There's a "culture of low expectation" in secondary schools. Do you agree?

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello. You may have seen/heard on the news today that Ofsted is warning that thousands of bright secondary-school-age children are being "systematically failed" at school.

And we'd like to know what you think about this.

Ofsted says there is a culture of low expectations in England's non-selective secondaries - meaning that, according to a new Ofsted report, more than a quarter (27%) of pupils who achieved the highest results in primary school fail to achieve at least a B grade in both their English and their Maths GCSE.

The most academically able, says Ofsted chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw, arrive "bright-eyed and bushy-tailed" from primary school, but things start "to go wrong very early. They tread water. They mark time. They do stuff they've already done in primary school. They find work too easy and they are not being sufficiently challenged."

Do you think this is a fair reflection of life at secondary school? Do you think your child's secondary school has a low expectation of its pupils/your child? Does/did your child "tread water" in Year 7? Do you wish secondary schools did more to challenge their more academically able pupils?

Please do tell!

TALKIN PEACE. You say Business pay very poor wages,apart from the big muti nationals like "STARBUCKS GOOGLE" most S.M.E"S and family business are fighting just to stay in Business, in many family owned small and medium sized firms i know, the Directors are not taking SALARYS so that they can either keep going or not make any"REDUNDANCIES". The vast majority of family business in the U.K are not making any money and are running huge "OVERDRAFTS" that banks can call in at any time. So the only companies that have the financial means for the new Y.T.S scheme are the major corporations. Small Business up to 100 employees are just trying to keep the wolf from their doors.

beatback
I know. I'm an accountant for several of them.

And for small businesses the apprenticeship scheme is an absolutely excellent way to get trainees who are at college part time and working for you part time : with no ERS NI bill and subsidised training - and they are on limited term contracts so you can either keep them on or let them go with no costs.
Look into it : you'll be pleasantly surprised.

PS
its also excellent for kids as they get to "try out" employers and skills without having to make a huge commitment.

several of my clients are taking on grounds and technical staff that way
filling posts that would otherwise have been left empty as the costs of hiring and firing are too much for small employers.

We have arranged apprenticeships with lots of local smaller firms for the reasons given above .

Yes, I completely agree that many state comprehensives fail the brightest students. They're more interested in the middle achievers than those at either the higher or lower ends of the spectrum. Many comps aren't streaming for different subjects but pile everyone into mixed ability classes, which IMO should be disallowed.

I'd support the reintroduction of grammar schools in all areas, and I also support special schools for those with severe learning difficulties. One size doesn't fit all.

It's wrong that the most academically able can only attend a school focused towards their needs if they can afford private school. We need the brightest from all backgrounds to be given a rigorous academic education, not just those with money. This directly impacts on who ends up in the most powerful positions in our society and where they've come from.

Elquota
How many comps have you actually been to?
Because your description does not fit ANY of the county ones round here.

And as the parent of a summer baby who was a bit of a late developer I'm awfully glad that he was not tested at the end of year 6 and barred from ever reaching the top academic sets - as he has been able to at his comp.

Talkinpeace I've been in several as a teacher as well as attending one myself. Clearly I don't live in your county. How about you, how many have you been to?

No-one is saying a changed system would be perfect, but the current system is worse IMHO. Comps have had decades to sort themselves out, but many haven't. While there will be a small minority on the borderline who don't pass the 11+ but develop later, is that really a good reason to deny the opportunity to so many?

Talkin - Your standard response to any poster that disagrees with you seem to be to tell them that they are talking crap because your DH's job gives you a greater insight into whatever. Nice to see that you are open to other people's experiences and opinions

Do you know, I've just remembered something.

Our borough opened a brand new cofe comp about 8 or 9 years ago. It was and has been touted as a flagship school.

We looked at it for dd. One MFL was offered and the science department on the open day could not confirm that triple science was offered. Millions were invested in it. At the open daye we witnessed a member of staff yelling at a child (like shite) and a pupil making ruden bigoted and racist remarks about a member of staff.

It is revered as fab and I believe ofsted rated it outstanding. Pupils about whom parents complained subsequently sexually assaulted a fellow pupil on the premises and set another on fire. This year the inquest of a pupil who committed suicide because of reported bullying has been all over the local papers.

We didn't apply; but many parents have no choice but they big. Up the school because of they have no choice.

This is one of the best state schools in our borough; we removed dd from one that has an amazing reputation in a similar borough.

Low expectattions - certainly. Comprehensive education - no it equates to secondary modern; good enough - not for our children; utter disgrace yesj part of an excuse based cultue in education - yes. Ofsted outstanding - hahaha - but it is!!

Elquota. Would you say a ratio of 30% Grammar School 50% High School 20% Remedial/Special School then would be appropiate then. Would 30% give kids on the borderline now a better chance and would you believe in year admissions say in year 9 from the High School.

Habba
I am utterly against state funded selective education : you want selection on grounds of "intelligence", faith, sex or anything else, go pay for it.

Elquota
At events with my children and DH and through my own work, most of the ones round here. Including the local academy that I chose not to send my kids to.
I fully agree that there are some truly dire comps, but there are also many, many excellent ones.
Bringing in Grammar schools is not the answer
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-17874326

DS is Year 7, previously at Steiner, his state secondary is very pushy indeed, all about targets, all the time. Boys from local vvpushy primary are switched off from learning and cynical, mess about a lot as far as I can tell, I think they have been overworked at primary.

Complete sidetrack, but how has your son found the transition, Mitchdafish, from Steiner to mainstream, I mean.

Genuine question do comps put the kids into sets these days? Or does it depend on the school?

I went to a comp and we were split for maths, English and Science but that was it i was in the top set and those lessons were fine.. It was beyond a joke in some of the lessons- generally (not always) under achieving children are disputive and often seem as being 'cool'. Certainly at my school it was not cool to be clever. Also the teachers were so busy trying to get the naughty children to behave that the more able kids were not pushed at all!!

I kind of agree that if your in a big comp with its fair share of difficult teenagers, then the children that just behave and get on with it can easily over looked and not pushed to achieve their best so in that respect there is a culture of underachievement. Much depends on the school.

racmum
Thornden do not. Its never seemed to harm their results.
Almost every other one I've ever heard about does - because it makes teaching saner.
A few stream but computerised setting software makes sets a sensible option.

Talkin - that was a bit of a non sequitur

I was just pointing out that you are usually quite dismissive of other people's experiences with schools that they are familiar with. Yes we know that your DH visits "100s" of schools but that doesn't invalidate what they have to say about their school.

I don't see what my views on private education has to do with the above observation.

Habba
I went to private school. I have nothing against private schools. I am not, and will never be, one of the people who thinks private schools should be abolished.

What I am against is taxpayer funds being used in selective faith schools and selective education schools.
When prep schools in Kent brag about getting 100% of their kids through the 11 plus, you know that grammar schools are not getting the brightest kids, just those with the most sharp elbowed parents.

I also firmly believe that a lot of the "culture of low expectation" in state schools is because idiots like Gove crap on teachers from a great height day in day out, move the goalposts on what they are teaching (introduction of the Ebacc being the prime example) and then bang on about league tables which have the artificial cliff of the grade C/D boundary.

The problem with threads like this one is that inevitably ends up an exchange of anecdotes.

The fact is that OFSTED and Gove cannot have it both ways - if too many students are achieving A/A grades, then how* can they assert that they suffer from the low expectations of their schools and teachers?

It's mind boggling.

It's interesting that people seem to think that bright children will only achieve their potential if they are "pushed" to.

Talkinpeace - I went from a kent private school to grammar in 1971. It isn't a new thing and many families had spit provision for their children. Rather than reviewing entry to the grammars from private sector though how about the local primaries raise their game.

We moved to the area in 1967 when I was 7 and the good primaries were full so I was sent to a rivate school in broadstairs. Our local primary at that time had never got a child through the 11+ It still has a poor reputation.

We sent our DS to a top performig, best in borough local primary and moved him at 8 because his GandT needs were not being met. DD stayed until Y6 and went to a high performing state school. We moved her at the end of Y8 because the school was drifting (a school with 8/9 chasing evey place).

The state sector needs to significantly raise its game before the independent sector is lambasted.

No Curlew Some children need support to get motivated. Some don't. I see it as the country's job to do what we can to help all children achieve their potential. That doesn't mean all achieve top grades, but then, nor does it mean not 'pushing' the more capable but less motivated because we know they will "do alright". There are also a lot of highly motivated children who will never get high grades, but, we should still ensure they achieve what they can.

Eviltwins I guess they could say that the standard for A/A* is too low.

I was discussing this with some Year 11 students in school on Friday who quite frankly know much more than I ever did at their age and can analyse and evaluate ideas with much more complexity than I ever did at school. I am no genius but I went to a top university and achieved a 1st. As these boys have clearly been stretched more than I ever was I don't see how they have been dumbed down - and this is in a comp/ secondary modern.

No-one has mentioned the high ability kids that mess about, refuse to learn, and disrupt the learning of others.

But then I suppose that id because those posters that have those children believe that it is the teachers fault for not being entertaining enough

Everyone knows on MN that all of our children are bright and perfectly behaved, it is only those pesky kids in secondary moderns who have TVs in their room who misbehave.

Let's talk some home truths.

1. Most schools are too big, so kids get away with playing teachers and parents off in a way they wouldn't have done 50 years ago.
2. Some parents fail to discipline their children properly, and this group of kids causes havoc in some classrooms, disrupting learning for the others. There is a limit to how far teachers can change this alone, as out of the 128 hours in a week only 30 are spent at school, for 38 weeks a year.

3.There aren't enough properly qualified Maths and Science teachers to go around, so many kids have to make do with people standing in and giving it a go. Not great for progress, and not in the national interest.

1. So much time is spent on high stakes tests that high quality practical and empirical work goes out the window a lot of a time, which is the very stuff that most kids need to be doing to make the most progress. Especially bright kids.
2. Exam boards are too big, ungainly and profit driven to be trusted to do a good job properly any more.
3. Internationally, teacher assessment of pupils works for most countries. Our externally moderated exam system is anomalous globally, expensive, and pretty ineffective.
4. Despite all this we still have one of the best education systems in the world, statistically speaking, which amazes me really given how little we spend on some pupils, and the diversity of our population.