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.

agoodinnings
I have a child who gets the Greek Myths out of the library to read on the plane to holiday (we have so many books she did not realise we have a copy)

I have a child who will quite happily watch videos of other people playing Minecraft for 5 hours

I live in a comp county, I cannot afford private.
What would you do in my shoes (I cannot move house as I bought 20 years ago)?

Ha - you've just described my younger two talkin' - chalk and cheese

Don't really know county ratings Talkin except that mine is one of the lowest :(. Assume Hampshire being 'south' and virtually 'home counties' is likely to be average at worst, I think I've read that schools are supposed to be good there....

Shame about the demise of Latin - it is pretty rare for schools to offer it I think. Perhaps that was something that attracted brighter dc to the school?

frogsinapond
I feel the need to clear my head and add a point to the discussion.

Bliar was a great believer in "parental choice" and "faith schools"
he and Broon then brought in the "sponsored academy" system to take over failing schools to magically make things better

when we moved here (pre kids) TBH we did not take on board the minefield, but as DH got more involved with education
I'm his PA, shareholder, director and bookings manager BTW
we saw that if YobCentral1 and YobCentral2 could be separated, then the 2nd was a good bet.

sadly both were handed to a bunch of evangelicals with no experience of running rough schools (we all locally supported the Uni bid based on pedagogy but it had a smaller schmooze budget )
so the school went, in 3 years from 1700 to 400 pupils : intake of under 70

this week I saw two "big fat gypsy" mums openly saying "its DCS school or we move as local school is dire
when the chavs and the gypsies avoid a school, Ofsted should intervene.

PS Frogs, as we cross posted
there is little "attracted to" round here : catchments are 12 miles across

My 2 nearest schools have been taken over too Talkin, but one is still consistently bottom of the county table (and under new headship yet again this year - it's a very challenging school) and the other managed a slight improvement for a couple of years, but then regressed again. I don't think it's been out of the bottom third, certainly not the bottom half. I think one child there got all A*/A GCSE this year. Short of turning catholic there are no other options before sixth form without medical grounds etc. This has probably coloured my view of comprehensive schools considerably. I know London has had a lot of money/initiatives thrown at schools and they have had success there in turning poorly performing schools around, but out in the sticks it seems much harder to do.

"bottom of the table"
yeah, that will always exist
and it will always be a comp
and in the old incarnation of my local comp, those kids were rare but when spotted were supported for obvious reasons

the current owners of the comp are an evangelical Christian group : no selection at intake but its rammed down the throat once you are in the door - free bibles for all bogroll from what we heard

sorry but I will not play their games
if the school turned back into a non religious, we might go back, but Bliar and Broon have an eff of a lot to answer for

PS Summerends
I'm not quite sure why you are so bristly / insecure about kids like mine getting stonking grades at state school.

Happgardening is refreshingly honest.
and proves the point that if you sent your son to Eton for the results, you have rather missed the point.
Any oik can get good grades,
but only the Westminster School PTA can offer City internships in its auction of promises

Oxbridge will wake up to the irony of employing wordfactory but it may take a while

mum I was trying to say that IME of the state sector the needs of the super bright aren't properly being served.
I don't think the needs of the super bright should be given priority over children of other ability ranges but the are generally ignored on the basis that they're going to do well so that's fine.
talkin our extras don't come to another 5k year (thankfully).
I know that I've worked in a politically correct profession for years but am I the only one to be very offended and rather annoyed by other parents being called "chavs" and "big fat gypsy"s? talkin frankly I'm surprised at you for using these highly insulting terms. We have already correctly criticised the OP for using derogatory terms about children she teaches.

Selection can work really badly at times. Someone upthread mentioned a snotty receptionist giving them the brush-off, we had a similar experience. When my DCs started school our local primary school was not what we wanted for DS so sent him, and later DD too, to a local independent school. When we moved we checked we were in the catchment area for the local comp which was highly rated. I rang that school 3 times trying to get a prospectus and open day info, each time the receptionist was arsey because DCs weren't in local primary schools. We felt the attitude was so negative it would not be a good move so ended up in the private sector for secondary too (not easy for us at times)
That school missed out on 2 bright and able young people who would have been an asset because of selecting against private school pupils

Happygardening you of all people (as you know who I am)
I accept the point about chavs/gyppos
but please, be willing to accept that the "worthy" North London interpretation is way, way off the mark.
the 'undesirables' hate my local school almost more than I do .....

happygardening mum I was trying to say that IME of the state sector the needs of the super bright aren't properly being served. you have previously said that the state schools you approached refused to educate your DC. Were these schools super selective state schools?

This is a genuine question as, due to inexperience and ignorance on my part, I am not able to able to fully understand the issues you face.

I will also add that what you consider as people generally ignoring the issue is actually people not fully understanding the issue.

Can I ask you what % of children in the UK are at the same, or compatible, academic level to your DC. I think you have stated what it is but I can't remember what it was.

Talkin it is a pity that you continue to misunderstand the point of my quibble and your comment following your previous reaction could be interpreted as transference. I am delighted when any child does well and BTW my DS does not go to Eton, not quite sure why you think he does. He has got quite a few friends who went there.

talkin I hope I haven't offended you I just feel strongly about these kind of unpleasant labels regardless of who makes them.
mum it was non selective schools who advised me to go elsewhere?new turned down a place at our "nearest" state super selective.

happygardening IME of the state sector the needs of the super bright aren't properly being served. Is it not possible that they are but only at the super selectives? Granted there are very few super selectives. However, surely there are relatively few super bright children.

I wonder how many of these children needed a primary/secondary education exclusively for the super bright (I don't know the answer BTW):

www.gradschoolhub.com/10-youngest-people-ever-to-achieve-a-doctorate-degree/

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1308446/Maths-prodigy-Arran-Fernandez-14-youngest-Cambridge-student-1773.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Lawrence

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_child_prodigies

www.waikato.ac.nz/news-events/media/2011/10waikatos-youngest-graduate-off-to-oxford.shtml

www.businessinsider.com/child-prodigies-2011-5?op=1

www.teachthought.com/interest/the-10-youngest-college-students-of-all-time/

Looking at these examples (albeit a relatively small sample) perhaps the solution is early entry to University?

Thought this might also be of interest:

www.prlog.org/10755715-how-london-girl-became-the-youngest-mathematics-and-computer-science-graduate-from-oxford.html

Maths prodigy Anne-Marie Imafidon, who holds the world record of the youngest girl ever to pass A-level computing at the age of eleven.

All children of the Imafidon family attended inner city schools, yet have set various world records including passing High school, and college level exams (GCSEs) at six, or seven and other advanced exams while at elementary (primary) school after participating in the Excellence in Education programme.

excellenceineducation.org.uk/home/what-we-offer

Word asked some way up thread why some posters deny that there's any issue with how well high ability children are served by our largely comprehensive system. I've been thinking about whether I fall into this category, and if so why.

I think my view is that I don't deny that this may be a problem at a macro level, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence for it. You cite a Sutton Trust report, Word - if I've tracked down the right one, its conclusion is that going to grammar school may convey an advantage of between zero and three quarters of a grade at GCSE, but it's hedged around with so many caveats that it's hard to take as the definitive answer.

I think I also instinctively feel uncomfortable with people stating this possible advantage as if it were indisputable fact, because I worry it will exacerbate the problem. The more parents of high attaining children feel that comprehensive schools aren't the best place for their children, the more they will seek out alternatives. And the more they do that, the fewer children there will be in comps to provide the sort of critical mass of children at the same ability level that we know benefits kids. I also resist the automatic answer that more selection is the solution, because of the extent to which any sort of selection ends up skewed in favour of already advantaged people.

So while I'm very open to evidence that shows that some comprehensives are failing their brightest pupils, I'd prefer to address that by exploring what the comps that don't fit this pattern do differently, rather than assuming that more selection is the answer.

happygardening "nearest" state super selective. Just a point to make on this, "nearest" is not the same as "non exist". I don't get the impression that your DC is at your "nearest" private school either yet you don't make the claim that the private sector is unable to meet the needs of the super brights.

mum I'm sorry of if I failed to make this clear on this thread I believe there are plenty is independent schools out there that are also unable to meet the needs of the super bright in fact I believe the vast majority can't as just as in the state sector true super selectives are actually not that common in the independent sector.
Our "nearest" state super selective at the time we applied for a place was over 40 miles away. For my DS to get there I would have to have driven him 10 miles in the opposite direction to pick up the bus at 7 45 am and then he would have had an about an hours coach journey to school. Fairly obviously in the evening I would have to have picked him up from the place the coach dropped him off at 4 30 ish. We have no public transport here so I would not have been able to work; my job requires me frequently to stay beyond 4 pm and on some occasions I start work before 7 45, the coach stop was 20 mins away from work. So any money saved in fees would have no effect because I'd have to have given up my job.
My DS's current independent super selective was at the time we applied just off 80 miles away and the only other one we applied to was over 135 miles away, we were only applying to those super selectives in the independent sector offering boarding which I believe offers the sort of all round broad education which the super bright really benefit from. It is so easy for them to get on an exams only treadmill, the "your so bright you can do more (I)GCSE's/A levels" rather than finding alternative non examined ways of stretching them, boarding can do this because they simply have the time but that's another separate thread and has already been done to death on here. Our nearest day super selective was at the time 50 miles away and although very well known and well liked by many simply doesn't do it for me. We're not scratching around to make ends meets but we're not super wealthy either and we as a family don't have many of the luxuries lots of the children at DS2's school have because of paying school fees, so if I am going to pay there are certain things I want for my money and it's not just results which as I said my DS2 could probably achieve in our excellent state comps.
As I've also said up thread and before for those of us lucky enough to have choices, either because of our location and/or financial circumstances, are in the luxurious position of being able to choose the school that we feel is the right fit for our DC's and as importantly ourselves. This is sadly not true the vast majority.

My DD feels privileged to go to her Independent selective school where 'quality' is clear in everything they do. My DS wishes that his state primary school was more 'professional' (his word).

What is that?

happygardening I appreciate that my posts may seem like I am challenging you. I'm not. I am directing questions (and they are questions not statements of fact) to you as, from what I can tell, you are the contributor on this thread who is faced with the challenges of gaining access to appropriate educational provision for the super bright.

From what you have outlined above, the issue is not so much the fact that the provision is not there, it is more to do with gaining access to the provision. However, I don't see that this is an exclusive problem for the super bright. there are literally hundreds of posts made by people with children in state education who feel that they have no option but to move house to gain access to schools which are labeled as good or outstanding.

Whilst I appreciate that some feel there should be dedicated educational centers for the super bright, given the geographical spread of these children (as I feel it is unlikely that you are going to find the majority of the super bright children in one specific location of the UK) I'm not sure how, from a cost perspective, this could be made into a viable proposition. Admittedly boarding facilities could be a solution. However, would this not then mean that the same option should also be presented to parents who are currently moving house in order to gain access to good or outstanding schools?

Something that people may find interesting regarding the provision of education to the super bright:

www.theguardian.com/education/2008/apr/04/highereducation.uk

mum I don't mind your challenging my opinions I post in here because Inlike to be challenged and to challenge. I'm rushing off to a meeting I will read what you've written properly and reply later.

Talkin I'm really quite shocked at your language - gypsies etc. - it's just utterly dreadful. Also, you've boasted enough now about 'stonking' grades but the raw reality is that 3A*/ 9A though perhaps 'stonking' by comp standards, really isn't by independent super selective standards, as both Word and happy have said, citing their stats. Nor does it compare to state super selective results, indeed it falls a very long way short. To castigate Word about access work for Oxbridge is miserable too - you don't even know if her work is paid or voluntary and either way I personally see no irony at all. As my kids would say: take a good hard look at yourself. Someone with the luxury of being able to opt out of the local school and do the run to a nice leafy comp, with the fall back of private (albeit at the cost of foreign holidays etc) is not in any position to sneer at others for exercising a choice. Classic middle class champagne socialism; not the most laudable sight.

happygardening mum I was trying to say that IME of the state sector the needs of the super bright aren't properly being served

The needs of any child significantly different from the norm aren't being met - if we're talking about super bright rather than standardly bright. That's partly because GCSE's and A levels aren't going to stretch the super bright & the main point of school is to collect exams (that's how a school gets judged'.

If your child is so far from the norm that they can't benefit from collecting A levels & can't cope with bring a bit bored at school at times then you can do the same as parents with kids with significant SN have to do regularly - and go to tribunals, write to your MP's, get IEP's etc. I find many with children they see as exceptional aren't prepared to do this & inhabit some alternative version of reality where they think extra help is handed out to those with SN with no problem at all. My friend recently has to try & get her son into the only suitable special school for him locally - there were 60 kids going for three places.