Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Ballot to abolish grammar schools

250 replies

zeolite · 24/05/2011 10:58

With all the talk on catchments, here is the second ever ballot to abolish grammar schools (the first was in 2000, on Ripon Grammar, which failed):

www.reading107fm.com/newscentre/local-news/petition-launched-to-scrap-two-reading-grammar-schools-247

What do MNetters think?

[takes cover now]

OP posts:
exoticfruits · 31/05/2011 17:13

That is what I found. I have known grammar school pupils have to have extra coaching at 11yrs-IMO they shouldn't have had a place-they got it through drilling.
People have to remember that the 11+ isn't the end, it is the start of 7yrs of education! Not fair to drill a DC who then struggles.(if they leave after only 5 yrs, they shouldn't have used up a place).
In Wokingham only 1 or 2 DCs a year from each primary school get to grammar school, and that is how it should be IMO-most don't even sit the exam-many who could pass don't take the exam.

exoticfruits · 31/05/2011 17:14

I think that is because back 40yrs ago they experimented with unstreamed seeker-things move on.

Yellowstone · 31/05/2011 17:57

erebus if the 'tutoring for grammar' thing is around 10 years old, has there been a corresponding change in the demographic in that time?

My feeling is that the 'tutoring for grammar' is vastly magnified in the collective mind of MN and that that is quite pernicious. The consolation is that MN may be ghettofied itself and therefore not scaring too many with bright children but few resources off. Frequently it's those who do not have a DC attending a grammar who insist that the majority are tutored to within an inch of their life. These people disguise opinion as fact. They aren't persuaded by those who have a few hard figures to hand and when one finally resorts to the fairly feeble line of well none of mine were tutored and got in, silly comments are quick to bounce back.

Admittedly I'm generalising from one particular school but I doubt that it's unique; I certainly hope it's not.

I think also that many who post on MN underestimate the importance many grammar school heads and teachers attach to the issue and how passionately they believe in genuine equality of opportunity in education as well as in the opportunities that often only education can really bring.

jgbmum · 31/05/2011 18:11

"Jgbmum, again, read the thread and my posts within it. I have not said that I think grammar schools equal a better education."

Bubble coral I have read the thread, and my question was not why you chose GS for your son - you explained that he has aspergers and you got him in on appeal, but rather what you felt was special about the GS system.

I did go through and highlight the points you made - starting with GS offers bright children a fighting chance Hmm

I was genuinely trying to understand your pov.

aliportico · 31/05/2011 18:50

erebus - yes, I think most grammar school children would get the same results at a decent, streamed, comprehensive. But is that all what school is about?

I certainly do have my reservations about the grammar system, but actually Kendrick is our nearest secondary school, my eldest was keen to go there, and it seemed like it would be a great fit for her if she could get in. We weren't thinking that we'd be happy if she got in because she'd get good GCSE results, we were happy for her because we thought she would enjoy the company. For us, it was about having 5 happy years, not what GCSEs she came out with.

DD2 wasn't interested in applying there at all. And I (perhaps naively) thought that that was how most people considered their school choices - where will my child be happy?

the (usually) superb building and sports facilities

lol - yeah, you've never looked round Kendrick or Reading, have you? ;-)

bubblecoral · 31/05/2011 18:51

Jgbmum, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

Tbh, I'm not sure that I do think there is anything special about the grammar system, except that for certain children who would find it difficult to reach their academic potential in a comp because of the size or for any other reason, it gives them a chance to be with simelarly minded children in a supportive environment.

But then it was pointed out, (I think possibly be Seeker, not sure) that other children without the academic capability don't get that chance if they too would find it hard to cope in a comp. I thought that was a good point!

I really don't know enough about grammar systems in other areas, or other GS's in particular, to be able to have an informed opinon of them. Everything I have based my opinion on relates to my son and our situation, and I can only be thankful that we have the schools nearby that we do. I was genuinely worried about how my son would cope in the comp, socially more than academically, because the transition into secondary school, and indeed the transition from child into young adulthood, is going to be more challenging for him than many children. So I suppose that that is why I have passionately defended grammar schools, because I feel that this GS with the excellent support they provide, will be the best chance my ds has of making these transitions as painlessly as possible. I think if something is available that benefits children, then as long as it is doing no harm to anyone else, it should stay.

aliportico · 31/05/2011 18:58

Interesting to be reading this thread and then to read through the one on "mixed ability teaching".

exoticfruits · 31/05/2011 19:21

DD2 wasn't interested in applying there at all. And I (perhaps naively) thought that that was how most people considered their school choices - where will my child be happy?

I'm naive too. It works well-find a school to suit your DC, NOT the school and then try and fit your DC.

confidence · 31/05/2011 21:52

Erebus,

"So why do we crave grammars (those amongst us who do!)?"

I can only speak for myself, but FWIW:

We chose a grammar school so that our DC could spend seven very formative years of his life enthusiastically exploring his interests, being around other kids with similar interests, being valued for his abilities and attitudes towards learning, and being in an environment where such things are generally valued and reciprocated. He was a stand-out geek at his rough community primary and I wanted him to have the experience of being "normal", not by having to change himself or adapt to lower standards, but by being among a critical mass of others who are similar. We wanted him to be educated in an atmosphere that corresponds to our own values, and not to have that compromised, or be constantly having to justify it and bolster it against the force of competing values to be "cool".

We're probably unusual in this but for us it had nothing at all to do with exam results. Of course I want him to get the best results he can and get into a university that suits him, if that's the right way forward for him at that point. But I see that as a by-product of education, not the point of it.

I don't think I "crave" grammars. We had other reasons as well for moving into an area with grammars and they just sort of "fit". I'd be happy with a high quality comprehensive where the pervading ethos corresponds with our own values. However there are two problems with that: (1) such comprehensives tend to exist only in relatively affluent areas, and we couldn't afford a house in any of them (the old "selection by postcode" that many supposedly egalitarian grammar-haters ignore), and (2) it's hard to work out when investigating schools exactly how much they stream and what effect that has on supporting the learning and ambitions of the brighter kids. It's probably a bit lazy, but a grammar just seemed like the easiest way to be confident of providing the right atmosphere, since everyone I've ever met who went to a grammar, or works in one, describes them that way.

wisecamel · 02/06/2011 22:37

confidence, I expect that you would have wanted your DC to spend

'seven very formative years of his life enthusiastically exploring his interests, being around other kids with similar interests, being valued for his abilities and attitudes towards learning, and being in an environment where such things are generally valued and reciprocated...'

even if he hadn't passed the eleven plus.

I want that for my DC too but he would be unlikely to pass at age eleven. I expect my 'values' are pretty similar to yours. How come my DC gets saddled with the secondary modern so that yours can choose the grammar? Or is that just life?

bubblecoral · 02/06/2011 22:56

Wisecamel, I want those things for my dc2 as well and he might not pass the 11+.

But his interests don't lie in the things that are on offer at the GS, therefore he is likely to meet others with simelar interests at the comp. They have a much broader curriculum.

If the comp (or in your area sec mod) doesn't provide an environment where he is valued for his abilities and attitudes towards learning, where such things are valued and reciprocated, then that is the fault of that particular school, not the GS up the road. They do still have things to learn at comps and secondary moderns, and there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to offer many of the values that are generally associated with grammars.

tigtink6 · 03/06/2011 01:11

Grammar school : chose this or not ? Grammar schools push kids to succeed, think all schools should! But GS have something to prove! Have a DS at GS, the best thing we have done so far, excelling, didn't at PS! It does depend on the child however my ds , his GS emphasise success in academics and sport, they celebrate success in each other. Discipline and respect is another key, i maybe howled at for this, but the respect for teachers , no first names, Miss Or Sir, expected to open doors for them is an important aspect. I went to an awful comp in the 80's, i know a lot has changed since , my DD just missed the 11 plus! She will be going to an all girls comp, a good one, But if i could get her
in any of the 5 grammar schools we are lucky to have on the Wirral I would , in fact she will be doing the 12 plus!! People who criticise GS, don't put your kids up for it, we have choices, their are excellant comps, but i would always choose a GS if a child was best suited , based on my experience .

Arissa · 03/06/2011 02:09

In the name of raising awareness, 10 parents chose to air their grievance by putting in a petition to bring down two of the most successful educational institutes in England by ending their selection.
Instead of applauding their success and promoting the fact these schools reside in Reading. Instead of trying to emulate their success, ethos and pastoral care by helping find resources for their local schools. The 10 petitioners are bent on a path of destruction and malevolance.

Across the two schools, they have put 1600+ childrens lives into turmoil. These children now fear that their school, due to this petition, may no longer be the safe, secure educational haven they know and trust and now also have the very real fear that it may all be taken away form them.

As to the restructure of the catchment areas for Maiden Erlegh and Bulmersche whilst detrimental to some, they have in all honesty, been put in as a common sense measure. To cater for the needs of the current housing structure of Wokingham. A logical, solution that everyone knew was going to be unpopular with those that lost access to ME. I know that Wokingham Council have to ship in children, on coaches, to 4 of it?s secondary schools due to the demographics of their location. Hopefully this issue will eventually be addressed by building a new Secondary near Finchhampstead.

As to the lack of spaces in Reading schools you?ll find the facts actually say that there are over 900 surplus places in Reading secondary schools. I do find it quite surprising that the 10 petitioners find none of these 900+ surplus places a ?decent secondary school? place.
Quote from Rob Wilson?s Website ?Reading East MP wrote:
Shortage of school places in Reading? The facts:
? As at May 2010, there were 212 surplus places in John Madejski Academy in Reading. In maintained primary schools there were 1,596 surplus places and in maintained secondary schools there were 977 surplus places. (Nick Gibb, written answer, HC Deb, 11 January 2011, c291W)

? As at May 2010, there were 1,596 surplus primary places (14% of total capacity) in Reading; at secondary level there were 977 surplus places (15% of total capacity). Nick Gibb, written answer, HC Deb, 21 December 2010, c1245W)

Historically there have been surplus places at Bulmersche, Forest and Emmbrook so the complaint that Reading children can no longer go to any Wokingham schools is another myth.

Perhaps these 10 parents would be better off spending their time getting behind the proposal of building a new school in East Reading. (Perhaps on the still available Alfred Sutton Secondary school Site.)
Which was reported in GetReading; Quote...
Three of Reading?s leading educational institutions have joined forces to back a plan for a new school offering a mix of academic and technical training in East Reading.
The University of Reading, Oxford & Cherwell Valley College which runs Reading College and Reading School have along with Reading and Wokingham borough councils have pledged their support to the proposal.
The new school will be for pupils aged 11-19 and offer both traditional academic studies and technical courses

As to the Utopia so many well meaning but inexperienced people suggest Comprehensive School education is. Well, I can only speak of my experience. The point here is that I do have first hand experience. One size does not fit all. Having worked in both an Outstanding and failing Secondary school I know that it is not a utopia. Streaming in all subjects from year seven isn?t practised by all, if many schools, due to a number of reasons. Staffing costs being one of them. As to the comment that teachers should differentiate and cater for all pupils needs. How ever well meaning this utopian sentiment, the reality and trying to practise these ideals to students who in the majority are non receptive, is quite another thing. All children aren't academic and many excel in other areas. Unfortunately our measure for successful schools is based on academic results.

I am quite sure that if we suddenly removed access to specialised learning for the small percentage of SEN Pupils, it would lead to a fierce outcry. Yet why is removing specialised learning to the small percentage of able students acceptable?

All these parents are doing is changing the system from selective entry, to entry by postcode. Current Education in this country is a postcode lottery. Again it is only the well of, that can afford to move into expensive catchment areas, that will win.
The selective system doesn?t care where you live, if you are intelligent enough to pass the test they will take you. Which is quite simply, a fairer system.
If you don't like selection at 11, well then there is always the selection at 13, or 6th form entry. There is, a choice, as the previous poster advised.
Its up to you if you make it yours. Why take away the choice? What will this achieve? Removal of choice and eventually the loss of 164 oustanding schools. Do we really have such an abundance of outstanding secondary schools in this country that we can afford to lose 164 of them?

Understandably 10 Parents are angry that their postcode no longer allows access to an outstanding school. Incredibly, to raise awareness of their predicament they chose to raise a petition to end selection at two local outstanding Academies. 10 people are going to bring down two outstanding academies, ruin 1600+ current pupils needs and the future of 100s of bright children that could have been?.It is indeed a truly sad state of affairs that they sought this route to raise awareness of their loss of postcode rights.

erebus · 03/06/2011 11:13

"The selective system doesn?t care where you live, if you are intelligent enough to pass the test they will take you. Which is quite simply, a fairer system."

Which is where you're wrong. If the 11+ couldn't be tutored for, at all, then you could be more sure you're testing for GS potential, not parental ability to pay (which you bag with your 'postcode lottery remark), but whilst some grammar towns bristle with preps whose sole raison d'etre is 11+ success, and whilst 11+ tutors fill their waiting lists years in advance....no.

This country, in general, as another poster has already written, should be investing that teaching talent at the end where it's really needed- those kids who are failing. As GS parents here have readily admitted, their clever DCs would almost certainly walk out of a comp with the same results as the GS will furnish them with; but I feel a vulnerable, under achieving DC's life could be turned around with access to a targeted, focussed and disciplined learning environment- like GSs provide for the more academically able.

erebus · 03/06/2011 11:15

"ruin 1600+ current pupils needs and the future of 100s of bright children that could have been"

-is rather offensive, tbh. The implication that anything 'less' than a GS spells dire failure. You 'out' yourself with this statement.

wisecamel · 03/06/2011 11:31

erebus, that's what I was trying to say only you put it much better. I have no argument with the fact that GS tend to be well-disciplined, high-achieving, exciting, fulfilling places to be but I want that for my DC just as much as those who are chosen by grammars.

What about those kids who aren't chosen? Secondary moderns are swimming against the tide with one arm behind their backs, especially if there's a faith 'comp' in the area too, mopping up all the parents with the foresight to attend church as they don't think DC will pass the exam. Again, I've nothing against people who do this, I don't blame them for wanting the best for their children but I worry about the 'average', or vulnerable child who would do so much better surrounded by children with the whole range of academic ability, good discipline and strong parental input.

Instead, kids end up in a school where staff work hard to prove that their school is just as good, even though it's obviously second choice for the vast majority of parents, some of whom may still even be preoccupied with further exams to pull them out as soon as possible. How easy is it to foster pride in a school in those circumstances?

zeolite · 03/06/2011 11:39

A couple of questions for those in the know: Could a free school select in exactly the same way as a grammar? And would it be exempt from legislation relating to grammars (and endless petitions and expensive ballots)?

An observation about cramming and the tutoring market for the 11+. Markets die without demand, there would be no market if people didn't want this, would there? Not having the requisite anxiety, drive or some would say awareness to do this (DCs as well as us), IME not preparing doesn't stop anyone from getting a place. Tutors do a valued job of easing the fears of those who think it makes a difference, and gives a living for those who are coaching kids in what they can pick up osmotically, while helping the economy along. Why is that wrong?

OP posts:
bubblecoral · 03/06/2011 11:40

Arissa, you are of course, completely right. But what use are the facts to a few disgruntled parents that didn't get their own way?

Erebus Plenty of children get into GS without prep school education and private tutors. Parents can put in the work themselves just by buying a couple of books and test papers. That's a hell of a lot cheaper than moving house to get into the catchment area of a good school.

I don't think that anything less than GS spells dire failure, and I am one of the parents that said her ds would probably come out of school with with simelar academic grades whether he went to GS or comp. That's not what is important to us, it's everything else that GS offers that will make the difference to my ds. Which, if he didn't recieve, could ruin his future. Or at the very least make his years at school and those after it much more challenging and unhappy.

This

I am quite sure that if we suddenly removed access to specialised learning for the small percentage of SEN Pupils, it would lead to a fierce outcry. Yet why is removing specialised learning to the small percentage of able students acceptable?

is an excellent point. Although I'd like to add that gifted children are considered to have a special educational need, as much as those who are well below average. But that's not as important is it? What does it matter if those children don't reach their true potential, as long as the kids who have lower grades do? Hmm

seeker · 03/06/2011 12:16

History is, they say, the stroy of the winners.

The grammar school debate is, similarly, largely the story of those whose children got in!

There is no massive clamopur for more secondary modern schools.

bubblecoral · 03/06/2011 12:25

That's because every child that should be in a secondary modern gets a place in one. Whereas there are plenty of children who pass the 11+, but there aren't enough GS spaces for them.

Perhaps some focus should be put onto improving secondary moderns, but that shouldn't have to be to the detriment of grammars.

seeker · 03/06/2011 12:43

That's not true. No child should be in a secondary modern.

erebus · 03/06/2011 12:43

...."I am quite sure that if we suddenly removed access to specialised learning for the small percentage of SEN Pupils, it would lead to a fierce outcry. Yet why is removing specialised learning to the small percentage of able students acceptable?"

But the argument here is that that 'specialised learning to the small percentage of able students' does absolutely not have to occur only in the gilded halls and purlieus of the exalted Grammar, does it? The place that excludes 77% of the populace? Why the need to quarantine these oh-so-able DCs for the other children when just about every comp in the land streams? (Many comps even call their top stream 'grammar stream'!)? Contamination??

The fear that if your clever, able DCs spots a vocationally minded child in the same assembly hall or lunch room they might- gasp!- suddenly want to become a plumber? And for that you'd separate your DC who got the magic 77% in the 11+ from another who scores 76% on that one day, age 10 who just MIGHT, at a comp with the existence of that 'grammar stream', work his/her way up into it?

Fair, anyone?

Or snobbery?

seeker · 03/06/2011 12:54

Well said, erebus!

exoticfruits · 03/06/2011 13:13

I agree totally erebus. You have to bear in mind that the next year the DC who got 76% may be beating hollow all those who got 77% or above. It is even possible that someone who only got 50% suddenly 'takes off' and beats them all.
I have nothing against the grammar school if at the end of each year those in a secondary modern who are out performing some grammar school pupils move up and those at the bottom of the grammar school move down.
They could all wear the same uniform to make it easy.
(silly me-why do we need it-it is called comprehensive education!)

scarlettsmummy2 · 03/06/2011 13:21

I haven't read all the comments, but having been to a grammar school I can honestly say it was great. I don't remember ever wishing I had got to mix with the children at the local secondary school, although after I left school I had no problems mixing with people from all different backgrounds. Myself and my three best friends all went on to do law degrees, and many of the other pupils in my year, did medicine, dentistry and engineering. Several went to oxbridge. I just don't get the criticism.