May has got her Grammars.

[ScrubTheDecks]

Despite widespread lack of support from the education sector. Despite not having got a majority for her manifesto determination on this. Despite the Tories having cancelled BSF. Despite schools budgets being SLASHED.

She has introduced a 'slip it past' programme of expansion for existing grammars. So: no access to the newly funded grammars in areas where they don't exist. Weasel words about lowering standards for disadvantaged pupils to ensure access....so, admitting they don't bloody work as agents of social mobility or inclusion!

Why not invest in Outstanding comps all over the country that are doing well by all students, including the disadvantaged? Why not invest n comps all over the country that are struggling to recruit teachers and need standards raising?

A nostalgic move by a grammar school educated vicar's daughter (faith schools expanding too - hooray, what a great move for the religiously declining, multi-cultural C21st that is!) for a golden age of grammars that never did what they were supposed to do in the first place - except for a minority of lucky pupils.

I am utterly disgusted by this. Totally anti-democratic move.

I understand those MN-ers in a grammar area where you have no choice but to buy into the grammar system, or those who have, on an local level, poor schools and for those with bright kids, grammar is the only salvation. But grammars and disadvantaged / under achieving schools are to an extent are symbiotic .

Good comps getting their budgets cut should go on strike right now. Oh, but they can't / won't because of the public exams. Nifty timing, T May.

Is there a march I can go on?

@WombatChocolate Primary schools are not allowed to recommend schools to parents.

A few years ago, there was a trial of primaries ‘tutoring’ Y6 pupils as suggested by a pp. As I recall, there were lots of issues with the cost, logistics (when/how do you fit it in?), pupil selection etc. It was soon abandoned!

For those of you saying that you never tutored your child and just ‘did a few prep books’, that is still prep. Not everybody has access to prep materials or has an adult at home willing and able to support them. It is wonderful that you can do that for your child so I'm not knocking it (!) I just think that some children will always be at a disadvantage

There is a huge difference between buying a 11 plus test book and leaving a child to familiarise themselves with the types of questions, and weekly coaching from year 3 or 4. The first was affordable to me as a single parent on minimum wage, the second completely inaccessible.

Absolutely! I completely agree. Money will always give an advantage.

I have worked in an outstanding school and currently work in a needs improvement.

The low level disruption here is immense and although the SLT response is good, it doesn't seem to make a difference. Sanctions seem like water off a ducks back.

The whole atmosphere is different in the schools and I pity the bright kids at the school I am at now. Their learning is constantly interrupted.
You can't walk a corridor during lesson time without seeing numerous kids outside classrooms. At my previous school, it was a rare event!

I still stand by what I say.
Does the school need a social worker because the kids have issues before they go, or is the school trying to sort out issues of their own making.

I seriously had my eyes opened when I started working in schools. I take my hat off to teachers, I certainly wouldn't want to put up with the endless shit they get.

Scrub I don't know the solution, but it seems we have the worst of both worlds at the moment. Effectively there is selection by money rather than ability (whether paying fees or moving house). This means the brightest children from lower income families will be at the schools many better-off families have rejected. At least if there were grammars some (rather than none) of those from lower incomes could attend the more successful schools. I know that still doesn't make a difference to the many who don't pass the test though. Giving extra money to schools that need it would be a very good start, but unless all the independents close and all secondary schools in the area are comprehensive, have the same catchment and selection by lottery, people will keep buying their way out.

I pity the bright kids at the school I am at now. Their learning is constantly interrupted.

But you don’t pity the hard working medium and low ability kids whose learning is interrupted? Wouldn’t it be better to improve that school for all children, not just give a lucky few who are already advantaged a golden ticket out of there?

cone That is how I see the issue too.

@qu1rky
Don’t you just love the train to teach adverts? The ones with the teacher in front of 12 immaculate attentive pupils - such an accurate representation of teaching!

We need to find and support ^^all schools well; not just focus on the advantaged pupils (I.e. more academic/affluent/supportive parents/where they live etc). After all, we all have to live with each other!

qu1rky, what would you say makes one school a well disciplined learning environment and another disrupted? Is it down to demography or pedagogy?

I am sceptical of the new ‘zero tolerance’ boot camps like Mossbourne and Michaela and that Gt Yarmouth ‘bucket’ school and Academy chains like Ark, but they do seem to instil discipline where it was lacking.

In our comp (it honestly is in a Knife crime area) there is a strict but family feeling. Staff seem to like young people and be proud of them. There are outbreaks of disruption, and occasional outrageous incidents, but by and large behaviour and attitude to learning is good.

Intake is high density social housing and private owned or rented terrace and modest semis.

@noblegiraffe Yes, I pity all the kids for different reasons.
I don't know what the answer is though when the parent's care little for education. They seem to rail against the school trying their best for their kids, rather than work with the school.
The attitude is so entrenched it could go on for generations.
How can the school improve for all?
All staff do their very best for the kids, if the kids don't see any value in education, what can be done to change their mind?

The job was so much easier with a school population where the majority wanted to learn and if they didn't want to, they saw the merits of it and knuckled down.
Here, it is the few who want to learn who are disrupted by the many.
I despair of the chain that seems unbreakable. The town shows no sign of being lifted out of poverty and our pupils will therefore remain in the same mindset.

Yes, @Neverwrestlewithapig, that advert was probably taken in a grammar school

qu1rky Sun 13-May-18 11:02:19 - I pity the bright kids at the school I am at now. Their learning is constantly interrupted.

Out of interest, does the school have a very, very small number of bright DCs?

Does the school set for subjects?

If the school sets for subjects and is a true comp. i.e. has enought bright DCs to form a top group, then I have to ask why their learning is being affected by other less bright, disruptive DCs?

mum it’ll most likely be disrupted because most schools only set for certain subjects, or because of the bullying and disruption that occurs out of the classroom.

The problem there is bullying and disruption, which is unacceptable for any child.

Allow the interested, better off parents to remove their kids from the school and who cares about the rest?

There's too much lazy stereotyping which assumes all lower-income families are exactly the same. Class and money are wrongly assumed to be the same thing, for a start. But there are also assumptions that if a family is poor, they must also be uninterested, uneducated, disruptive, unqualified, stupid and not deserving of a decent education.

I don't think it's that easy to expand a school and I don't think it will happen much, except with adding extra classes to their intake.

One grammar in a neighbouring borough to us talked about expanding (after that school in Kent was allowed to build an annex 10 miles away), but it never happened.

schoolsweek.co.uk/confusion-over-grammar-school-expansion-plans/

If there was national per capita funding per pupil, it would be harder to hide behind statistics. Just saying.

But it doesn't address or correct the division between those parents who value education and teach their children to do likewise, and those who don't.

Echo chamber going on here, so here is a contrasting view:

Grammar school expansion is just keeping pace with expansion for all schools given the increase in school age children. Secondly, if they weren't popular then they wouldn't be oversubscribed by 5 or more children for every place or whatever it is that they are, and if you think many of those applicants are only applying from the local area and not thinking of specifically moving just to get in a grammar area, then you are very much mistaken I believe.

A certain section of the public want grammar schools, giving the public what they want is surely what government should be about.

giving the public what they want is surely what government should be about.

No, it should be about what is the best for the whole country, not just a noisy subsection. Where we fall down badly as a country is in our technical and vocational education, and for the 50% who don't go to university.

giving the public what they want is surely what government should be about.

Why should the parents of pupils-who-will-pass-the-test get to dictate the education offered to the much larger number of children who won't pass the test?

A government continually giving vocal minority pressure groups what they want, to the detriment of society as a whole, is simply weak,, and isn't governing. Government has a responsibility to balance the needs of all, and should always bear in mind that those who need the most may be least able to articulate these needs.

If the same amount of money had been found for the expansion of Special Schools, then I WOULD be happy.

Tid13: my borough is losing £14m + in schools funding. People here want investment in good comps.

The majority of teachers do not believe in Grammars. The researched evidence is that Grammars make no overall difference.

In this context why is the government making such an intervention ? For a minority of families who want something which doesn’t make an overall contribution to the country?

giving the public what they want

Many more people don’t want their children to go to secondary moderns than want their children to go to a grammar, including people who want their child to go to a grammar. Grammar schools actually give way more people want they don’t want so if popularity is what you’re after, a policy that sticks loads of kids in secondary moderns isn’t it.

Tid13 - if they weren't popular then they wouldn't be oversubscribed by 5 or more children for every place

www.kentadvice.co.uk/peters-blog/news-a-comments/item/1071-oversubscription-and-vacancies-in-kent-grammar-schools-on-allocation-for-2018.html

There were just eight grammar schools with vacancies on allocation, all of the five with more than ten empty spaces at this stage having a history of seeing high number of appeals from non-selective children upheld. The total at this stage is 184 places unfilled, the lowest figure in recent years (240 in 2017). Most of these will vanish after appeals and late applications.

I never get this argument that if you had more grammars you wouldn't have as much tutoring.

If you have a situation where, say 25% of children go to grammars then maybe a few people who have kids right at the top of the tree might think they can get away with a few practice papers. But anyone whose child is generally in the top half of the class will definitely think it's worth their while to try and get their child into the grammar and if they can afford it that will mean tutoring.

Also for people in areas where there are very few grammars there will generally also be some good comprehensives that most will be happy to go to. Whereas once you have many more grammars there won't be comprehensives so many more people will think they have little choice but to try and get their kids in somehow.

So I really don't get this argument.

A certain section of the public want grammar schools, giving the public what they want is surely what government should be about.

Not many want secondary moderns though which is what the majority will get.

I’m in Bucks and have a DD in year 4. I am lucky enough to live in a village with a primary, ( quite affluent, although we are not).

At least 6 of the 12 children in my daughters year are being tutored, there are waiting lists for the top tutors and the average cost for tutoring is £3k. They may not call it tutoring for 11+ but it is. It is especially prevalent in middle class village primary’s.

Whilst some children may do well without tutoring it is very much a culture in middle class areas. My friend tutored her daughter from year 3 for Grammar as the cost of tutoring compared to independent schools was pennies.

It does make the schools around it less desirable but I am lucky enough to be on the Oxfordshire border so my daughter can go to a normal comp.