Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

The Politics of Grammar Schools

705 replies

GiftedPhoenix · 30/11/2014 10:08

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.

OP posts:
Notsuretoday · 04/12/2014 22:58

I did. Fail to see where anyone said that some children are not deserving of a good education.

teacherwith2kids · 04/12/2014 23:01

The comp my DCs go to (am going to remove myself from MN, as i have obviously become too identifiable) doesn't set AT ALL in Ys 7, except for Maths.

DD's class has everyone in from those who got L3 and below across the board to L6s across the board.

Then they set increasingly from Y8 opnwards, but flexibly. DS's English set has changed a LOT, as has his initial Maths set. He reckons about 50% opf the children originally in top set have been replaced, which is as it should be as 'influence of primary' declines and progress at secondary becomes the key driver of setting.

Mehitabel6 · 04/12/2014 23:17

All this fuss about grammar schools when there are so few left and a tiny proportion of children go to them! They won't come back as it will be a real vote loser. At least 75% would be left with a secondary modern and therefore 75% will vote against them!
Any party who wants them back has lost my vote and it is one thing that would bring me out actively campaigning - NO to divisive education.

Mehitabel6 · 04/12/2014 23:21

Of course they change, as you say,teacherwith2kids. There are huge changes over a year. The tragedy of the grammar school system is they can't change. The secondary modern pupils have very little chance until 6 th form and the grammar school ones NEVER change to the secondary modern- regardless of how they are doing.

Blu · 04/12/2014 23:36

LePetit, how long ago were you at school?

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 07:48

Notsure-with respect, I don't think you can have read the thread...........

Marni23 · 05/12/2014 08:02

I think the only way to ensure a truly comprehensive intake at every school (in areas where there is a choice) is to introduce admission by lottery.

I do wonder how many people would still be in favour of the comprehensive system if they couldn't buy their way into catchment or choose to drive them past their nearest failing school to get to the 'better' school further away.

Notsuretoday · 05/12/2014 08:04

Hakluyt, would you mind telling me please which post(s) said that some children don't deserve a great education?

Notsuretoday · 05/12/2014 08:05

Exactly Marni

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 08:16

"Hakluyt, would you mind telling me please which post(s) said that some children don't deserve a great education?"

There are many posts which say they want a grammar school education for their child, because the poster considers that that is the best possible education available in the state system, and that is what their child deserves. In wholly selective areas, this means that they consider 75% of children not deserving of the best possible education.

Notsuretoday · 05/12/2014 08:26

Okay, I see what you mean now, though I didn't read it like that. If you see my post a bit further down I describe the type of learning at my dd's superselective - many parents don't want that kind of education for their child. Eviltwins who lives in the same county as me and a very good teacher says she won't send her children to a grammar school, so she obviously rates the quality of education at the non-grammars more highly. So isn't it about the style of teaching rather than the quality?

I have read many of these threads and still wait for an answer to the question how comprehensive supporters will overcome selection via house prices.

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 08:26

"I do wonder how many people would still be in favour of the comprehensive system if they couldn't buy their way into catchment or choose to drive them past their nearest failing school to get to the 'better' school further away."

[http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2235415-Unofficial-poll-Is-your-child-at-a-comprehensive-school-Are-you-happy-with-it contributes to this thread seem to be]]

RabbitOfNegativeEuphoria · 05/12/2014 08:27

I can't speak for anyone else. And I agree with you that some of the posts in this thread indicate different views to my own. But my key thing is - I want an appropriate education for my kids. For two of them, that's their grammar school. No question. For one of them, the grammar would have been inappropriate for him and he is much much better off where he is. I don't think either school is 'better' per se, I think they offer some different things (and some things that are the same).

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 08:28

"I have read many of these threads and still wait for an answer to the question how comprehensive supporters will overcome selection via house prices."

Personally I would introduce a lottery system.

Marni23 · 05/12/2014 08:32

Hak your link doesn't work for me so I can't read it.

Do the contributors specify whether they bought into catchment/are able to drive or pay for their DC to travel to the school of their choice?

I am well aware that many parents are very happy with the comps their DC attend. That wasn't really my point...

Marni23 · 05/12/2014 08:34

'Personally I would introduce a lottery system'

Oh right, we're violently agreeing then!

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 08:36

link, sorry

opalfire · 05/12/2014 08:40

Hakylut. Maybe a better way to phrase it would be to say 'most appropriate' school for their child. As previously stated plenty of mums here have chosen the 'best' school for each of their children. Some have chosen the secondary moderns or comprehensive in the next county for one child and the grammar for another. One child took the entrance exams to keep his options open but opted for the secondary mod because of its ethos. The grammar isn't 'best' for everyone, however intelligent. It is a highly pressured environment. It wouldn't have suited me! But it is the most appropriate place for some. Similarly for others the 'best' school is one or other of the moderns.

Hakluyt · 05/12/2014 08:41

[waits for the list of mumsnetters who actively chose a secondary modern school for their child]

Notsuretoday · 05/12/2014 08:43

EvilTwins
Teacherwith2kids

Notsuretoday · 05/12/2014 08:49

Have chosen or will choose a non-grammar school in spite of their children being able to pass the test

Marni23 · 05/12/2014 08:54

Not sure how many of them are DC Mumsnetters but according to some figures I've just looked at around 40% of children in the county don't sit the Kent test. So presumably some of their parents are actively choosing a secondary modern?

mumsneedwine · 05/12/2014 09:21

My comprehensive educated child has just started her first job - tutoring at a local prep school. She's in year 10 (& v good with kids and explaining things to them). This does make me chuckle.

RabbitOfNegativeEuphoria · 05/12/2014 09:32

I can see the attractions of a lottery system but it would only work with free school transport and mandatory uniform costs. And also, a mandatory curriculum so that musical or sporty or other specialism kids wouldn't be disadvantaged by their allocation. Which would be resource intensive (because you couldn't make non sporty kids sporty, or non musical kids musical). I don't have a problem with resource intensive education but the government might. You'd also have to have more rigorous streaming than now so that the really fast kids (the sort that thrive in a SS atmosphere for example) werent held back, and so that kids with issues that mean huge schools are a problem were not disadvantaged. And so on. And you'd have to ban private schools, if non orivate kids are being forced to go to a school where there's no choice. Basically it would cost a fortune. But it could work if done properly and it would be fairer.

RabbitOfNegativeEuphoria · 05/12/2014 09:35

Hak I actively chose a comp for DS. It's not a sec mod, because we don't have sec mods. But it's not a true comp either because (a) no sixth form (there are comps we could have chosen, further away but less far than the grammar, that'd have 6th forms), and (b) where I live the effect of private schools is more distorting than the effect of the GS.