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!

"I am not going to claim that they are representative of their profession but many teachers here on MN make it clear that the above puts too much pressure on kids and that kids should be made to feel that getting a manual job is just as worthy as getting a well paid office job for example. And that getting a GCSE 'D' in Maths/English is something that they should be happy with."

Hubba, surely you can see that it depends on the child, and the context? The focus should be on every child making maximum PROGRESS, not on the final finishing points.

And that isn't a soft option. I have taught in extremely mixed primaries, with a huge stread of abilities. There are children I have taught that I would be distraught to find out in years to come had not got A/A*s and gone on to university - because anything less would be poor progress given their starting points and capabiilities. There are other children for whom getting GCSEs at Grade D and becoming emplyable in a manual job would be absolutely EXTRAORDINARY progress involving superhuman efforts both by the and by their teachers and support assistants.

It is not a question of 'just as worthy as a well paid desk job' - that manual job, for that child, is an extremely worthy and heady aspiration, as hard to achieve for them as an Oxbridge degree and a high-flying management training job is for another. The job of teachers and schools is to achieve both ... and every gradation in between. And that is hard, but it is the job.

Excuse typos. Not sure what happened there in the middleQ

Apologies, also meant to say that the pressure that would need to be put on those children who strive every sinew to reach a D is every bit as testing FOR THEM, and every bit as onorous FOR THEIR TEACHERS as the pressure that has to be put on an able child to reach an A. Probably more, in fact, becuase there may well be more barriers in the way. It is definitely not the case of 'not wanting to put too much pressure on kids'. To achieve the maximum progress for every child, pressure is put on all children, wherever they sit on the spectrum of abilities.

teacherwith2kids
That is another reason why kids should be in mixed ability schools if not classes.
Mine are fully aware of how hard kids try to achieve what they find easy because they sit in the same room as them.

Kids who are always isolated from that (like I was) genuinely have no comprehension (as I did not till I was in my mid 20's)
which is why jerks like the current government made such daft decisions

You don't want her to aiming to be an accountant???

You convinced her and her parents that the DD should abandon the idea of doing a business degree and switch to maths instead???

I know that you have a 'I know better than you' attitude here on MN. It just didn't occur to me that you carried this over to your pupils and their parents.

Absolutely. And the brilliant thing about mixed ability schools is that if a child has one (or more) things that they are amazing at, or one or two things that they are truly poor at, then they can be appropriately grouped. One of my most SEN pupils, with very poor literacy and numeracy skills, was a genuinely brilliant, inspired artist. And another who found reading and writing exceptionally difficult was a very able natural mathematician. All could get access to the teaching they needed, simply through altering groupings or support. In a non mixed ability school, that isn't so easy to do.

Habba, surely you ought to be FOR a child aiming for the 'general' academic degree that would open the doors to a myriad of opportunities in the future, rather than a single-focus approach leading to a specific job? Surely that is the point of aiming as high as you can - it gives you more choice. That girl could still become an accountant with an excellent maths degree - the door is most definitely not closed BUT so many other doors are opened AS WELL. Why is that a bad thing in any way??? (genuinely puzzled here - am in 'maximum progress possible' thinking mode and can't see how anyone would NOT want a child to ake the maximum possible progress, even at degree level?)

PS Habba Please stop referring to my pupils. I'm not a teacher.
I'm an accountant. One who knows that the BEST accountants do not do Accountancy degrees. In fact when I was starting out, Accountancy degrees were worth less exemptions than a BSc - because the good firms wanted analytical akills not anoraks
Surely you expect the same from your firm's trainees?

Many years ago if you did not fit the mould or were anyway different requiring different teaching strategies. They were unable or not prepared to use them meaning that kids from the very top to the bottom were failed in so many ways. reading these threads it would appear that many of the wrongs of 25/30 years ago have been removed from the system and for most kids Education delivers their true potential.

beatback
Exactly. Its called "child centred learning" : if their eyes are glazed over at the end of the lesson the teacher is the failure not the child.

At comps, the thing that EVERY child can do is found and built upon - even if its stock car racing or sheep shearing

as well as the girl I mentioned above who is entering a national maths contest tomorrow

Its not like 25/30 years ago when because you had terrible handwriting or concentration issues you were branded unteachable and a dummy now is it. It makes me very angry with the Education i received from those so called professionals, i would not any of those run a *** in a BREWERY. I am glad that most kids today will be taught by skilled and commited teachers, not the ones i knew that when the teachers strike of 84/85 were seen in the pub at lunchtime forcing 12/13 yr old kids to walk round the town for lunch.

SHOULD. SAY I WOULD NOT LET ANY OF THOSE RUN A*

Evil I don't think that turning down or failing to take on a grammar school place is necessarily a sign of disinterest .

Like you I teach in, or close to, a grammar school area . My first two children were offered grammar places only one took up the place. That was exactly because we are interested in education , we knew the grammar was not right for her and we also wanted her to go to the local village school because community is important to us . Our third child is probably borderline grammar material , she did not even sit the test because we wanted her to experience a comprehensive education.

I have noticed that the very bright students whose parents have chosen to keep their children at our comp- secondary modern have families who tend to be involved in and passionate about their education. Not always of course but definitely a trend you would notice .

Of course it may be different at other schools , particularly in the centre of a grammar catchment or where the alternative is not as good.

That's encouraging. Certainly the girl whose parents didn't bother to get the results is a model student with interested, encouraging parents. My DTDs are only 6 so we're yet to decide whether to play the grammar game. In lots of ways, I'd rather not- I strongly disagree with selective state education. They might have other ideas, though.

DH and I don't agree with selective education and therefore I will admit that we were quite relieved that for most of our children it was not a suitable option.

I accept that is easy for me to say when I teach at their school in a fairly senior position and can keep an eye on them. Our school is also a good school, the kind that drives property prices up. I have a feeling that our local grammars are not as good as others as well.

We do have my eldest son in a grammar as part of a managed move, not my ideal scenario by any means but one that at the time felt like it was our only "choice" .

We do send students to Oxford or Cambridge every year and have actively worked to make that happen . However we also have an issue with students choosing safe, local universities rather than those that offer the most academic rigour.

Our students by nature seem to be very conservative , they are very compliant and play it safe, I suspect that is part of our issue. We also have a relatively low number of families with a history of university education for themselves .

Interestingly I have noticed recently, that parents who have a bright child and they have been to university themselves are likely to keep their child in the non selective system . Those parents who have a bright child and they are generally supportive of education, but do not have a university education themselves , are more likely to send their children to the grammar. I am not claiming that can be generalised and it is only something I have noticed over the past two or three years .

Arisbottle. There is a simple reason for parents who have not been to University prefering Selective Education .it is because in most cases Comprehensive Education failed them. I can accept things are different now but people always remember how things were for them, and the last thing people want are for their offspring, is to encounter the same trials and tribulations they did.

Yes I suspect you are right , there is also often a desire for things to be different, better for their children and so they want something different for their children and an obvious way to do that is to opt out of mainstream.

My DH and I have done well out of state comprehensive education , even though our schools were not on paper, great schools. It is therefore not surprising that we want that for our children, even when other models are available .

Various studies have shown that there is a disproportionate number of selective kids taking up coveted uni places and jobs. You have to wonder how much of that is down to bias on the part of unis and employers, and how much is down to parents and teachers telling kids that it's ok to be average.

Interesting point Habba, but I would say that it actually is OK to be average, academically. Millions of people are average and really don't have a problem with it. What needs to change is the academically superior people have to accept that it's OK for other people to be average and show them the respect they deserve, rather than look upon them as losers and failures.

But not ok for the academically superior to be expected to perform only averagely well at GCSE

I'd totally agree.

My dd is bright, she passed her eleven plus but has gone to a comp due to her not getting a place on distance. They do stream them/set them and she's in the top sets. Though not all subjects are streamed - the main ones are but stuff like drama, citizenship, re, aren't.

Anyway, she's coasting. Hardly has any homework. Kids I know at the grammar are doing 90 mins of homework a night.

I get the impression that because she's bright and finding the work very easy the teachers are concentrating on getting other kids up to standard. Sadly dd isn't very self motivated.

Viva surely that's a good sign, you should be thankful that she is doing well, keeping up with the top sets. If you feel she is not busy enough, offer other activities to enrich her education. Or just give her a break and allow her to develop in other ways.

My children ate not in the top sets but they are never bored or unmotivated.

(Maths degrees are better than business degrees. Business degrees are usually done at less good universities by people who aren't so bright).

My odd job man has a Maths degree from Oxford. He is particularly good at things involving intricate geometry, like putting up difficult shelves and tiling. He is poor and has a complicated relationship with society.

There are several stinking rich families at DD's school with parents who attended mediocre UG business schools...

Beatback - in past threads various posters have said that they based their decision to go selective on their experiences as school kids, which supports your point.

However, a lot of parents base their decisions on current experiences. In our case, our primary school's attitude was that DS was already KS L4 at the start of Year 6 so leave us alone while we focus on getting everybody up to L4 by the end of the year.

Then there was our local non-selective secondary. A neighbor with academic kids there wasn't too happy. Their DCs would be set homework and they either didn't get marked or came back with just a tick. After a while the DCs didn't bother.

A lot of parents do have valid reasons for favoring a selective education. Not all of us are basing that decision on something from 20 years ago :)

And before teachers tell me that not all schools are like that, I know but since I don't live in your catchment tray that is small consolation to me.

If you have a First in maths, preferably followed by a PhD in maths, from a highly ranked uni then financial companies will snap you up. By your early 30s your can be on £100k plus.

Anything less and you fall into the same employment problem experienced by people with English and Chemistry degrees looking for a non academic/research job.