Nikki out, Justine in

[bojorojo]

Will the new Government be more supportive of new grammar schools and change the law to allow new stand-alone ones? Theresa May wants one in her constituency and all the anti grammar school brigade have gone: Gove, Morgan, Cameron and Osborne. The BBC is reporting this could be on the agenda.

[Peregrina]

I don't think the lack of support for vocational training is just a fault of the Blair government, although he certainly didn't help. I would say that it goes right back to the post war years with the failure to implement, in large part, the technical part of a supposedly tripartite system. We have just not sufficiently valued technical/vocational education.

[Lurkedforever1]

hpfa sorry, I thought you were saying 15 of the 60, i.e one quarter were from grammar. Rather than 15% of the state school intake.

mini stop making excuses. Some comprehensives manage to cater very well to the full ability range with the type of cohort you are prejudging as less worthy. Do you honestly believe that in some large comprehensives there aren't any dc who are capable of an academic education?

I will call crap schools crap. Some schools do their best for every child with deprived/ lower income forming the majority of the cohort. So leadership who think like you, that they can just trot out the line about deprivation as an excuse, are indeed crap and unnacceptable.

I don't think it takes 13k to provide suitable education. But I do think the budget should be shared out equally.

talkin the UK has exploited the poverty of immigrants for years to decrease the conditions/pay for low and unskilled work. What is needed is an actual living wage, with reasonable terms and holidays in return for doing them. And then English, Europeans, Martians or whoever else can do them. Not just taking advantage of desperate immigrants.

Vocational routes do in theory work quite well locally. The Infrastructure is there with colleges, and the decent schools are very good at implementing them. The problem is that a few of the crap schools aren't using them as intended. More 'shove dc on anything they might pass, better the equivalent of 6 passes in anything, than scraping a pass in maths and literacy and a good level in a vocational skill they will actually use'.

Vocational routes are worthwhile, but only when they are used for the individuals benefit, whether that's a future career or just to keep them engaged with education. But they become devalued when they are used to shove dc on at random because the school cba teaching. (For school read leadership, not that the teachers cba). And of course when a school starts shoving every academically struggling dc on a vocational course picked out for reasons that have sod all to do with the childs benefit, that vocation becomes less desirable as a route.

Interestingly, there was one btech that quite rightly was seen as an admirable qualification and future career prospect locally. Until one particular school decided to offer it, and shoehorn as many dc as possible onto it. The result is that it now has the undeserved reputation of being inferior to other vocational courses and future careers.

My other gripe with them is that the crap schools use the availability of vocational routes to close the academic route.

[TaIkinPeace]

Lurked
You are so innocent
What is needed is an actual living wage
My lovely Kosovan car wash man ( he came here as a teenage refugee) cannot get Brits to work for him for even £10 per hour cash in hand.
So he hires Bulgarians and Hungarians who are willing to work.

Picking veg, strapped to a plank on the back of a truck in January is shitty work.
The UK has imported people to do it for a century before that they used gypsies
if you can get benefits to sit on your arse watching Jeremy Kyle, why on earth would you do it ?
so the Brits don't.

The middle skills jobs - chippies, dryliners, sparkies and the like - they were devalued by Bliar and Broon and then slammed by Gove
you do not need an EBACC to do drylining
so Brits stopped doing that work
FFS at my old company we had a policy of hiring prison leavers because they had to sign with the parole officer at the end of the day so we knew they would not bunk
Ebacc destroyed their self worth

Justine Greening needs to focus on Makers not thinkers

[Badbadbunny]

We also need to stop the trades being the dumping ground of the illiterate and innumerate. Schools shouldn't pigeon-hole the high achievers for uni and the low achievers for manual skills. Someone forecast for straight A's should have a real choice of becoming a plumber or electrician rather than uni/degree being the default.

[Lurkedforever1]

No talkin you are. Forgetting mere practicalities like organising childcare, getting a rental agreement, what happens when you or your dc are ill, the stress of never knowing when or if you'll work, zero hours aren't enough to support you. And I also think unskilled workers should be allowed paid holidays like anyone else.

You'd still need housing benefit and tax credits on top, and even if you are shit hot at making sure they don't overpay you, the fact is that the system doesn't work fast enough. So even if childcare etc aren't an issue, the week you get 4 hours work, or when your job is closed for xmas etc you'll still only get top ups equivalent to the 40hrs they based their award on.

And your cash in hand example is irrelevant. I won't pretend every unemployed person I know would be horrified by not paying ni or tax. But they do know you can't live on that alone, and you can't get tc or hb on top if you aren't legally employed. You'd also be screwed on the week where he didn't need you, because dwp would want to know how exactly you'd been supporting yourself till then. And you're living in cuckoo land if you think people prefer the ritual humiliation of signing on to washing cars. Are you bringing up your dc (real or theoretical) to work cash in hand with no predictable income? Because I'm sure as hell not raising mine that way.

The fact is it's simple supply and demand. By guaranteeing an endless supply of cheap labour, the conditions have been lowered. As has happened for various reasons throughout history to the detriment of the working classes. And in this day and age there is no excuse for the fact the UK has boosted its economy by lowering work and life standards for the working classes. We should have been welcoming poor Europeans to also benefit from a living wage and reasonable life standards for hard work. Not viewing the poverty in their home countries and using it to the advantage of the rich and the detriment of the UK born working classes.

I also think the cheap labour supply and under cutting of the working classes is exactly why we are now out of the EU. Which could have been avoided if they hadn't been shouted down as racist or work shy everytime the problem was raised.

[sendsummer]

You are right Badbadbunny. The technical specialisation from 14 for bright enough DCs could lead onto to skilled trades as well as eg engineering or computer options requiring higher education. As I said I think importantly the allocation of specialisation whether grammar-type academic or technical or other vocational training would depend on the choice of the student and parents as well as attitude and potential assessed by school. This would be similar to the German system but specialisation would occur at 14 rather than 10.

[MangoMoon]

14 is definitely a better age for branching out into different paths.

How does a primary/middle/senior school type system work?
(Genuine question, I've never experienced that sort of schooling).

[MangoMoon]

Would a system like the following work?

Primary yrs 1 - 6
Middle yrs 7 - 9
Senior yrs 10 - 13


At senior yr, those that want to pursue a particular trade go to tech college to study trade, but with compulsory core subjects alongside (Maths, English, Science & Philisophy/Ethics).

Those that want to do mainly academic subjects stay on at regular school, but can be in partnership with tech college or similar (for eg, if they were doing triple science, history & MFL but wanted to do an engineering btec too).

Those that want to follow traditional EBACC route stay solely at regular school.

[peachpudding]

The comprehensive system does fail very clever children, it just can't provide what is needed to teach to the very high levels a minority of children need. There is no need to return to the old Grammar/Sec Mod system but is should be possible to find a way to provide for this need.

Religion, Music, Sport, Expensive house in catchment, Feeder Schools, Arts, Technology and Languages, are all used to select, so why not by exceptional aptitude.

Perhaps in every city/area one new free school should be allowed to select a percentage of intake by aptitude. Fingers crossed the new Ed Sec will relax the rules for this and give some more equality to the system.

[minifingerz]

"Do you honestly believe that in some large comprehensives there aren't any dc who are capable of an academic education? "

Have you READ my posts?

Did you miss the one in which I pointed out how even in the worst performing schools there are children who achieve very highly academically?

I think there is vastly less difference between the quality of teaching and management than there is difference between children in terms of receptiveness to education, and willingness to embrace a work ethic. Teachers are roughly delivering the same curriculum across a very wide range of schools, and most of those teachers have trained and graduated from similar teacher training institutes. Yes, you will get some who are truly gifted, and some who are very weak, but the majority will be competent, regardless of where they are teaching. The differences in outcome are mostly down to the differences in the children.

[minifingerz]

"The comprehensive system does fail very clever children, it just can't provide what is needed to teach to the very high levels a minority of children need"

If that was true we wouldn't have thousands of clever children leaving comprehensives with straight 'a's in their A-levels, and then going on to top universities.

[Badbadbunny]

Religion, Music, Sport, Expensive house in catchment, Feeder Schools, Arts, Technology and Languages, are all used to select, so why not by exceptional aptitude.

My point exactly. Society is happy to congratulate and make special provision for high achievers in sports, arts, etc., but being a high academic achiever is regarded as a dirty little secret to be hidden and ignored.

[Badbadbunny]

I'd also like to know how many of the "comp" supporters have sent their kids to the nearest comp as opposed to those who have lied about being religious or moved into the catchment area of better schools.

One of my neighbours was whining about grammars but is a complete hypocrite because she went to church a few times so she could get the vicar to sign her attendance form to get a place at a local faith school as opposed to the closest comp which is in special measures or having to pay for bus fares to the only outstanding comp which is across the county border.

[sendsummer]

MangoMoon that seems a reasonable template except perhaps primary only up to year 5. It would depend on local building infrastructure whether the different sections were on separate sites.
I also think that there should also be a trial period for the choice of academic versus high level technical / trade versus trade which would be the last term of year 9. That trial period would enable both the pupils and their teachers to evaluate whether the choice is right for them.

[MangoMoon]

Badbadbunny, forces families are a large example of people who send their kids to the local school.

I had no (real) choice other than to send my kids to their local primary & then local comp in all our addresses.
Luckily we have always had a decent school (4 overall, my kids are 11 & 14 now).

None of those schools were in urban areas though, so not a true comparison in the bigger sense.

[MangoMoon]

YY to your post send.
It's definitely an area that needs a completely radical rethink rather than just messing ineffectually with the mish mash that's already there.

[minifingerz]

"Religion, Music, Sport, Expensive house in catchment, Feeder Schools, Arts, Technology and Languages, are all used to select, so why not by exceptional aptitude."

Many comprehensives also select a percentage by academic ability. It's a good way of making sure the intake is representative.

Is this what you meant?

[minifingerz]

I think comprehensives are allowed to select up to 15% of their intake.

[TaIkinPeace]

mangomoon
Up thread I pointed out that DH sees all sorts of schools all over the country.
The middle school system does not deliver results.

mini
No comp in this county can select in any way other than distance. Its the same in most of the country.

badbunny
I've never made any secret of the fact that my kids did not go to the nearest comp. Its a sponsored academy that should have closed years ago and has 400 empty spaces.
My kids - and 500 like them, got the bus to the next catchment along.
For 6th I cough up the bus fare and cope with the 11 hour day.

and high achievement is actively celebrated in the comps round here
DD was nowhere near the top of the year group with her 3 x * and 10 x A

I'll tell you how DS did in a couple of weeks.

[peachpudding]

If that was true we wouldn't have thousands of clever children leaving comprehensives with straight 'a's in their A-levels

Your deliberatly missing the point, they are being failed because getting straight A's is easy for them. They are being failed because they sit in class bored with work 2/3 years below them. They are being failed because they dont have access to material or classes that actually challenges them.

Its the glass ceiling that says you got an A* and that is as far as you can go, who cares you are capable of so much more. What a contribution these children to make to our country if they were allowed to reach their potential, instead of being held back at school.

[sendsummer]

Talkin I don't disbelieve you about the current middle school system (which is different to what was being proposed above) because I don't have the facts but I am curious as to whether your categorical conclusion is based on information your DH has from assessing these schools through official data collection and inspections or just by hearsay from his visits for another purpose?

[Peregrina]

I'd also like to know how many of the "comp" supporters have sent their kids to the nearest comp as opposed to those who have lied about being religious or moved into the catchment area of better schools.

I did, and no they weren't particularly highly regarded schools, but both have gone onto good universities and got good jobs.

[Lurkedforever1]

mini how do you justify comprehensives with the average large intake that only offer the minimum of academic gcses? How on earth do dc get top results for gcses their school doesn't even offer? How many good teachers remain at schools with shit leadership? I can compare the two realistic choices for dc near me, and while one is shit at providing academically for dc above average, it can't be faulted for its pastoral care or what it does for the average and below dc. The other is just inexcusably shit in every possible way. Cohorts are no different in either. It's just some leadership are crap.

peach has answered the rest for me. I went to a shit school, and a mediocre sixth form. And I left with top grades across the board. Did I take my pick of universities like I could have? No, I'd spent most of my life bored senseless, always being promised the next stage would be better and then being let down when it was the same tedium. So I decided there was no way I was signing up for anymore formal education. When I did go to university, I was just bloody lucky to be able enough to cope with being a lone parent to a baby, and experiencing for the first time in education the concept of effort, regular attendance, and doing a degree all at the same time.

What about all my top set peers, who with hindsight all got a grade or even two lower than they should have? How was their potential reached?

[cricketballs]

I have read this thread with interets, and felt no need to contribute until I read peaches post "They are being failed because they sit in class bored with work 2/3 years below them"...I would challenge you to ask the many oxbridge students I have taught in shock, horror a non bacc subject at GCSE/BTEC if they were bored and felt the work they were given was 2/3 years below them.

That statement on its own shows the lack of understanding about what actually happens in schools/subjects/qualifications as many insist that what they read online is actual fact

[Lurkedforever1]

cricket you're mistaken if you think every teacher does that. They don't. Nobody has said it never happens the way you think. Just that all too often it does. Not because we read it somewhere, because lots of us have personal experience ourselves and of it still happening now to other children.