Bright pupils are more likely to get top GCSE grades at comprehensive schools than grammars, research has found.

[NeverVerbal]

Here is the freshest research on this matter, for those who are keen to explore further.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bright-pupils-get-better-gcses-at-comprehensive-schools-jvqnw2g6x

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/aug/28/english-regions-dominated-by-grammar-schools-do-not-improve-grades-study-says

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131911.2023.2240977

I think the assumption that students will be set/streamed in comprehensives is faulty. In my non-grammar area, many schools have minimal setting/streaming as research shows that it works against children from disadvantaged backgrounds: setting-and-streaming

My DC is doing GCSEs this year and is only set for Science and Maths (and the setting is done with a very broad brush: they have four levels of ability for a cohort of 250+)

DD on the other hand is currently living her best life at grammar, she's so happy in an environment where there are other nerdy kids

This exactly! People always talk about results, outcomes, etc but it's important to remember that the social aspect matters, too.

I went to a superselective (not in UK) and I didn't get fantastic grades - the work was really hard. But being around other clever kids for six years made a huge difference. We could talk about anything and everything in our nerdy way without being stigmatised as clever showoffs. Looking back, it contributed so much to my confidence and future career.

This exactly. DD1 was actually not one of the nerdy ones in a super selective grammar, she is sporty and pretty good across the board but not say, a maths superbrain like some. It was nice just to find her people. I didn't do that until sixth form college - everyone wanting to be there and wanting to learn rather than having to be there made a difference.

That said, I think good education can be provided for all in a comprehensive school.

What it would take is building roughly twice the number of secondary schools we have now, small class sizes and smaller schools. I also think a middle school system would benefit a lot of children. I think years say, 6-9 are quite different from 10-13.

There are some huge primary schools too now which I don't agree with either. Kids need individual care and attention to get a proper education, not crowd control and treating them like they are in a young offenders institute. Young offenders could probably do with more care and attention as well tbh.

Value added metrics such as "Progress 8 score" is just a descriptive statistics currently. Some research argue that schools like superselective grammar the progress 8 score is already bias and should be adjusted downwards.

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/how-progress-8-disguises-grammar-school-pupils-true-attainment/

@unfor agree - setting and streaming is definitely not the best thing for young people - anyone who knows anything about self-fulfilling prophecy can tell you that. It might be great for teachers but not pupils.

If the bright children in mixed ability groups are bored or not challenged then I would argue that is poor teaching and planning. The same for those who might be struggling in mixed ability.

At A level and HE level all teaching is mixed ability and there isn't this fuss about setting etc.

I suppose the key statistic is that grammars have expanded 30% in recent years (by pupil numbers - no new ones have been built apart from a couple of annexe situations).

So whatever the academics say, the parental demand is very high.

Probably more worthwhile unpicking why that is - as some posters are doing.

I'm in a grammar area and will be sending DD to a comprehensive, because grammar wouldn't suit her.

I don't think all schools should be the same though. There should be a range of options.

And the average size should definitely be smaller. Around 800-1,000 not 1,500-2,000.

I think setting should absolutely happen for some subjects such as Maths. I imagine it would be very hard to teach a class that will suit all abilities when you've got some children being able to factorise quadratic equations while you have some struggling to add 3 digit numbers together.

@StressedMumOf2Girls setting really isn't necessary in well resourced and well funded schools (this is the problem). You would have TAs in schools (as in primary - where you have mixed ability classes) to support the teacher with those struggling,

Setting benefits the teachers the most - I speak here as someone who teaches mixed ability A level students - without a TA - I wish I had one!

The problem about doing away with setting is the government isn't prepared or willing as we all know from current shenanigans to fund and resource schools properly!