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.

I'm sorry, I have got really confused about which thread is which. I wasn't commenting on.your links, I was just pointing out the nature of what you described as a good article.

And anyway, I am interested to hear that grammar schools have the same level of behavioural difficulties, challenging families, troubled pupils and SEN as comprehensives and secondary moderns. It's not been my experience, but there you go.

Arf in get thats some people deliberately take a look very narrow biased view of a situation to try and paint a very skewed picture that is not the whole story. Noble said she very easily persuaded her dh that grammars were bad by using fsm as example. But the onus cannot be all on grammar to get fsm in. It's got to be on primary school lea. As far as I am aware level 5 at year 5 Is good indicator of 11+ potential. It's not dead cert a tutored child will get in. All sorts can be done to help all potential dc if the schools allow it and open up the conversation. Past papers, exam techniques... Etc. Parents would do free after school stuff in fact one came on and said that's exactly what her primary does.

I liked all the articles but particularly that one of for the people interviewed in it. Opinon pieces can pull in information from qualified people. But what about the repeated Ofsted reports that comps are failing top sets. I know you would like to focus on the Opinon piece so perhaps you have dismissed the ofsted ones??

"Noble said she very easily persuaded her dh that grammars were bad by using fsm as example. But the onus cannot be all on grammar to get fsm in."

I cannot speak for noble, but I suspect it was the position of fsm children that helped to persuade her dh that the selective system is unfair, rather than "grammars are bad". And nobody says that th onus should be on grammars to "get fsm in"

Yep, Bertrand, my DH believed the headlines that grammars were good for social mobility. When he was shown that the opposite was in fact true, he naturally changed his mind, because he is not in favour of perpetuating social inequity, which is what all the international evidence of selective education systems shows is the case.

The social inequality problem isn't simply a feature of British grammar schools which can be fixed by a bit of coaching by primaries. It's a feature of selective education across a variety of systems in different countries.

Noble are you trying to out me by mentioning 'Ebbsfleet Academy'.

Only Joking...

The school is good and my information is they have the intention of creating a sixth form when it is possible !

The pupil mentioned should be 'angry' with the large minority of idiots at the school. This means an authoritarian approach by the head is required so he can achieve his best !

Creating a sixth form would be a bit late for that poor boy!

I have no idea about schools in London and the South East, if I mention any that people actually have kids at, it's a total coincidence!

I am loving this Tory backlash about letting poor not-so-bright kids into grammar schools, and the antsyness that this might not only apply to new grammars, but also to current grammars.

Hopefully the backlash will kill off the grammar idea completely.

"But what about the repeated Ofsted reports that comps are failing top sets."

I think, a little like the "some comps with high levels of children with PP are not doing well" argument, that perhaps the problem is best addressed by learning from the best within the comprehensive sector, rather than creating a totally different class of school?

So in the same way that I do believe that schools with poor Progress 8 for high levels of PP children can learn from schools with good progress 8 for a similarly high level of PP children, I believe that comprehensives who do not enable their top sets to make good progress can learn from comprehensives with similar percentages of high ability children who make better progress.

Let's share knowledge of what REALLY works, rather than creating something that we already know - from fully grammar counties - doesn't have a measurable benefit at population level.

(I wanted to give examples here of Progress 8 for HA children from a mixture of comprehensives and grammars .. but the government website is currently insecure so my computer refuses to connect to it!)

I feel a little like screaming !! Comprehensives work. End of. Most kids go to them, most kids do well and most kids come out to a job or more education. Some schools are doing badly, not due to bad kids, but to bad leadership. This needs ta joking - fast. Look at Forest Gate Community School if you need proof of this. There are many, many similar examples. Schools need money and we have had cuts on top of increases in NI, pensions, and rates. Yes education has its biggest budget ever - it also has the largest number of kids ever !!!! I went to a Comp (Oxford degree), my husband went to a comp (Oxford degree), my kids went to a Comp (1 Oxford, 2 Cambs, 1 trying for med school 1 wants to be a vet). That's 3 Comps that worked - 2 of which were in crappy parts of the land where there was little money. My kids have met many many other students from comps that are doing well. And do you know why Oxbridge is not full of state kids - because not everyone wants to go there !!!! Private schools have a vested interest in sending as many there as possible as they can use it in their marketing. Most state schools couldn't give 2 hoots where the kids go as long as they are doing what they want. There are great, more modern courses at other Unis and a lot of kids don't like the tutorial system, they want lectures.

Rant over. Back to marking 120 chemistry papers

Opinon pieces can pull in information from qualified people. But they remain opinion pieces and not evidence. The very nature of an opinion piece is to put forward a personal point of view rather than gather evidence on the fact.

Yes there will be failing comprehensives - there are also failing grammar schools, particularly in the extent to which many fail to 'add value' to their intake but rely on their cohort being strongly supported at home, often economically as well as emotionally. By putting the onus onto primary schools to broaden the intake you are asking for not only the secondary sector but also the primary sector to be set up and run for an unproven benefit to 10% of the school population.

It might sound a bit silly, but not every student wants to go to small cities the size of Oxford and Cambridge, preferring what is on offer in e.g. Manchester.

Bertrand no irony whatsoever - none. You really are displaying the most profound lack of understanding and imagination.

goodbyestranger - is it really necessary to stoop to personal insults? What do you hope to gain from accusing someone else of displaying a profound lack of understanding and imagination? Surely better to agree to disagree than claim for yourself a superior imagination?

"goodbyestranger - is it really necessary to stoop to personal insults?"
It was too incomprehensible to be a personal insult! The harder, goodbye..

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10117739/Expectations-of-children-are-too-low-in-comprehensive-schools-says-Ofsted.html

Expectations of children are "far too low" in comprehensive schools and must be brought up to the standard of private and grammar schools, the head of Ofsted said today.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/09/ofsted-chief-proposes-further-sanctions-for-schools-failing-brig/

"Thousands of the brightest secondary school pupils are being let down by a chronic lack of ambition among some teachers who are failing to stimulate their students' progress, the chief inspector of schools has said.

"Children from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds are particularly susceptible to underachievement because teachers are focusing on getting GCSE pupils on the crucial C/D borderline into the "top-grade" bracket, rather than supporting the most able to secure the top A/A* grades, Sir Michael Wilshaw said"

"In June 2013, Ofsted published The most able students: are they doing as well as they should in our non-selective secondary schools? The report made it clear that many of our most able students who attend non-selective secondary schools fail to achieve their potential compared with students who attend selective and independent schools"

"Disappointingly, our findings show that most schools visited have been slow in taking forward Ofsted’s previous recommendations, particularly at Key Stage 3, and some have been complacent"

"Her Majesty’s Inspectors identified too much complacency in many of the schools visited. In these schools, the leaders indicated that they were satisfied with their most able students making the ‘expected progress’, but all too often, aspirations of what these students could achieve were simply not high enough"

"Not only did many of the most able students spoken to during this survey say they felt unchallenged by the teaching they received, they often said that low-level disruptive behaviour from other pupils affected their learning"

"The survey evidence shows that the most able students, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, were not routinely getting the information, advice and guidance they needed to develop a self-assured approach to preparing for their future studies or their next steps into employment or training. This situation has not changed since our report in 2013.
It is worrying that in four of the schools that inspectors visited, most able students were not encouraged to apply to top universities, an issue picked up previously in research commissioned by the Sutton Trust. University admissions tutors confirmed that they have worked with most able students who had not been encouraged by their schools to apply to prestigious universities. This is a particular problem for those students from disadvantaged backgrounds whose families do not have experience of higher education. It is imperative that these students are aware of the opportunities open to them and that schools give them the confidence to fulfil their potential."

" Leaders had not embedded an ethos in which academic excellence was championed with sufficient urgency. Students’ learning in Key Stage 3 in the schools visited was too frequently disrupted by low-level disruption, particularly in mixed-ability classes. Teachers had not had enough effective training in using strategies to accelerate the progress of their most able students"

www.standard.co.uk/news/education/200000-pupils-in-england-being-failed-by-secondary-schools-that-underperform-a3444521.html

"Almost one in 10 secondary schools across England are underperforming, according to new official figures"

Mums I know many comprehensives work, but sadly many do not. Its wonderful you and your family have gained brilliant education from them. Its not the same story in my family or in my area.

Michael Wilshaw is opposed to selective education.

And even if the idea that 10% of children are being failed by compreh naive schools is true, why would be remotely a good idea to make things worse for the other 90%........?

I think Brtrand's last point is the key.

Grammar / secondary modern is a 'no net gain' scenario, compared with comprehensives. It is just that the 'winners' and 'losers' are slightly different.

However, if less good comprehensives learned from the best comprehensives of a similar makeup, then that definitely could be a 'net gain' scenario.

Bert it was completely intelligible and wasn't 'personal' in the usual sense of the term: it referenced your inability to understand or imagine the potential for mental health and social and domestic difficulties experienced by DC who happen to attend grammars. Unfortunately these DC are not immune from the ordinary difficulties and tragedies of life and there can be a high incidence of mental health difficulties for particular groups of grammar school DC. My post was a comment on the substance of your posts; the alright Jack syndrome at work again. They're ordinary DC sometimes with peculiar vulnerabilities.

I don't understand how will sending the majority of those bright kids to a secondary modern improve their outlook? Everyone deserves a good school - not just the top 10%.

Our local comp had around 25% A*A grades this year.

It would also be interesting to know the makeup of the 1 in 10 schools 'underperforming' - since obviously that number contains all types of schools.

I seem to remember a poster upthread saying that most secondary moderns in her area were underperforming, whereas grammar schools were mostly not.

So if the % of underperforming schools is actually HIGHER in selective areas (because in a selective area, more than 1 in 10 schools will be a secondary modern), how is moving to that model elsewhere seen as an overall benefit??

Some of those with mental health issues at grammar might be better off in a less pressurised environment.

Goodbye,

How many grammar school children are:

• Refugees
• In substandard or B&B accommodation
• In foster case or local authority care
• Malnourished or have a diet lacking in key nutrients
• Never eat breakfast
• Children of substance-dependent parents
• Young carers
• From marginalised social groups e.g. Travellers?

Yes, there may be specific mental health / physical health issues that are more common in grammar school children - anorexia, certain forms of mental illness - but there will be forms of mental and physical deprivation that are much less common for them.

The above list isn't exhaustive, btw, it's just a list of those I have come across personally in a couple of years in a mixed primary school.