noblegiraffe*
Clavinova loves playing the man rather than the ball
I do have an answer but you won't like it.
Essentially I think that the government and others do believe that the education of more able children is a priority - more so than children of middle or lower ability.
Michael Gove, Sir Michael Wilshaw and even The Sutton Trust have all written extensively about the importance of challenging the most able pupils.This report by Michael Wilshaw was published in June 2016 - only weeks before Teresa May made a bid for the Conservative leadership - it will have been one of the most prominent documents on the table when Teresa May and her advisers were considering Education Policy:
" Of all the important issues I have put under the spotlight during my time as Chief Inspector, arguably none is as critical to the nation’s success and economic fortunes as the performance of the most able children in our non-selective state schools
The question of how well our brightest pupils are supported and challenged to achieve high academic results after they transfer to secondary school has been the subject of 2 high profile Ofsted studies in recent years.
Both these surveys found that thousands of pupils who achieved well at primary school, especially those from more disadvantaged backgrounds, were failing to reach their full potential after the age of 11. The reasons for this were:
•poor transition arrangements with feeder primary schools that left many academically gifted pupils treading water in their first few years of secondary school, rather than building on the gains made at key stage 2
•a culture of low expectations and a failure to nurture high ambition and scholastic excellence
•few checks being made on whether the teaching of mixed ability groups was challenging the brightest children sufficiently
•disproportionate effort being spent in many schools on getting pupils over the GCSE D/C borderline rather than supporting the most able to secure the top A/A* grades....
Since these surveys were published in 2013 and 2015, the performance of the most able pupils and the quality of the teaching they receive have become a central part of Ofsted inspections. Our common inspection framework, introduced at the start of this academic year, explicitly highlights the need for schools to provide effective teaching, learning and assessment for the most academically able pupils.
It is, therefore, dispiriting to learn that in spite of Ofsted’s sharpened focus in recent years, little progress seems to have been made since I first reported on this important issue.
The most recent statistics paint a bleak picture of under-achievement and unfulfilled potential.Thousands of our most able secondary-age children are still not doing as well as they should in the non-selective state sector where the vast majority of them are educated ....
These figures reflect the lack of ambition our inspectors still find in many secondary schools. To illustrate the point, here is a sample of comments lifted from recent inspection reports of schools that have dropped from good or outstanding.
From an inspection of a large comprehensive school in the east Midlands:
“Work set by teachers is not always challenging enough, especially for the most able. Pupils are not given sufficient opportunities to apply their learning in a range of situations. This is especially true in lower school mathematics and science. Teachers do not have consistently high expectations about pupils’ work.”
This from the inspection of a secondary school in West Yorkshire:
"Expectations of what pupils can achieve are too low. The academy’s academic targets are too modest and more able pupils, in particular, are not challenged enough to make faster progress... In too many lessons, higher-ability pupils are insufficiently challenged by their teachers or the curriculum provided for them.” ...
What is most depressing is that the brightest children from disadvantaged backgrounds are the most likely not to achieve their full potential. The most able children in receipt of pupil premium funding still lag well behind their more advantaged peers. They are also less likely to be entered for the English baccalaureate (EBacc) than other bright pupils and when they are entered, are less likely to achieve it...
As Chief Inspector, I have consistently lamented the failure of too many secondary schools to stretch our most able children, particularly the poorest. If our nation is serious about improving social mobility then our secondary schools have got to start delivering for these children.
Our nation’s economic prosperity depends on harnessing the talent of all our young people but especially those who have the potential to be the next generation of business leaders, wealth generators and job creators..
many bright children, especially from poorer homes, are allowed to drift through their first few years of secondary school. Their progress and early promise are stifled from this point on...
We know that there are non-selective schools across the country that act as beacons of excellence when it comes to meeting the needs of their most able pupils. Unfortunately, there are not enough of them.
We have to muster all our efforts to challenge the underperformance of our brightest children. ..."
Published 10 June 2016
Unfortunately there is not enough money in the pot to improve all secondary schools and so more grammar school places (with a certain allocation for disadvantaged pupils) probably seemed like a good idea.