Tories shit all over the comprehensive system with a return to the 1950s and a nationwide 11+

[noblegiraffe]

That nice comp down the road that you had your eye on for your kid currently in primary?

BAM, now it's got an entrance exam and your kid is going to be bussed out to a secondary modern. We're staring down the barrel of a return to the two tier system across England.

Word on the street is that Theresa May, because she is a total fucking thoughtless idiot who doesn't have a clue about education and couldn't be arsed to read the Green Paper consultation responses from people who do, has kept in the imminent White Paper on grammar schools the option for current comprehensives to convert to grammar schools.

Heads will be preparing their applications to convert as we speak, because no school wants to miss the boat and become the secondary modern of the area.

Everyone with kids in primary should be very worried about this. Even if you think your kid should have a good shot at getting into the grammar, the test is unreliable.

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/government-set-allow-existing-schools-convert-grammar-status-white

Is this why Justine Greening was in the telegraph today, saying the government were concerned about parents being priced out of catchment for good schools?
She didn't actually.seem to be saying anything... And i was a bit about why the piece was there.

tis just shit and horrid and lazy
Just give schools the money they need to get the best out of every child...whatever happened to 'every child matters'. 'Oh but the poorer kids can get on a bus to the grammar in the next town'not when they have caring responsibilities at home they can't letalone the fact that the grammar entrance will be so tutored up to its eyeballs (they will find a way to tutor to the test) that there is little chance of getting in anyhow.

Bucks does not, by any definition, have comprehensive schools. Neither is the pass rate 34-40%. In your dreams! In the north of the county 1/3 of the grammar children are from out of the county so of course the results are good. The pass rate is not lowered, the distance from school admitted is increased. However many of the secondary moderns have in excess of 30% high achievers. By and large Bucks is a high achieving county. The major problem is the PP children who have been failed by the secondary moderns where they largely reside. More funds are going into this and the county is well aware it needs to improve. Bucks is usually near the top for attainment and progress 8 is high too. These are school results not resident results as they are not available.

No area should try and change to this system though. The new grammars will cause good schools to lose pupils and this is largely unfair. Bucks has 34 secondary schools of which 13 are grammars. Some of the secondaries are as good as many comprehensive schools and sought after by parents. Bucks does not have roads of empty houses where people are leaving because they don't like the schools. The opposite is true. Neither is there a huge sense of failure at not being selected for a grammar if the alternative school is good. I know university lecturers, doctors, accountants, company directors, teachers, M and S executives, BBC employees all with children at sec mods - and happy with them. It just doesn't need rolling out elsewhere in some sort of retro policy that suited the few.

I think that once the proposals come out the clever bods at the Unions and anti-selection groups need to get their Heads together. For instance, what if all schools applied to become selective on the same day, what would this do to the system? I would like Heads to come together, consult with their governing bodies and parents.If they have agreement then they make a public commitment to retain comprehensive education in that area. In Surrey all but one secondary Heads wrote a letter opposing selection, so they ought to be able to come together on this. Of course, this doesn't solve the problem of the few who will put their own interests ahead of the majority. They would then need to look at other possibilities, such as all applying to become selective to disrupt the system.

Whatever, we need to see a clear plan for protecting areas of schools so that where parents wish to retain the comprehensive system they are able to do so. This could also be a fertile area for amendments in the Commons and Lords - rather than endlessly circulating the same arguments where evidence and reasoning is never going to win we can expose the lie that grammars will only be "where people want them".

Mumski

How would you propose to allow areas to retain a genuine comprehensive system when that this is what they want? We can disagree on whether grammars will damage existing comprehensives and that's fine on Mumsnet. But if the majority of people in Anyshire believe with me then where will they have power to oppose a system which they believe will harm children? It seems like all the power is to be given to those who believe the other way, even if they're in the minority.

If they're the grammar they'll find it easier to recruit and retain staff, they'll be more likely to be Ofsted Outstanding and they'll probably have an easier cohort because the kids with major issues don't tend to be entered for/pass entrance exams.

Agree about the Ofsted, and with attainment 8 they may not even be inspected but recruitment... I'm currently looking for work from September and I'm not applying to the grammars in the area. I have a tick list of what I want and a tick list of what I don't.

Grammar is on the 'don't want' list.

Grammars exist now in my area. We still have a genuine comprehensive system.
Why don't we wait and see what the proposals actually are and how they will manage the number of places in any particular area. It's ludicrous to think that a free for all level of conversion will be proposed such that all schools in an area have the ability to convert. How on earth would the governments aim of 10% be kept in balance.
How do you know that most people oppose new grammar schools. I have found no evidence for this.

My area has only one comprehensive, the two neighbouring areas are the same so they are all likely to either stay comprehensive or all go down the grammar route as none will want to be the poor relation and be the only secondary modern, I imagine there will be a rush to convert as none will want to be the last to change. Thank god I have no primary school age children any more, the countries education system has systematically destroyed over the last few years and the only reason there are still success stories are the efforts of the teachers and TAs and other school staff who still believe in the children, unlike our pathetic government.

My dc's grammar is losing £500 k, they are not getting more money.

I'll wait and see.

I'm neither opposed to or in favour of grammar schools. I have worked in a comprehensive in a GS area and it was excellent. I am aware NI has the GS system and it seems to work well.

I think something needs to change. At the moment there are several threads about this started by noblegiraffe, all adamant that poor, clever children are well served under the current system. I disagree.

And what a hysterical scare mongering thread, there are no plans to roll out the Kent model and full selection.

Northern Ireland is not comparable with England
Because as was pointed out by some NI parents on another thread
They have had 25 yrears of curriculum stability
25 years of school structure stability
25 years of admission stability
None of which apply anywhere else

I lost sympathy with this post after the first line. There is no nice comp down the road for my primary children. All schools we can get into are failing and the nice comps down the road (which are our closest schools) have restrictive catchment areas that we are excluded from. At least with a Grammar system my children would have a chance. If they failed 11+ they wouldn't be any worse off than they are now. The rubbish comps we have the options of aren't going to become any worse as secondary moderns.

Well Kent isn't comparible then as the SE is v diff to much of the rest of England and there are no plans to follow this model anyway.

The comprehensive system is continually failing our brightest and best children. You've had twenty years of a failing system give it up. TM is right to do something different.

I agree with that Infinite

Time will tell whether that something different is a GS system.

I don't believe northern Irish children are so inherently different to English and Welsh children that their system works where ours would not.

there are no plans to roll out the Kent model and full selection.

Given that they are going to allow current comprehensives to convert, how would they stop this?

From the article I linked to in the OP:

"There are two reasons why this is such a big deal.

Firstly, no capital funding would be needed. This makes it much, MUCH easier to get hundreds of new grammar schools very quickly. Once the legislation is passed, it would be as simple as changing any given school’s admissions policies (notwithstanding the aforementioned hoops the DfE may make schools jump through).

Secondly, there is the possibility of a domino effect. Again, there is a chance that the DfE’s restrictions might be successful in stopping this happening, but in a deregulated system that now encourages competition between MATs, there’s a very real danger that if one school in a town or area opts for grammar status, other schools or chains will feel they have no choice but to follow suit. And once the hare is loose, the government will struggle to pull it back..

...Assuming there’s not a last-minute change of heart, and that a possible Tory rebellion fails, this could be a very, very big deal indeed for many, many schools."

Mumski How do you know most people oppose new grammar schools. I have found no evidence for this

Did you look at the yougov poll?

"The prospect of actually bringing back grammar schools is supported by a much smaller group of people though. More than a third (38%) of people say they believe that the government should build more grammar schools and encourage more schools to select by academic ability. A quarter (23%) of people support all existing grammar schools being forced to accept children of all abilities, whilst the status quo option of retaining existing grammar schools but not allowing any more was backed by a further 17%."

yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/15/two-thirds-people-would-send-their-child-grammar-s/

Mumski

According to this Yougov poll 34% of people support new grammars. The percentage among people of parental age was even lower (from memory about 25%?) - it's in the full tables somewhere.

yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

I get the impression that the pro-grammar supporters don't think there should be a mechanism by which people keep an area entirely comprehensive even if the majority of parents wish that - but happy to be corrected if wrong.

I'm not sure if this bit of the legislation will get through. Thinking about it in an area I know(Oxford). Which school gets to be the grammar? Cherwell? Yes, that'll go down well with people living in the very expensive catchment area, many of whom will now see their children not allowed in. Matthew Arnold? Go down well with Kennington families who would then have to send their children to less reputed schools in Abingdon. Cheney? Of course well-connected Cherwell families will be quite happy to have their kids in Cherwell secondary modern. St Gregory's? Well, this is promoted as being the only option for people wanting Catholic education so I'm sure the Diocese would be happy to see that option restricted to able Catholics. Oxford Spires? See above for Cheney? Oxford Academy? A school that gets amazing results for its disadvantaged intake who will now have to go elsewhere because since hardly any of their intake actually scores above Level 5 in SATs it is extremely unlikely that any of them would get through the 11+?

What do you think, Nicola Blackwood (Tory MP - Oxford West and Abingdon?) Enjoy trying to sort out these sort of disputes? Which section of your angry parents will you keep happy? Those who would like Matthew Arnold to be a grammar because they think that would give their child a chance of getting in? Or many Kennington parents who realise that their child wouldn't?

brightest and best children

I like you Infinite. I always prefer the pro-grammar supporters who are honest about this. Much prefer to "comprehensives/secondary moderns are brilliant for the right (i.e other people's) children.

BRING BACK SECONDARY MODERNS. They are fab.

No ?? Don't see that headline much do we. Because people pushing for Grammars never dream their little precious will ever have to go to a SM. So let's have these schools where 10% of kids will get all the good teachers (think that's what's being insinuated), and leave the other ones to, well rot.
Not sure where all the rioting Comps are, and not sure why anyone would think badly behaved kids should just be shipped out. Maybe teach them to behave and be useful members of society might be more cost effective.
I think very very few schools will chose to convert as teachers are a pretty militant lot and understand what is best for their students (weird that government didn't ask their opinion about all this).
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Comps work for everyone. Late developers, kids who lose their way, bright, sporty, arty, whatever. If you want a Grammar then move near one and leave the rest of us alone.

Off to teach 150 kids today, all abilities, and I love that bit of my job (the rest not so much these days)

If you want a Grammar then move near one and leave the rest of us alone.

Love it!!

We moved away from Kent deliberately to get away from the grammar system. Despite the fact that our dcs would probably be smart enough to get a place if we tutored themto the hilt (which we can afford).

Our new town has good comprehensive schools. Funnily enough the one which is most popular is the one renown for its sports provision.

Grammar schools were introduced when the country's demographic was very different. We had a lager proportion of working class manual workers and this gave them a chance to get a better education.

Now we have a much larger "middle class"although inequality is spreading again.

Anyway by the time you get to secondary school, your life chances are cemented. Better to spend money targeting early years education where evidence has shown that changes can be made to overcome life chances.

*PS have you ever heard of a PRU ?

we need 10 times as many PRU places for comprehensives to work, and we need for them to take referrals for 10 times longer.*

This.

Permanent exclusions are starting to rocket as once they are permanently excluded they are the LA's problem, not the schools.

Where are you going to get enough teachers to teach in them given that we are losing teachers at a rate of knots from naice comps.

Maybe the ex-soldiers-into-teachers option will come to fruition and they will turn into reform schools.

And so the wheel turns.

But at least the grammar school kids will be OK.

I have 3 children in a special school, a grammar and a mixed ability school. No rioting that I've noticed. The grammar probably comes closest (all boys).

Having a child at grammar I'm not sure why people get so excited by them. Too many of the teachers are unpleasant, there's arrogance to the place, the teaching isn't inspiring. Of course they get results because parents like me sit on little Johnny when it gets to close to public exam time.

I have been much more impressed by the teaching in my youngest son's mixed ability school - and he loves school - the actual school - and had great relationships with his teachers. Ds2 likes his mates at school but growls about the rest of it.

TM is just awful. She is so out of touch it's terrifying.