignore because of her great intellect, are not, in fact, brain dead, but may have something to offer in our wonderfully diverse society.

xenia talks sense

Xenia, your post at 18.43 today is your most recent use of this term.

Reading and writing are base level skills which most children should be able to acquire. Don't you think that something is very wrong if the pupils most capable of imaginative ideas are unable to write them down?

Not if they have been living in another part of the world where writing in particular is taught later. Nor if they have English as an additional language and aren't able to write in a language that the teacher understands. Nor if they have a SEN including dyslexia which makes the links between thought and words more complex.

So, no, basically. As buster and SWC say, this very narrow view of imagination and creativity.

Unfortunately some children have learning difficulties have poor literacy skills.
These children should not be written off as they often have good observational and organisational skills and vivid imaginations.

Well I wouldn't label a student for whom English is a second language as a 'low achiever' just because they were catching up with English literacy.

Given the right support dyslexia shouldn't mean being a 'low achiever' either.

Jackstarb
Forget the labels. Some children just find it difficult to read and write. Where do you and your cronies suggest these they are educated?

Excuse errors - moved to phone.

Ah yes, but I'm talking about people to whom I love to talk and spar and debate. I absolutely stand by that. I reember on a thread saying noe way I would have been disappointed had my children had down's would be that we wouldn't have such fun debates at home about things. So it's not just that I need to talk to a man with a brain and who is very fast but also prefer that the children are. That doesn't mean I don't think chidlren who aren't bright shouldn't be educated just that if you're clever and no one else is in your class it can make education a pretty lonely experience and you can't bounce ideas off each other and you're sitting there thinking I wish I could put an accelerator pedal on this person so they would get to their point.

(lcd - yes, I don't think I use the phrase myself but someone else had and I was referreing to their post. It' s not important)

BusterGut - It looks like you are the one that needs forget 'The Labels'.

I happen to think Cortina and Xenia have expressed valid points of view. Cortina's point that charater and hard work are possibly more important than "measured IQ" and Xenia's that bright pupils do better with bright peers.

If it was from somebody else's post, then you clearly considered it a useful phrase to repeat it.

If you're going to talk claptrap, at least stand by it.

Yes, it's just not a phrase I would use bu t I was quoting someone's.
Given selective schools are far and away better than all others and are some of the best on the planet in the UK I suspect my view that bright children do better in selective education is one of the more true statements on the thread.

But it is a phrase you use, Xenia, as very obviously you did.

I don't think it had been used previously on this thread for your to quote.

Anyway, some bright children do better in selective education. Some don't.

I think SWC's, Cortina's and Buster's points about 'brightness' are much more sensible and based in reality than the sweeping generalisations you make.

Xenia, I think, like our current government, you live in a different realm to the majority of the population.

Selective schools are often NOT the best. My son's state selective only got one (tutored) child to Oxbridge, compared to 4 in the same year from a local high school (pupils had not passed the 11+). Entry to selective school is affected by tutoring (i.e. parents' wealth) and catchment area. Some of our local schools have 50%+ passing the 11+ compared to 5%- at other local schools. Guess which children live in the more prosperous areas!

It is sad that all jobs now depend on literacy skills. Even going for an interview in a shoe shop involves a rigorous interview (including role play) and filling in an application form. A job as a dustbin man requires the applicant to fill in an application form. This means that people who find writing challenging have a problem even finding the most basic jobs. However, just because they find writing difficult, does not mean that they are totally brainless. They have views; they have opinions; they have feelings.

I took a child to forest school last year. He is always going to have problems with literacy. He finds spelling and writing hard work. At forest school, he 'invented' a peg for holding up a tarpaulin, explaining to the other children how they should pull the tarpaulin and how the guy ropes should be tied. He 'created' this idea, with no input from any adults (and he'd never been camping). I know, in our twisted society, that this creative, practical individual will have problems getting a job in the future, because his literacy / maths / science (oh... the ebacc subjects) will not be up to scratch.

We are on the wrong track, and something needs to be done about it.

5 minutes ago I was giving one of my children in the garden a flint thing to make fire. I think it's reall important children can develop a range of skills.

If you cannot pass interviews because you cannot write etc then there is always the option of working for yourself. Many of our most successful people had little education but by 13 were sellign things to other children, doing paper rounds and the like.

Dyson interviewed in today's press was saying all he liked at school was metal work and woodwork and he's done rather well out of it.