The Politics of Grammar Schools

[GiftedPhoenix]

I thought some mumsnet readers would be interested in my latest post, which is about grammar schools, especially their record in admitting high-attaining children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

giftedphoenix.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/the-politics-of-selection-grammar-schools-and-disadvantage/

The selection issue has been bubbling away in the media and this looks set to continue next week, as the Conservatives come under increased pressure from within their own party to include a commitment to new grammar schools in the Tory Election manifesto.

I wanted to explore what progress our remaining 163 grammar schools are making towards 'fair access', so providing a benchmark against which to judge political claims that they might be engines of social mobility. I'm not concerned with research on their historical record in this respect, but with evidence of recent reform.

What, being ruthlessly selective and having loads of money? Yep- that does wonders for a school! Unfortunately.........

No. I meant try and tap into how the private schools get the grades, and see if any can be made transferable into the state sector. Benchmarking, is what it would be.

And see if any of the best practices

Hak

I'm going to copy some practises from our closest independent - just off to build a theatre and employ a wardrobe mistress.

How they get the grades? Um, they don't take in children who will NOT get the grades.

Some privates, that are good, are academically non selective.

Sorry but it is far too easy to dismiss some of the things that independents do well as being down to selection and money.

DDs school is not selective, yet the grades are fab. The outcomes for the girls excellent.

There are things that could be implemented that would make a difference. But it would require a change if ideology in some cases...

Like what, Word?

" school is not selective, yet the grades are fab. The outcomes for the girls excellent."

If your dd's school only takes children from wealthy families then it is selective. The vast majority of people who can afford private schooling are graduate professionals. This fact alone will bear heavily on the attainment of private school pupils.

The school takes only girls. Therefore it is selective.

Any school that charges fees is selective by definition, before applying any other criteria.

I've been thinking abourt this:
"Two children in the same city, one living in the teeny catchment area of a highly achieving comp, the other on the other side of town in the catchment of a sink school."

My own family is a fair approximation of this - 3 children, of the same parents, schooled very very differently (No 1: just ex secondary modern turned suink comp, followed by barey-adequate rural state 6th form, No 2: full scholarship to highly selective private, No 3: sink comp followed by private 6th form on full scholarship.

You know what? Our A-level results are almost indistinguishable, and the O-level ones only differ in number, not in grades. All of us went to Oxbridge, and we have very similar degrees.

The absolutely determining factor? Our parents (Oxbridge graduates, though poor as the proverbial mice) and their expectationd for us.

Given the very signifucant, sometimes over-riding importance of parents, actually it would probably achieve the best possible results for all if all children of high achieving parents went to the sink comp, and all those who do not have supportive parents went to the high achieving comp or the selective school. The average results would almost certainly go up - the results of those with high acheiving parents might go down a (very) tiny bit, while the results of those with less parental support would almost certian be the ones most responsive to a truly exccellent school.....

I'm still waiting for comments on the two children living next door to each other, one of whom has a choice of 3 schools while the other only has a choice of 1.

Apologies, I was teaching today, and hence did not reply to the point that my views / choice of school are not relevant to the debate because my catchment school happens to be excellent.

You can't really have it both ways - you cannot both criticise Talkin for not sending her children to her catchment school, and me for sending my children to the catchment comp. I can assure you, but of course you don't have to believe me, that we would have made the same choice had we lived in another catchment.

On "I meant try and tap into how the private schools get the grades, and see if any can be made transferable into the state sector. " I have visited, and talked to teachers at, our local private primaries (I know the teachers mainly through work, and have visited the schools mainly as a parent). With both 'hats' on, the teaching that I saw was a) many years behind what would be seen as the modern 'norm' in state primaries, b) almost entirely undifferentiated and c) for reasons of style, content, and lack of differentiation, only possible with like-abiluity, selected, very passive classes. (I was, btw, similarly shocked when visiting classes in a local grammar school as part of a teacher training course). In bioth cases, the teaching was only possible because of the nature of the classes, and was successful (in some cases despite the quality of the teaching) because of the nature of the class. There was little to transfer back into scools with more mixed classes.

I've found this discussion really fascinating - it's given me some real food for thought.

I've published another post today about how well disadvantaged learners perform at different grammar schools. I'm not going to give you the link since mumsnet mods have told me off for doing so the first time round. Apparently this is deemed to be 'spamming'.

So if you want to find out which schools are doing really well and which (there are some) that are doing rather badly, you'll have to find the post yourselves.

I sincerely hope that saying this isn't tantamount to 'spamming' but, if it is, please accept my profoundest apologies.

Most of the better comps are selective.Only the kids whose parents can afford the higher mortgages often get places hence Sutton's concern.

Hi teacher.
I think that one major advantage the prep schools have that help them get better grades is their class size. I was working in a year 2 class when about 10 out of 30 children were off with a bug for a couple of days. The difference was astonishing! A calmer classroom with much more focus; each child could have more attention. And it wasn't just the more disruptive children that were off.

LePetit,

That argument is difficult when a comp - good or bad - has a very 'settled' catchment area. When a family has lived in the same area for generations - or even for many years before children were even on the agenda, let alone due to transfer to secondary - it is hard to argue that they are 'selecting' that school or that the school is 'selecting' them IYSWIM?

Opl, my old class in a very deprived school had 16 children. My current one in a very MC school has 32. The latter is a) easier to teach and b0 gets better results - purely because of the different nature of the intake.

Dp and I went to crap comps and our results were waaaay below what they could have been.Our children won't be experiencing the same.

This inference that a crap school doesn't have an impact on results and the non poor will get good results regardless is uttter baloney.Actual results don't back that up hence the requires improvement Ofsted grades in leafy areas.

And sorry having sacrificed all sorts of things and worked my but off to ensure my kids reach their full potential forgive me if I don't agree with the suggestion that the parents who can't be arsed should just get to sit back and have the best schools handed to them in order to pick up the pieces they have scattered in their wake.

I would also like to point out that often these "truly excellent" schools are hugely advantaged by the parenting of their intake.Such advantages would disappear if you banned the proactive parents from such schools.

LePetit,

I wasn't suggesting it ass a practical proposal - just saying that it would be theoretically interesting, and would probably get better average results than the curtrent staus quo.

You do realise, of course, that the obvious inference from the statement that 'truly excellent' schools are advantaged by parenting is that 'crap' schools are disadvantaged by the same? In other words, that the quality of the SCHOOL may be the same in both cases, or even reversed (the 'crap' school may acually be the better educational establishment oncve the 'parenting' factor is stripped away).

Lepetit
I do not live in the catchment of the good comp.
But I was free to put it on my form for my kids
and their applications were judged purely on siblings / distance
without reference to ANY test / exams / interview

therefore the fact that house prices jump at the catchment boundary had no effect on me
OR
on the 500 other people round here whose kids also attend the good comp

BTW
You've still not answered whether the Grammar takes people with L3 KS2 SATs if they are on the form

But the ones beyond that with a crap school or who can't afford the transport,we'll just forget about them.

Oh and the hoards of kids excluded from the better schools up and down the country because their parents can't afford the catchment.

You could fill in the form for the school you wanted so that is fine and dandy.

Sorry I smell hypocrisy.

Do top set English/Maths sets at Comprehensives take kids with Level 3s ?.

Talkin. Would you like a level 3 child educated with your DC in a mixed Maths set ?

LePetit
The bus fare is a flat fare and the Council flats are nearer to the school than my house so they all get priority.

Why do you find it so scary to comprehend that hundreds of kids from the nasty cheap flats also avoid the local school - because we fundamentally disagree with its ethos
and are all lucky enough to have non judgmental schools up, down and along the road

Smokepole
Why on earth would one put an L3 kids into an L5 set?
You put them in the L3 set and see if they are a late developer, or had problems the primary missed, or just need support
but the point is that if they do then flower, they can move up the sets - not possible if the "sets" are in different schools