Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

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

999 replies

noblegiraffe · 07/03/2017 08:21

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. Hmm 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.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 07/03/2017 22:04

Pupil Premium funding is regarded as inefficient. I expect there will be an overhaul soon.

annandale · 07/03/2017 22:06

I have a relative who is hugely pro-selection. She failed the 11-plus in the late 40s but her teachers wrote letters and ?appealed (I don't think it was such a formal process then, but I didn't want to say 'pulled strings' though I think that woudl probably be closer to the reality) and she got into grammar school and was the first in her family to go on to a professional career.

Somehow she has turned this in her mind into a convincing argument for academic selection, whereas I think it is the opposite. Having said that, her family were absolutely not sharp-elbowed middle class - they were sharp-elbowed working class, but too busy surviving to have done a whole lot of elbowing in this case.

I think the only convincing argument for grammar schools to me is that that British society is so hopelessly class-ridden that it is better to have the class divisions up front and visible, and starting early, rather than hidden, denied but still there. There is some truth to that IMO. There is no education system that this country has ever had that has really changed the class system so perhaps we should just accept that we like to fuck over at least 75% and preferably 90% of the country's children because we just don't give a shit.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 07/03/2017 22:08

anna I saw on twitter earlier "If grammar schools are so good, how come nobody who attended one can differentiate between personal experience and statistical evidence?"
Grin

OP posts:
GreenGinger2 · 07/03/2017 22:09

How are a miniscule number of schools which are vastly underfunded in comparison to the majority fucking over 75% of the population?

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 07/03/2017 22:11

Because grammars are more likely to have qualified and experienced teachers and a stable workforce even if they don't have cash for textbooks.

OP posts:
MumTryingHerBest · 07/03/2017 22:12

Clavinova So what level of FSM will qualify a school as a Comp?

GreenGinger2 · 07/03/2017 22:13

So do many comprehensives in the wealthier areas where parents buy places via housing.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 07/03/2017 22:16

If you think that's shit, ginger then why would you deliberately create more schools like that? And don't pretend that it's so poor kids would get a chance to go to them, because we know that overwhelmingly they don't.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 07/03/2017 22:17

noble do you have no qualms about the lack of access for less well off kids to leafy comps?

MumTryingHerBest · 07/03/2017 22:18

GreenGinger2 Tue 07-Mar-17 22:13:11 So do many comprehensives in the wealthier areas where parents buy places via housing.

I imagine there is a fair few. Just like the many parents who buy places at Grammar Schools by paying a tutor for two/three/four years, get their DC to sit the test in 2/3/4/5 different areas, wait until results are out and then rent in the catchment of which ever Grammar school their DC qualified for.

Those same parents will also love the addition of more Grammar Schools too. More exams for their DCs to sit and more areas to look at moving to.

GreenGinger2 · 07/03/2017 22:20

A poor child will find it easier to get into a grammar than a leafy comp. With a grammar there is a chance,getting into the best comps is an impossibility.

GreenGinger2 · 07/03/2017 22:22

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39076204

goodbyestranger · 07/03/2017 22:22

Mum how on earth many families do you suppose are able to be that peripatetic? Ever heard of a job? And what about subsequent kids? Lots of grammars have no catchment either - so many myths!

flyingwithwings · 07/03/2017 22:23

I hate the term 'Dripping with money'. Also one thing i was told very early on by my O.U tutors was never to use terms unless it was made clear either by Qualitative or Quantitative evidence what it meant !

Define 'Dripping with money' by Quantitative means or by Qualitative sources not by perceptions

Does that mean families who are Multi -Millionaires or just because the fall out of a crude measure of FSM or pupil premium.

For the record my understanding of 'dripping with money' comes from the UN Ultra high net worth $30 Million and high net worth $1 Million Dollars.

Therefore to describe families with moderate or reasonably high salaries as 'dripping with money' is inaccurate and offensive !

OK . SO what if grammar schools end up only being for' middle class children, if that designation starts at £16,000+ family income . I don't care after all these families pay all the 'flipping' tax and deserve the schools they want.

Away from this 'echo' chamber, it is clear that grammar schools are a popular policy idea.

However, rather like the 'Lords ' posters on here like to assume people on here don't know what they want !

Well we see won't we if the country has an appetite to vote for a change in 2020 ! no chance...

GreenGinger2 · 07/03/2017 22:25

A few tutoring lessons is a miniscule cost in comparison to buying/ renting in the best comp areas. Many grammars have no catchment area.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 07/03/2017 22:31

getting into the best comps is an impossibility

So there are comps with 0 FSM?

That link that says that rich families go to outstanding schools - well part of the reason the schools will be outstanding is because rich families go to them - it's circular. Poor kids from deprived areas have local schools with poor results - it's not just the schools that create those poor results. If you swapped the kids from the poor area with the kids from the rich area and stuck them in each other's schools, as time went on you would see the results switch over.

Also, I think there is a tendency to equate 'high results' with 'best comp' when that is not necessarily the case.

OP posts:
CookieDoughKid · 07/03/2017 22:33

The thing is, is that the current comprehensive system is pretty shit in some places so parents feel they have no choice but to play the system. Quite simply put, the local comp on their door step - parents are not willing to send their children to. You can throw all the money, shiny buildings, excellent qualified staff at a school but if the intake has social issues - then it will be extremely challenging to turn around. I know of one school that reopened and closed TWICE in a space of 8 years in its same location, in London. Comprehensive education is great if the environmental attributes (like wealth/leafy suburbs/social intake etc) work in its favour. Not if it's the opposite. I'm not against comps per se and yes, I do think it helps move the 'baseline' education up a notch or two but I feel so much depends on the comp location and whether you can afford to live in its catchment.

annandale · 07/03/2017 22:34

I look at my relative who was clearly capable of benefiting from an academic education, and she failed the 11+, likely because she was from a family so poor it would sound like something out of the Four Yorkshiremen sketch if I went into the details, not to mention being extremely identifying. That's what happens to poor children when academic selection becomes the basis, not just of which stream you go into in a school, but of which school you go to. They fail a single exam at 11 and go to a separate institution to those who pass. I find that HORRIBLE, even if the separate institution is well or even better funded, full of great teachers etc etc.

I will concede that 'modern grammars' or whatever they will be called, won't look exactly like grammars of the past.

MumTryingHerBest · 07/03/2017 22:34

goodbyestranger I take it you have never read the posts on the elevenplusexams forum after results are out?

HPFA · 07/03/2017 22:35

Amazing stat here

twitter.com/Samfr/status/839189570243686400

You have to be in the richest 10% of popn before your kid has a 50/50 chance of getting into a grammar. Lots of disappointed Mail readers.

goodbyestranger · 07/03/2017 22:40

MumTryingHerBest no I've never read that forum nor do I think I ever want to - sounds grim from what's said about it on here.

HPFA · 07/03/2017 22:50

I don't think the eleven plus forum is as bad as its made out - they give pretty sound advice to people who are thinking of moving to grammar areas without giving a thought to their kids failing. And not everyone has a choice about whether they have to deal with the 11+.

Clavinova · 07/03/2017 22:52

HPFA
You often link to Sam Freedman's tweets. I noticed in your last link that he ignored the tweet about Catholic schools - I wonder if he has his eye on one of the excellent faith (Jewish?) schools in London for his own dc?

flyingwithwings · 07/03/2017 22:58

HPFA I think the top 10% of family income assuming two people working is equal to about £100K PA before tax and NI so netting around £65k a year or arond £4.5K per month income before Mortgage ,Car payments etc.

However, remember that this is the median average of the top 10% so is highly distorted by the top 1and 2% of earners !

The truth though if even if we take the £100k PA family income as a representative figure of the top 10% . There are likely to have a £300k Mortgage on a £500K house !

No way is this dripping in money....