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.

All our local grammars are in exactly the same boat,years of underfunding. We've had similar letters.

Then why don't we agree to fund existing schools (including grammars) properly and stop this idea of expanding selection?

And as an anti-grammar poster you certainly haven't represented my views properly. I believe that precisely because an exam at 11 cannot possibly divide children into the academic and non-academic large numbers of children (including the most able) will lose out.

HPFA because the amount being allocated for new grammar places is a drop in the ocean so would make next to no difference across the board, and because the current set up does fuck all to help very able DC from disadvantaged homes.

"top maths/english GCSE sets?
Presumably top sets in grammars will all be working towards a 9?"

I wouldn't have thought so- only about 2% are expected to get 9s. Not all grammar school kids get A*s now.

Bertrand the DC in maths top sets at good grammars should probably be mostly aiming for a 9.

If it is of any relevance, DS is in the second English set of a comp. His target grade - a stretch - is an 8. His current 'predicted actual' grade is a 7.

I would also say that it is not necessarily the case that less well-off families are priced out of the catchments of good comprehensives - by which I mean those that make most progress with all their children, those who have the best 'added value', of which progress 8 is a crude and inaccurate measure but the one we have.

Not all houses, even in such catchments, are mansions. Also, 'pricing out' only happens if families want to move into the catchment - those families who have always lived in the catchment simply continue to do so, regardless of whether the neighbouring house's value has skyrocketed. One thing that many such schools have is stability - few families moving in or out of the area - and so there are many families who simply live in catchment and have done for 20+ years.

Yes, house price inflation around honeypot schools - because of the very moves made by people who want to move into catchment when their children approach secondary school age - does prevent 'slightly less wealthy MOVERS making the move that more wealthy MOVERS can make...but those who have lived in the area for a long time just get into the school anyway.

On the grades thing - I think there is a difference between 'target' and 'expected actual' grades, especially if a school has a policy of being aspirational in the targets it sets.

DS is top set Maths in a comp, second set English. Target grades 9 and 8, likely actual grades 8 and 7 ... but who knows??? All bets are off on what the actual grades will look like come the summer.

Oh sorry, yes. Brain failure. The top set at a grammar probably should be getting 9s.

As should the top group at a comprehensive. They are the same kids, after all.

My ds is in the top set of a secondary modern. He is predicted 8s in English and Maths.

Yes but Bertrand so he should be, given that you told us he was a L6 in Y6. He should actually be predicted 9 according to Progress8.

By contrast my Y10 DD at a grammar should, according to Progress8, get an 8 in maths but she's already working at an 8 and is predicted (as opposed to targeted) a 9.

Probably an 8 is as good as a 9 however!

Somebody asked what the range of ability in tops sets in their kids was. I said what mine is. He's hoping for a 9 but Maths is not his subject. An 8 is achievable. But a 7 is likely, considering the GCSE kerfuffle.

"Probably an 8 is as good as a 9 however!"

Obviously a 9 is better than an 8. Won't make any difference in real terms, though.

Although to be fair she might well potentially have been a L6 but at our local village primary where four year groups (Y3 to Y6) were all taught by a single teacher in one room, they chose not to enter the DC for the L6 SATs in case anyone felt bad if they failed.

Well duh Bert. Clearly I meant in real terms. I can actually count in an orderly fashion up to to 10....

This debate is so city focused. For many children in rural areas there is one school that they can realistically attend. Parents there mostly want a good school, with a decent choice of subjects and good teaching and pastoral care. All the blather about Grammars is an irrelevance. The potential cuts in funding are a different matter.

What kerfuffle?

Peregrina how rural are you? I'm extremely rural.

So rural and ivory tower that you are completely unaware that there have been certain "issues" about the marking and grading of the new GCSEs?

I don't see how a child can possibly be a Level 6 at KS2 in English and Maths in Kent and not pass the 11+, the head teacher review or an appeal to grammar school.

A small anecdote from my experience of a classroom (won't go into specifics) 'high attainment' table children - v.good at getting grammar right and mathematical calculations. 'low attainment' table children - very imaginative writing and very good with shape and symmetry. Just because children are 'low attainers' doesn't mean they aren't 'high attainers' in other very valuable ways. Surely it is best if our children are learning together in the same schools appreciating each others strengths and learning from each other.

greenginger
The priorities for comps are the less able. Time and again posters on here tell us that this is the case and should be
Link please
naming schools
or admit that you a liar

Hampshire is all comps
Symonds is 90% comp intake
do show me where the 800 kids taking Maths A level are let own
go on
go on
go on

Bert your L6 DS should not be getting a 7, notwithstanding the newness of the grading system.

Calvino a- believe me, one day I am going to get him hypnotised and try and find out why!