Grammar schools proposal so appalling that a cross-party alliance forms to fight them

[noblegiraffe]

Former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (Lib Dem), former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan (Conservative) and former Shadow Education Secretary Lucy Powell (Labour) have written a joint piece for The Observer condemning the plans by Theresa May to open new selective schools.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/19/help-poorer-pupils-selection-social-mobility-education-brexit-grammar-schools

"The formation of their cross-party alliance against grammar school expansion, which is opposed by about 30 Tory MPs, spells yet more political trouble for May on the domestic front. Last week, chancellor Philip Hammond was forced by a revolt in his own party into a humiliating budget U-turn over national insurance rises for the self-employed, and Conservatives lined up to oppose planned cuts in school funding.

Launching their combined assault, and plans to work together over coming months, in an article in the Observer, Morgan, Powell and Clegg say the biggest challenges for a country facing Brexit, digitisation and changes to the nature of work, are to boost skills, narrow the attainment gap between disadvantaged children and their peers and boost social mobility. By picking a fight over plans to expand selection in schools, May will, they argue, sow division, divert resources away from where they are needed most and harm the causes she claims to be committed to advancing.

Before a debate in the Commons on social mobility this week, the three MPs say it is time to put aside political differences and fight instead for what is right. “We must rise to the challenge with a new national mission to boost education and social mobility for all,” they write. “That’s why we are putting aside what we disagree on, to come together and to build a cross-party consensus in favour of what works for our children – not what sounds good to politicians.”

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/18/cross-party-alliance-grammar-schools-theresa-may

Actually he'd love ds3's school but it is new and doesn't have his year group

I think what we are trying to say , is that schools will bear no correlation to what the pejorative understanding is of them.

That is why using the term or designation Secondary Modern school is negative , due to previous interpretations of what that meant.

Does any school bear the same educational characteristics in terms of teaching or exams taken to my school in the 1980s for instance!

The answer is no of course over 30% left the school without any meaningful qualifications , me being one of them (unless you count E and F grades as meaningful).

No school is allowed to get away with such shocking statistics today. Therefore it is unfair to try and paint a picture of similarity in the future for non selective schools if selective education is expanded.

Incidentally E and F grades were probably about average for the school.

" think what we are trying to say , is that schools will bear no correlation to what the pejorative understanding is of them."

So what will they be like?

GCSE maths is still GCSE maths whether you are in a grammar or a comp. If only the top 2-3% will be awarded a 9, why would pupils need a different curriculum? Surely it's already rigorous enough.

It's almost always maths, isn't it? I think some people get a bit over excited when they have a child very good at maths. I can imagine feeling like that, because proper serious maths is a bit like magic to me.

Not sure why everyone's being deliberately obtuse about the term 'leafy comp' - there's an old thread on Mumsnet from 2015 if you are feeling confused - 6 pages of it.

You forgot to mention 'bog-standard comp' which is obviously better than 'failing comp.'

HPFA
"I like Lucy Powell too and as comp attender and having children at a comp you have to do extensive research to find a reason to discredit her."

Her children are quite young so when she said they went to the same school as she did I assumed it was the same primary school. The Ofsted outstanding primary school has the 6th or 7th lowest fsm rate in a city of 140 primary schools and boasts 400 pupils taking instrumental music lessons with peripatetic teachers. Her comprehensive senior school has a healthy dose of children on fsm though. Less than 10 minutes research by the way.

Out of interest, why do journalists label everyone from a Northern comprehensive school as 'working-class'? How can you be a 'working class MP' if your mother, grandparents, aunts and uncles were all head teachers and teachers, you went to Oxford and you married a doctor?

I think those schools will be able to specialize in offering 'T 'levels for instance. I also don't believe academic results in the middle ability groups will be affected at all.

I have also suggested a grammar system that takes up to 40% so effectively taking the top '2' sets of the spectrum !

The bottom 10% i have not got a clue what to do apart from (don't throw scarce resources at that group for no calculable return).

I have been taken for task for suggesting this, by posters who themselves have no answers. This is except for an unshakeable and Un -realistic expectation of Man Kind that given the same opportunity everyone will succeed.

Clav I said it would take a lot of research to find a reason to discredit her and you haven't found a reason to discredit her, unless you're saying that people who send their children to a "too good" primary school are now no longer able to be supporters of comprehensives.

T levels?

And your definition of a 'calculable return' is what?

(I have a son who will be in the bottom 0.001% - what sort of resources is he allowed?).

Clavinova - Not sure why everyone's being deliberately obtuse about the term 'leafy comp'

My confusion is based on your claim that disadvantaged DCs can't get into a "leafy comp.". Based on this I'm assuming a "leafy comp." is not the same as a high performing comp. Is this correct?

The type of people allowed to comment on selective education is getting pretty narrow. It'll be down to old Etonians only soon!

'don't throw scarce resources at that group for no calculable return'

What calculable return do grammar schools offer?

Concerning Maths -
cantkeepawayforever
"I am a little puzzled by your reference to curriculum? All grammars and comps follow the same GCSE / A level curricula............. Comprehensives IME offer further Maths at GCSE and A-level, for example."

No they don't ( Noble should have known this) - only 65% of state funded sixth forms and colleges offer Further Maths A-level and probably even less offer Further Maths GCSE.

Maths -Bingo!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/04/sixth-form-education-undergo-biggest-overhaul-70-years-multi/

This meaning that certain schools could become excellent in offering T levels at sixth form level. This could/would attract pupils to transfer from grammar schools and hopefully create an element of equality in educational qualifications.

Bertrand - I think you will find the only people allowed to talk about selective education in the end will be those who did badly at school and want to blame that on a lack of grammar schools.

It could all get very complicated. Having travelled back in time to prevent your parents sending you to a grammar or independent school, you then have to seek out a very badly performing primary school for your offspring, ensure that it does not improve whilst you are there, then seek out a poorly performing secondary school that is at least one mile from the nearest tree and is also not a faith school.

The type of people allowed to comment on selective education is getting pretty narrow. It'll be down to old Etonians only soon!

It is clear with that group that the pro Comprehensive supporters have useful allies ! Bertrand A case of "My Enemies Enemy is my Friend there".

Nicky Morgan fawning over George Osborne/ Cameron at every opportunity. This is not surprising that a girl from a Minor Public/Private school would go 'weak' at the Knees for the attention of boys from Eton or St Pauls .

However, despite her displaying sourness at losing her 'chums' in Government it is clear she does not want non private school children to have anything like her education !

The way to protect for the prosperous futures for the next generations of 'Morgans' i.e the Vin Ordinaire's is to team up with the naive socialists ....

HPFA
Well, she's hardly making a sacrifice for the cause is she? MPs never do.

MumTryingHerBest
Yes, a 'leafy comp' would be a high attaining comp (in a 'leafy' suburb/area) with a largely middle-class, affluent intake and very low fsm. Parents pay a premium to buy houses in the catchment and/or attend church.

I was at college with Nicky Morgan. There are plenty of old etonians around for her to fawn over there if she really wanted to. I'm sure by the time she got into govt she had discovered they were just people - like anyone else.

Anyway please answer what you meant by not funding unless there is a calculable return. What sort of funding is my bottom of everyone ds1 allowed?

Clavinova Ok, so not the same as a high performing comp. then.

Clav You are seriously suggesting that she should deliberately seek out a poorly performing primary school for her children??

By the way, Theresa May attacked Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs for sending his son to a grammar school even though it is well-known that he and his wife divorced over the issue. So as well as showing May's nastiness, it appears that even ending your marriage in a failed attempt to send your child to a comprehensive (which apparently was a very poor-performing one at the time) does not qualify you to defend comprehensives.

only 65% of state funded sixth forms and colleges offer Further Maths A-level

Yes and do you know why? Because there aren't any bloody maths teachers to teach it. That's not a failing of the comprehensive system, it's a failing of the fucking government to stop treating teachers like shit. They need to start making some effort to keep the ones they've got, because they sure as hell are having problems replacing us when we quit, dismally failing to meet their recruitment targets for the 7th year running.

My school offers further maths A-level and further maths GCSE, because we have a maths department with qualified maths teachers who are able to offer this. And do you know what? We also get bloody brilliant results with kids who are less able. Take us out and have us teaching in a grammar school, and what will happen to the maths education of the rest? It will get worse, and they matter too.