URGENT! Government education proposals: you seriously won't BELIEVE number 14!

[noblegiraffe]

Click-bait title, sorry!

But today's really the last day to tell the government their plans for grammar and faith schools stink contribute to the government consultation 'Schools that work for everyone' (except poor kids, those with SEN, the less academic and atheists)

Consultation document:
consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/schools-that-work-for-everyone/supporting_documents/09.12.2016%20%20Publication%20%20Schools%20that%20work%20for%20everyone.pdf

Online Survey:
consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/schools-that-work-for-everyone/

It's a really long document with lots of confusing questions but they will have to record all responses as there will definitely be a FOI request put in to find out the results. Even if you just head straight for the grammar section and say that you are against the creation of more secondary moderns, please just fill out that bit and leave the rest blank. Ignore the questions and write what you want to. Oh, and if you can point out that Northern Ireland which is a selective system did worse than England in the PISA results, that would probably annoy them

Unless you are in favour of the proposals in which case the consultation ended yesterday

[TalkinPeace]

However, nobody has come up with an alternative way of improving education for bright but under privileged children.

Yeah they have
its called fully funding LEA comps in poor areas

its dead cheap
cuts out academy chains
and tutoring companies
and private sponsors

so gets no coverage or support

EVIDENCE BASED DECISION MAKING
I get paid for delivering such in the public sector
It can be done because I do it
I thus have zilch patience with thise who "believe" or CBA

[Peregrina]

I am sure it was designed with the Tories in mind, but whether it will actually speak to them is a different matter. I think they may be surprised and after all Maggie Thatcher was responsible for converting a lot of schools into Comprehensive, which she didn't do without a good reason.

What I could see happening, once the idea of selection being firmly back on the table, is the less successful independent schools, especially in the South East, applying to be grammar schools. This would go down a storm - who wouldn't want to save £12,000 or more, per annum?

[flyingwithwings]

Another analogy you would not expect Jeremy Corbyn to be lobbying the the Ferrari Owners club G.B for votes.

Therefore why be surprised when a party start lobbying certain sections of society and tell them what they want to hear.

Its called politics unfortunately the 'penny' has not dropped for Corbyn et.al yet..

[IrenetheQuaint]

YY Peregrina - though setting up more grammar schools would also help less successful independent schools survive, because well-off parents whose children failed the 11+ would be more likely to send them to an independent school, rather than a secondary modern.

[Peregrina]

I managed to squeeze some comments into that appalling questionnaire, and I suggested that rather than make assumptions about selection being 'good', why not look to those successful comprehensives to see what they are doing and attempt to replicate that?

Will they take any notice? I doubt it. The only thing is, none of this was in the Tory manifesto, so Parliament and the Lords in particular, can feel free to offer strong criticism.

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

Very able mathematicians that are below average in written English (allergic to sentences) do get in to super selectives. We have many students with 'spiky' profiles.
As I said earlier, I am aware that the plural of anecdote is not data. My school does well for our students. I would like to see more diversity in the students sitting our exam but that's our issue to resolve.
I do wonder though, if this highly emotive issue is being used as a cover for the situation in education more generally. It's a much easier story than delving in to the truth behind the numbers coming out of the NAO, and asking why all schools can't be funding along the London formula rather than cutting funding to certain schools. While the press focus on this issue education is being dismantled and falling apart. By all means fight grammar expansion (as I've said elsewhere I'm not a fan of the Kent version), but don't lose sight of the larger picture.

[sashh]

I support grammar schools - why shouldn't the best be given the opportunity to stretch themselves? Who do you think is going to become the doctors and lawyers and thinkers of the future?

Why shouldn't ALL children be stretched?

Oh and I would prefer doctors, lawyers and thinkers to understand that some people have chaotic lives, illnesses, SEN, speak English as a second or third language.

I worked for the NHS for many years, partly in Oxford, the junior Drs were all Oxford grads and many just did not live in the real world. A patient brought her 4 children with her during the school holidays andOxford grad Dr could not understand why she hadn't left them 'with the nanny' - she lived on a council estate, she wasn't likely to employ a nanny but this was 'does not compute' to said Dr.

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

I really should step back from this but we have students with SEN (mainly ASD and dyspraxia but occasionally others), chaotic lives,, English as an additional language (in fact, this can be higher than some other local schools). That said, it can be a bit of a bubble and some of the students are a little divorced from reality at times. However, they are normal children. The like of diversity comes at the economic level. But then the people who sit the exam reflect that.
My father went to grammar school (fourth of five children, son of miner in a three bedroom council house) and it genuinely changed his life (in a good way). I went to grammar school (without tuition).
You'll notice I don't make that rather repugnant argument don't we want 'doctors and lawyers' no reason whatsoever to suggest that people have to be 'creamed off' to achieve that.
Anyway, I'd just like to point out one last time that we're currently in this together. All schools are starved of funding while money is frittered away on a vanity project that no one voted for.

[Fourmantent]

DS has verbal IQ in top 1% (1 in 200). He is very articulate, thrives on intellectual challenge, loves learning, is a very divergent and creative thinker. He thrives when with like minded peers (the grammar school argument).

He would definitely fail his 11+

He has dyslexia. He is (low) average at maths - cannot tell left from right. He cannot spell.

He could only be catered for in a comprehensive. He was in top sets for most subjects (even English). He's was in a low maths set (just scraped a C).

Removing the top 20% (1 in 5) and leaving him behind (1 in 200) would have been very detrimental to him.

[HPFA]

Doctor Don't step away from this - I think you have good things to say.

Fourmantent I have a child who I don't think would have thrived in a grammar or a secondary modern - the confidence she's gained from doing well in her top subjects is now starting to help her in her weaker ones. When you see what difference a great comp can make it's hard not to want that for everyone.

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

Rubbish! We have students with dyslexia. There is little extended writing in the entrance exam. If a student qualifies for extra time in exams they are allowed that for our entrance exams.
Misconceptions like this are why we have difficulty showing diversity. People don't apply as they assume they won't get in. We have a very busy SEN department and a growing number of TAs.
I have invigilated and marked the entrance exam. There are special access arrangements available. It would be wrong morally and legally if there were not.

[noblegiraffe]

It must be pretty rubbish to be the lone kid who is crap at maths in a class full of very able students?

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

Noble - depends on the child and the definition of 'rubbish' at maths.
Our maths department (like all maths departments I hope) are brilliant at offering support/mentoring/extension as is relevant. In any school there will be someone who is bottom in the class. Maths is probably our most popular subject but the boy I considered to be the most able in year 11 (English) isn't in either of the top two sets.
The students who find grammar life difficult are those who were heavily tutored and 'just' got in. Those who weren't tutored with the same score do fine.
I've been thinking about this lots since having my son and every one saying 'when' he goes to my school. I won't be tutoring him. He will see some practice papers so knows format. I want him to be happy primarily so he will go where is best for him, not where people assume he will go.
Anyway, Noble, I know we disagree about grammars but what do we next about what we agree on. I have been writing to my MP but she doesn't seem to understand her party's policies. Do we wait for the results of the consultation?

[DeepanKrispanEven]

There's a very good comprehensive in our area which regularly gets results at around 85-90% with five GCSEs at A to C, and around 50% A or A - and that's in an area where a large proportion of kids go to very selective private schools or to a grammar school not far away. It's inevitable that, with a grammar school system, a substantial number of those kids getting those results wouldn't get in. What a ridiculous waste that would be.

[Fourmantent]

"I want him to be happy primarily so he will go where is best for him, not where people assume he will go."

Would you be happy with him failing by 2 marks and being the most able at a secondary modern? Personally, I wouldn't be happy with that.

[Fourmantent]

Some children might also feel (permanently) stigmatised for "failing" which is not something I would want for my child.

[SixthSenseless]

"However, nobody has come up with an alternative way of improving education for bright but under privileged children"

Reading the Prize-giving evening brochure at our comprehensive school, where I know many families from primary, I would beg to disagree.

London, London, London, get these excellent results in comps because of extra funding! Well, finally, it seems, the government have listened to that and are increasing schools funding in certain areas, those of rural deprivation , I think. Hooray! Replicating, to some extent, the London model. And where is this extra funding coming from? The budgets of London schools, of course! Schools in my local authority will have budget cuts of 2%!

How to destroy a working model!

And perhaps more pertinently, how to eradicate evidence that comprehensive education can deliver good education for the whole community.

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

They are not secondary moderns in our area. They are comprehensives. Our local schools do not lose 20%.
He may not even sit the exam quite frankly. I know the two schools that would be possible instead (one Catholic one comp) and I like both. My sister didn't sit the exam and doesn't consider herself a failure.
Please realise there are other issues in their reforms as well. Don't be distracted by this issue from the funding issues.
I already know a lot of you disagree with my school's existence. We won't change each other's minds.

[MumTryingHerBest]

DoctorDonnaNoble Thu 15-Dec-16 10:02:43 My sister didn't sit the exam and doesn't consider herself a failure.

I live in an 11 plus area bordering an 11 plus area. There are no comprehensives. The vast majority of the kids are affected by the 11 plus results as are the parents (not helped by the pressure on local school places which are increasingly going to DCs from outside the localised area).

[flyingwithwings]

I hate both the demonizing or the 'pity' that gets placed on secondary modern schools (whatever there are in the modern world ) N.B nobody leaves at 15 anymore for instance bright children can transfer to either sixth form colleges or the grammar schools if available.

There are many excellent schools that are might be designated as 'modern' but are far more successful than many comprehensive schools.

Its time to stop lumping schools in to categories and judging them from their category .

[SixthSenseless]

I don't view 'Modern' schools or equivalents (High Schools, in Kent etc) with either pity or scorn. The school is not the problem.

I think it bad practice that children are categorised by assumed potential at 10 or 11 years of age, and assigned to any particular kind of school as a result. Are they sent to schools which have the same number of MFL on offer? Do they have an equal opportunity to do triple science? Can they study Further Maths?

If so, and if the school has a critical mass of students of all ability levels, fine...but that sounds like a comprehensive, whatever it's name.

[Peregrina]

'Superselectives' (which I had never heard of until Mumsnet), can only really work in cities, but will only cream relatively few children off, so will leave the remaining schools as more or less genuine comprehensives.

What I would like to know is whether those Modern/High/Upper schools in areas which still have the 11+ have the same parity of esteem as the grammars in those counties. Or are they disproportionately schools which are either RI or in Special measures? Are there any grammars which take their full share of pupils on free school meals - I know that's a crude measure, but it's one of the few we have.

[HPFA]

I'm always slightly puzzled at how the same people who say how desperately important it is for us to have grammars also say that children will do perfectly fine at secondary moderns.

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

Our area isn't fully 11+ so not hugely answering your question but the grammars are by no means the only outstanding secondaries (although OFSTED rankings are rather crude as far as measuring school outcomes go) in the area. One 'side' of the town has a better reputation than the other. But that's true of other factors as well (housing, social care etc that all feed in to the reputation).
Do we take our 'fair share' of FSM (another crude measure)? I would say no, but that is partly because the test is opt in (has been for decades). We do outreach work, but I would say there is definitely room for improvement there.
However, if I was Teresa May (thankfully I'm not), I would take note of the NAO data and not engage in a vanity project where only about 4 areas meet the requirements and want grammar system (one is my current county - BBC article). I would instead stop the continuous and expensive examination reform and invest in schools to achieve parity with the Excellence in Cities programme with a bit extra for schools in coastal communities (who are really, really struggling). I have other ideas as well but new grammars where there is no demand and better ways of spending the money makes absolutely NO sense.

[SixthSenseless]

A 'Secondary Modern' may well be Outstanding, and I don't see any reason why the quality of one category of school should be any less likely to be Outstanding than another. But the Ofsted status of the school is irrelevant if it can only offer a late developer summer born boy (for example) one MFL and double science, when a different curriculum would suit his potential and aspirations.

Even in the Golden Days of the nostalgically remembered original grammar system , the schools did not actually offer the equal opportunity to education and social mobility of their reputation. They have never reflected the demography in terms of disadvantage, and do not do so now, even in full grammar areas.