Justine Greening grubs around for grammar school support after disastrous consultation

[noblegiraffe]

Despite the grammar school consultation only closing recently, the results not yet being published, and many high-profile education organisations condemning the plans, Justine Greening has decided to try to whip up Tory support for grammar schools by sending an email to Conservative party members and backers asking for them to support a grammar school campaign.

Ignoring all the evidence that this is a stupid and costly mistake, with real implications for parents who want to send their children to comprehensive schools and for disadvantaged children, she has described how 'popular' they are with parents, who perhaps aren't as well informed on education issues as the organisations and professionals who publicly responded to the consultation.

schoolsweek.co.uk/government-launches-pro-grammar-schools-campaign-just-days-after-official-consultation-closes/

Is this pigheaded or just desperate?

Equally though, one might wonder why there are hundreds of comprehensive schools where only a handful of students get a string of A*s.

Surely only a handful of kids in a mixed ability comp should be getting a string of A*s?

I actually don't believe secondary modern schools exist. I think the poor achieving non selective schools are just bad schools.

I think the Headteachers letter from Kent is looking for something to hide behind , because they are not able to improve standards.

If there are kids at the 'modern' getting strings of A*s and triple science then one wonders what the point of grammars and the 11+ is.
Noblegiraffe similar point to mine from up thread.
I therefore think that all these discussions of the benefits or rights of selective education are not really relevant to the majority as most grammar schools will not be providing anything different teaching style or content to standard comprehensives.

noble Well Ofsted thinks the most able students should be doing better;
www.gov.uk/government/publications/are-the-most-able-students-doing-as-well-as-they-should-in-our-secondary-schools

You teach in a comprehensive school - roughly how many of your school's pupils achieve 6+ A*s every year compared to other schools in your area?

I think the poor achieving non selective schools are just bad schools

That's because you have a very simplistic view of what makes a good or a bad school.

If you look at the intake of the good 'modern' schools like Trafford, you'll see that they have quite a few high and middle achievers and relatively few low achievers. This matches the intake profiles of high achieving comps. When you look at the intake of the 'bad' secondary moderns, like the ones in Kent that you claim are just blaming the grammars for their problems, you'll see that they've got quite a few low and middle achievers and maybe a handful of high achievers, if that.

roughly how many of your school's pupils achieve 6+ A*s every year compared to other schools in your area?

No idea.

" actually don't believe secondary modern schools exist. I think the poor achieving non selective schools are just bad schools."

7% high ability kids at our school.

sendsummer You are being too elitist - dcs' prep sends pupils to 9 of the top 50 independent secondary schools (A levels 2016) and I know quite a few children at the superselective grammars (not necessarily from the prep) but none at Westminster or St.Pauls.

Someone mentioned Latin and further maths upthread - presumably both are taught at most grammar schools but I cannot imagine that even 20% of comprehensive schools offer Latin and less than 50% further maths? Also German, EBaac pass rate?

Here's what one Labour councillor in Derbyshire thinks of Latin for her county's high achievers;
schoolsweek.co.uk/academic-calls-for-return-of-the-classics-in-all-schools/
Not for the likes of us!

The grammar schools I know were until recently teaching IGCSE maths with its extended content and flexibility to go beyond the syllabus with additional maths - likewise the sciences; exam results after the introduction of the new GCSEs will be interesting.

HPFA My daughter's head .... took the opportunity to promote comprehensives
But 2 of the 3 comprehensives in your town have below average Progress 8 scores (bottom 30%) and the gap between the disadvantaged and others is 30% plus - almost 40% in one measure.

clavinova have you got some spreadsheet where you fill in tidbits about posters' schools then spend time sweating over league tables trying to figure out where they are?

Or have posters actually posted where they live and I just missed it?

"But 2 of the 3 comprehensives in your town ......."

Blimey, I thought I was obsessed!

Clavinova I do not think that access to Latin (particularly when poorly taught) or IGCSE maths are sufficient reasons to justify a grammar school system. I am not being elitist just saying that if grammar schools are providing the same teaching as many comprehensives do for their top sets why have a whole separate system.

Actually, 4 of the 5 posters whose schools I know have posted the name of their schools on other threads - I cannot 'unlearn' something I've read especially if I've clicked on a thread because my nieces/nephews/close friends' dc attend private/state schools in the same towns and those towns are of interest to me. You are being disingenuous Noble - it was you who asked for one of my posts to be deleted because you thought I had given too much identifying info about another poster. No, I don't have a spreadsheet - easy to look at the Progress 8 scores of 3 schools in one town.

I stand by that deletion. I don't think it's your place to be posting identifying information about other poster's schools if they haven't posted it themselves on that thread. It comes across as creepy and stalkery.

Just like when upthread you casually posted about a school close to me that blah blah. Bit freaky until I realised you didn't know what you were talking about.

Back to the OP, what really pisses me off here is that Justine Greening will have seen the public responses, have got a flavour of the consultation and despite it being negative is trying to whip up support before the results are published based on a sodding yougov poll and some cherry picked stats.

Has she no integrity? Has the political system no integrity? What was the point of the consultation at all if the Tories are going to carry on regardless?

And I bet the letter from the Kent heads will be ignored.When nobody knows more than them about the negative impact of selection.

december10th
I know Trafford work miracles in your opinion (and through many name changes on your part)
BUT
the evidence nationally does not support your viewpoint

I haven't mentioned Trafford whatsit? The school I linked to was outwood academy Ripon which had 80% a*-C incl Eng & maths which is well above the national average.

*"But 2 of the 3 comprehensives in your town ......."

Blimey, I thought I was obsessed!*

Me too!!

I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me which of the Winchester Comps should get the entrance exam and the others get the dregs

This is all very tiresome. If 40% of the schools in Trafford are grammar schools, then "grammar" is just a name for a school which teaches a wide range of abilities... Or is the claim that only clever people live in Trafford? Or that you don't have to be clever to go to a grammar school, you just need parents who do extra tuition with you at home?! (And if the latter, then there is bugger all need for actual grammar schools, you could just randomly add the word "grammar" to any old school where you want to attract more pushy parents who don't trust the school to do all the work of educating their children).

This country's problem is not the under-education of the minority, it's the complete lack of understanding by our political elite of what makes a good universal education system that works for everyone. It's not as if David Cameron's education made him a good leader, or Theresa May's education made her a good Home Secretary or Brexit negotiator... They are where they are because of a hugely unequal, divided society whose unhealthy, divisive attitudes are positively encouraged by the existence of grammar schools.

I always ask where Trafford's lower ability children go and nobody ever tells me. I think there is a school just over the county border and they are all bussed there.

That made me smile Bertrand. No. No buses across the Trafford border. The lower ability DC in my DC's primary, and the other local ones mainly went to Wellington or Altrincham College of Arts. One girl ended up at Manor High after a couple of switches. All still in Trafford. Two did go to Knutsford High. They're not exactly lower ability though, just very into drama.

The best way to prove you're not obsessed is to spend time grubbing around D of E statistics right?

So - in Trafford in 2015 2854 children reached the end of KS4. Of those for whom we know the KS2 results (you can really see the private prep influence here) over half (1388) were high achievers. Of the rest 987 were Middle Achievers, 278 low. So we can see that Trafford has a very high percentage of High Achievers which unsurprisingly is reflected in their results. In contrast in Oxfordshire which is hardly anyone's idea of a deprived area 35% of KS4 finishers were High Achievers.

Amongst other statistics: Of Middle Achievers nationally 69.8% made expected progress in English and 67.4% in Maths. In Trafford the respective figures were 68.6 and 61.3. Not huge differences but surely if secondary moderns in Trafford are so good they should be doing better than the average? Or could it be that no matter how hard secondary moderns work they can't overcome entirely the disadvantages inherent in selection? Which is exactly what the Kent secondary modern Heads are saying.

The lower ability children are outnumbered so are easier to manage. You don't have half or more of a class of kids in the primary school who are low achieving like you do in other areas in Manchester. Again this is because you have people who move to the area for the schools.