Tories pour millions into new grammars while state schools discuss the possibility of a 4 day week

[noblegiraffe]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/theresa-may-unveils-plans-new-generation-grammar-schools/

In a cowardly move, the Tories are publishing their White Paper on grammars before publishing the responses to the Green Paper which, the best thing Justine Greening could say about them was that they were 'not overwhelmingly negative'.

What a bunch of fucking shite. And where are they going to get the thousands of pounds required for free transport for golden ticket poor kids? The only potential money-saver here is that we know that the vast majority of poor kids don't get into grammars. Why not save this money and put it into the school that the poor kid would be going to originally? Then everyone would win, including the poor kid who isn't faced with a long commute, the poor kid who didn't get into the grammar, and the 90% of kids who aren't 'grammar material' (decided by a faulty test which puts kids in the wrong school aged 10) who would see more investment in their education which is desperately needed at the moment.

The majority of children with high ability and a specific learning difficulty will be disadvantaged by the nature of the selection tests. Some grammar schools in my LA don't test for non-verbal reasoning at all ( assesses innate intelligence) but assess only verbal reasoning, English and Maths, which is going to be more of a challenge for children who have underlying difficulties related to English.

Comparing the data provided by the government with regards to the number of children with SEN in grammar schools and secondary schools reflects this.

On a side note, if only ADHD was as uncomplicated as 'very fidgetty, can't wait your turn.'

So. Comprehensive schools. A combination of fair banding and lottery. Sorted.

Wages vary wherever you live. Wages are lower away from the Home Counties so houses will still be expensive for families relative to salary. There is a premium in the catchment of the best comps. It may seem affordable to those on London salaries not so for those on local salaries.

Anti grammar supporters always say a grammar automatically makes surrounding schools poor. Not so. The comps in the same city as our grammars are both good.

A school with only a few High Achievers will tend to be in a poorer area so statistically very few of these children will go to the new grammars.
Equally if grammars are set up in wealthier areas the new secondary modern will presumably be unable to cater for the fewer High Achievers they will now have?

Exactly * eddiemairswife Fri 10-Mar-17 18:55:10

What is needed is a national education strategy which is not dependent on the whim of whoever happens to be Education Secretary, but is determined by a body of people comprising members of all parties, people professionally engaged in education from various backgrounds and interested lay persons; working for the benefit of all pupils. And don't forget... academics need to have practical skills, and vice versa.*

Exactly.

Equally if grammars are set up in wealthier areas the new secondary modern will presumably be unable to cater for the fewer High Achievers they will now have?

Yes presumably the top sets are made up of children with a wider range of abilities than in a Grammar school.

checkin Yes, we keep being told that the new grammars won't affect the nearby comprehensives. But then we're told that comps with only a few High Achievers can't do well with them. Surely that implies that the comps (or new secondary moderns) who will now have many fewer High Achievers will also not be able to serve them well?

Are there any secondary English or Maths teachers who can tell us the range of expected levels in their top Y11 sets? That would be interesting.

GreenGinger2 Fri 10-Mar-17 19:02:46 The comps in the same city as our grammars are both good.

But only rich families can get into the comp. because the house prices are too high. Where do all the deprived families send their DCs?

Children appear to be divided into two groups. High ability children and children with SEN compatible with being high ability and children with other SEN.

Not can't won't.

The priorities for comps are the less able. Time and again posters on here tell us that this is the case and should be. They moan about the new progress 8 because they can't now just ignore the more able. Comps often don't have the formal and very rigorous teaching grammars have. Some parents want it.

One style does not fit all.

"Today 19:26 checkinsandwich

Are there any secondary English or Maths teachers who can tell us the range of expected levels in their top Y11 sets? That would be interesting"

Why? To prove that comprehensives are unsuitable for high ability children because there might be some B students in the top set?

Said comps have above average fsm over 50%.

Green How do you propose to square the circle of the new secondary moderns now having the problem you've attributed to comps of having too few High Ability children to be able to meet their needs?

GreenGinger2 Fri 10-Mar-17 19:30:17 Said comps have above average fsm over 50%

So deprived familes are not being priced out of good comps by rich families then?

"Comps often don't have the formal and very rigorous teaching grammars have"
What are you basing this on?

They often can be when they are Outstanding.

If they have 50%fsm they are hardly leafy comps with selection by wealth....

"The priorities for comps are the less able."

Evidence for this too....

BertrandRussell - No I'm asking about secondary schools.

What are the expected outcomes of the top maths/english GCSE sets?
Presumably top sets in grammars will all be working towards a 9?

I don't know, but I presume that the range within a top set of a secondary school will be wider (7-9?) which (presumably) makes it more difficult for the teacher to ensure that all pupils achieve the grade that they are capable of.

GreenGinger2 Fri 10-Mar-17 19:36:15 They often can be when they are Outstanding.

Oh so its only outstanding comps. that have no FSM DCs?

My experience and what I've read( much on here).

Do they have identical teaching styles then?

You're not making sense Mum.

And what is absolutely bonkers is that existing grammar schools are also being hit by the funding crisis

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/08/grammar-school-deficit-st-michaels-barnet?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I really think I'm beginning to dislike Mrs May more than Mrs Thatcher. At least Mrs T had some kind of intellectual heft about her. Theresa May's policies just seem based on her own prejudices. It's like having the country run by the golf-club bore.

Noble started a thread berating the new progress levels as she felt schools couldn't just focus on those at risk of not passing GCSE. It was clear that she and others in her sector alongside anti grammar posters have made such children their priority and feel those guaranteed to pass( even if not as high as they could) shouldn't be helped or be made a priority.