New Grammar Schools: good or bad?

[thing47]

I see Liz Truss has announced she is in favour of creating more grammar schools (Rishi Sunak has opted for saying he will allow existing ones to expand, which is in keeping with current Conservative philosophy). What does everyone think of this? A good idea, or not? I know we have quite a lot of teachers on this board, be interested to hear what you all think.

In your experience
in your area

its not the same in mine, in my daughters year.
the greater depth kids from poorer backgrounds didn’t get it. The year before they might have got it, certainly 5 -10 years ago they would have 100% done it. Tutoring wasn’t a thing. Now it’s summer camps and big business

How about you can have grammars IF the per head funding for every child attending the non-grammar is at least 2x that for every child at the grammar (plus PP and SEN funding on top) AND a new Special School is created, fully funded and staffed, for every grammar created or named?

That might almost be worth it.

What were the average pass rates for that year? Were they well above the minimum pass?

I live in an area with some grammars. As a teacher, I have known no un-tutored child get a grammar place for many years, and the vast majority of tutored children don't get in either. 8 years ago, a year of tutoring was normal. It's 2 now - or (most commonly) private primary plus tutoring

I think that they need more Special Schools and PRUs because in my experience as a parent, there are too many kids stuck in mainstream who'd benefit from that kind of schooling.

[You may ask why the non-grammar needs so much more money in order to provide an equivalent quality of education [note i say l quality, not 'level']. It's obvious - it will contain almost all the children from genuinely deprived backgrounds, and almost all those known to social services. It will have almost all the SEN, and almost all the children with behavioural difficulties. It will contain almost all the refugees, and almost all those who are at the early stages of learning English. It will have to offer a much wider range of courses and qualifications than the narrow range of academic subjects at the grammar, and the staff will have to be much more skilled, as they will teach a much wider range of ability. More support staff will be needed to manage SEN, pastoral and behavioural issues. Extra-curricular clubs will be much more necessary, as they will provide much more of a child's cultural capital and much more of their opportunities, since the average income of the families who attend it will, in any given area, be lower than the equivalent grammar.]

If middle class parents are getting their dc tutoring, as in their regular academic dc (so not greater depth) to get into grammer, all they are doing is paying for their dc to try and be as academic as your (naturally) greater depth dc. In other words, trying to match a naturally very academic child buy paying for extra tuition.

Locally, the 'arms race' has gone beyond that. When my own DC started secondary a decade ago, successful grammar entrants in my partially-selective area were

• From private primaries OR


• Coached OR


• Naturally very academic


• From private primaries AND coached


• Naturally very academic AND coached


• 'Normally' high ability and coached for a very long time, often from specific types of family who make hours of extra academic work per day the norm for their children almost from the start of school

I would lift the ban on opening new grammars, but not have an active policy of trying to create them either. So basically new grammars would only be created where there is overwhelming local demand.

In some areas of Kent children have been doing 2hr+ return commutes for decades, travelling in the dark and on highly unreliable (and expensive) transport because the local academic school in Sevenoaks had become a private school and it was illegal to open a new grammar to replace it 🤬 but there was no full service comprehensive either because its a ‘grammar area’. Long story but for decades many children in Kent had an awful time and lost hundreds of hours to long distance commuting because of this stupid ban which was created for political reasons.

Finally, after decades of arguing with central government, the council managed to create in Sevenoaks two local ‘annexes’ of some Tunbridge Wells grammar schools but apparently it was illegal for this to be mixed sex because that would make it new 🙄 So now Sevenoaks has two small grammar annexes sharing the same site instead of the single coed grammar it needs. The children think the adults are insane when the issues are explained to them.

I don’t agree with irreversibly streaming children at 11 either. I agree its unfair and divisive. But if you have grammar schools around you have to allow new ones to be occasionally created as local situations change ans populations shift. Either scrap them all, or lift this stupid ban.

(Dunno what Rishi is mumbling on about, grammar schools are already allowed to expand.)

(What I have found I interesting to observe as my own DC have become older is the ebb and flow between the schools as well. The grammars actively select out students at 16 who haven't met their 11+ promise. They take in large waves of replacements from other schools to boost their A-level and Oxbridge results, and claim these results as 'their own')

agree With @cantkeepawayforever . I think grammars in theory are not bad IF the alternative is seen as just as desirable (ie providing equivalent or better education for less academic kids - eg bigger choice in subjects, smaller class sizes, more extra curricular).

I don’t know that stat.i know anecdotally from school playground chat it was close for a lot (either side). It was a big year for appeals due to some issues.

I do know over 60% of places went to out of borough their year, the year before 25% went to out of borough.

The opening of new schools thing is daft for all schools, though - local authorities can identify a need but are unable to create a new school themselves and so have to tout round academy chains or free school openers, trying to persuade someone to open one for them. It's not a 'grammar' issue as much as an ideological refusal to create a reasonable solution to founding new schools where they are needed.

Not when they are being tutored on the reasoning side. youll never come across that unless tutored.

If children who were highly tutored for years prior were only getting just about the pass grade they couldn't have been that academic to begin with and would have struggled badly at the school.

As I said, not a stealth boost but more to make a point, my ds scored well above the pass grade which was 308 and he was 374, probably far beyond those kids who were tutored to the hills. Tutoring doesn't necessarily mean a child is built for grammar or that they'll pass/do well and if kids are just passing, as in 1/2 points over, they will probably struggle at the school.

From my experience, grammar is for a certain type of brain which cannot be bought.

Agree that 'Greater Depth in the National Curriculum subjects of English, Maths and Science' is pretty much zero use in many of the 11+ tests used for grammar selection - which instead demand exceptional speed and skill in the very particular (tutorable) skills that fall under 'Verbal reasoning' or 'Non-verbal reasoning'

There's plenty of papers you can do at home which doesn't require tutoring at all.

Why would they struggle when they continue the tutoring?

From my experience, grammar is for a certain type of brain which cannot be bought.

How so? the lessons they are taught - English, Maths, Science etc - are surely for the same type of brain as are found in the children in the higher groups of the non-grammars (as the 11+ is not a perfect test, there is a very large overlap between the lower groups of grammar students and the higher groups at non-grammars).

I agree that some children, who are found in grammars where they exist and in comprehensives where grammars do not, have brains that enjoy logic puzzles, vocabulary questions, brain teasers etc. Some of these children are also very able at school subjects. Some will go on to perform highly right up to university and go on to highly selective universities.

However, it is wrong to assume that grammar schools are full of such 'outliers'. There is a very high overlap between 'grammar school pupils' and 'non grammar school pupils' in terms of actual academic ability measured in a holistic way, and only a very, very tiny percentage who are not equally well catered for in well-funded comprehensive systems.

If you’ve a parent who
a) knows you need to do them
b) can help answer the questions and explain the reasoning.

I’m not actually disagreeing with you @Rosewaterblossom despite it looking like it.
my experience is the grammar system failing the kids it’s set up for. That private schools and affluent engaged parents are able to buy the grammar education which is pushing out the children it’s designed for. The ones with the logical brain regardless of family engagement and income.

its happened fast in our area, it almost felt over night. You’ll get the odd one or two that smash it on the day and manage it. But for the most it’s not working anymore. See the above comments from teachers about untutored children not getting in anymore.

I was referring to the dc who are tutored to pass the 11+ then left to it.

It's hard to explain tbh. Some brain are just.. they get it. I don't know how but they do, and they enjoy it (unlike me.)

It goes beyond top sets of the mandatory subjects, it's just a kind of brain that "is" something else. Where they can read a paper and get it with brief explanation, they just get the logic and reasoning and retain it. You just can't buy that type of brain activity.

The odd thing about these periodic discussions is that they ignore the clear research findings that grammar systems are shit for social mobility.
Disclaimer: I went to a grammar and thought it was great but that anecdote doesn't outweigh the massive amount of research that generally they are not good for our society.

I think its a great idea, my son attends a grammar school and we are low income family (also classed as people who are very unlikely to go to university.)
He has never had a tutor but weekends we worked hard using relevant books to help him pass.
He is doing extraordinary well and as he's quite reserved, I know he would of had a rough time at comp school as he didn't have it easy in primary school. Now he's confident and doing things he would have never dared.

Me and his father went to comp and never went to university. So we want the best for our child and I know grammar school is his best chance at giving him aspirations for the future.

This is my personal experience and my opinion before someone tells me I'm wrong.