Worst forms of selection in schools: Views of M'snetters

[thankgodimretired]

Interviews?
Questions concerning parental income?
Academic selection?
Previous school reports?
Decisions made by committee about whether to exclude certain individuals from attending?

Having just recently retired from the teaching profession, I am struck by how little things have changed over the course of my working life. There are certainly less overtly selective schools in the state sector than when I started out teaching in South London in the late 1970's. But the independents, grammars and faith schools appear to be more socially exclusive than at any time.

Mum. Yes they do .

TalkinPeace there are Superselectives whose sphere of influence includes other Grammars (Colchester / Southend ; anything in Kent)
so who gets first dibs on which kids? Interesting point. If the elevenplus web site is anything to go by, some parents actually opt for Watford Boys rather than QE Barnet due to the 6th form cull.

I wouldn't know smokepole. There seem to be more than one category - the 11+ counties of Bucks, Kent and Lincs where the grammars are presumably not super-selective, although I dare say that some are better than others. Then there are the LEAs where there are the odd one or two grammars, like Lancs, Stoke on Trent. I know that the grammar in Stoke on Trent is Catholic, so its primary means of selection after the entrance test is religion which I suspect would exclude it from the super-selective category. And then there are your Tiffins, Newstead Woods, which I gather really are superselective.

smokepole Mum. Yes they do Significantly more than the selective schools?

Presumably there is some sort of 'pecking order'. There used to be in the old days i.e. the 50s and 60s in some places. In Sheffield for example, you could pass, or 'pass for King Edwards' which was deemed better than just passing. Where I lived there were only a boys and girls grammar school, so you either passed or failed. (Unless you were Catholic and could then choose the Catholic Grammar.)

Absolutely agree LaVolcan, having a good degree in no way of itself cuts someone out to be a good teacher. But not being especially intellectually able or academically minded almost certainly does mean that that person isn't equipped to teach the very able adequately themselves, even though they might nonetheless be very capable teachers in the right setting.

I'm not sure I've made any generalizations about comprehensives have I, other than very obvious points?

Super selectives in theory are open to everyone though I get the point. But then all grammar areas are very restricted too. So arguably the whole ferocity on MN is pointless........... It's a shame really as the area where there seems to be most consensus is around super selectives. There's no political will to introduce a superselective system nationwide however. Parental will, but no political will.

St Olaves now won't be the same St Olaves as it was then though Talkin. Many of these schools have changed beyond all recognition, along with the political and educational landscape.

Mum. I had complied a list of the top 25 Grammar schools ( for no other other reason than being bored one night, from the Performance Statistics based on average A level points, iv'e Lost the Bloody piece of paper) 2 "Typical Comps" were on that list You've Guessed it those typical comps Watford Boys/Girls. Most of those 26 Super Selective schools were on that list , the only exceptions on the list were Altrincham Girls Grammar, Tunbridge Wells Girls grammar and the two Watford schools. I might be right, but "don't Sue me if I am slightly wrong with my placings.

The average 2013 A level grades from these schools went down from A, A- B+ Tunbridge Wells Grammar for instance was I think in 25th place with a B+ average A level grade and points of 252.4 . Queen Elizabeth's Barnet was no1 with A grade average and points of 271.4.

La Volcan Maybe "King Edwards" was a direct grant grammar school so was deemed more "exclusive" because it had fee paying pupils as well.

St joseph's College in Stoke , must have had to employ some of the tactics used by "Blue Coat in Liverpool" to stay selective because Stoke is a Labour Party Strong-hold.

If you mean more than the grammars in all grammar areas Mum, then yes. Although there are ebbs and flows also some of the schools you're asking about push Oxbridge far more than others.

smokepole Thank you :-)

The direct grant thing did make a difference as it was based on the 11+. I was offered two direct grant places at two London schools and it was wholly down to the 11+ score. It would have been possible to get to lots of other London grammars with a far lower score. The pecking order now is based on results, rather than difficulty of obtaining a place, though of course there is and was a rough correlation, mostly.

St Joseph's College I have just looked on Dept Of Education website Statistics It would be far to say a FSM rate of 1.2% in one of the poorest Cities in the United Kingdom is not very representative "IS IT".

It has a "Non Grammar" intake of 69% High 30% Middle 1% Low. It's A level average grade is C+ which is pretty much similar to DD2 DS grammars .

Molio I think you would have a stronger augment if you knew what you were talking about. It is evident to me that your extremely limited knowledge is preventing you from presenting a viable stand point.

smokepole
its an interesting game - and thank you for doing it : your elucidation has been greater than many
BUT
there are only 164 grammars and only in parts of the country.

Non selective schools will, by definition, get less kids into Top200 Unis
but I'm still really unclear whether the pupils at the grammars would have got into those Unis had they gone to non selective schools.

As HappyGardening was honest enough to state up thread, her DS would have got the same exam grades at a state school as he has at a £40k per year private : but he would have not have got the esoteric extras

TalkinPeace excellent points.

Many people I know have selected private education for more than pure play grades.

No top academic performers have moved from my DCs primary school to private education. However all bar one have (out of four leavers so a small sample) moved because local primary state schools have fallen far short of nurturing interests in areas such as art etc.

It is good to see the might of the rich still holds sway. Examining the list of " super selective" with their oh so gifted and talented children it is not hard to see what privileged areas they come from.. what a silly thread too.. the hierarchy of completion .. heaven knows what the kids.. only made it to the third tier grammar.. what a disappointment
as to the discussion on the quality of teacher required to inspire such treasures. Any half awake teacher can stand in front a class of super clever kids can trot out a string of A* . The challenge is the other end ...the truly talented and outstanding teachers are standing in front of a class of children who barely scraped a 4c in their key stage 2 Sats, come from low income families were English is not always the first language and get them to succeed.
a "challenging" environment is not about behaviour it is about access to resources.

Well that's interesting Mum........ How do you work out from what I say that I have ' extremely limited knowledge'? :) If you could add some substance to that it would be great. I would think that it was pretty obvious that I have some pretty solid knowledge tbh and very hard to point out where it's weak. My knowledge is strongest of the old direct grant system and the current system and of university entrance but 'extremely limited' on those three things would be pushing it a bit. This is direct knowledge too, not through a 'DH'. So where exactly do I indicate that my knowledge is 'extremely limited'?

halftheway
please read the full thread
as far as I can gather this thread has now become about analysing and dissecting the ways that more bright kids from all backgrounds can have the same opportunities

there can be no knee jerk because the data has so many nuances

Oops. Meant to say current super selective system. Not current system.

halftheway my dad arrived in this country with one suitcase of clothes and no money at all and even had to sell the suitcase to raise money. His grandchildren have the benefit of access to a good state education as I did too with direct grant. Don't make assumptions.

Molio I'm not sure I've made any generalizations about comprehensives have I, other than very obvious points?

That's far more easily done in a selective school than in an all ability school.

I would count that as a generalisation - I don't think it's obvious myself. With something like 3,500 comprehensives it can't be possible to generalise about what the school will or won't be able to do because there are just too many.

Molio So where exactly do I indicate that my knowledge is 'extremely limited'? feel free to grace us with your knowledge of comp. schools as so far you have demonstrated none to me...

Molio In fact the only knowledge you have demonstrated to me is that of the one school your DC attends... Oh and how to latch on to a challenge and never let it go...

MumTrying / LaVolcan
some people's posts are best largely ignored.
I should not have lost my temper the other night.
There are posters on this thread with points to add
and others who are just a weight on the space bar

Molio I would think that it was pretty obvious that I have some pretty solid knowledge tbh and very hard to point out where it's weak. Does everyone else on this thread agree with this statement?