Grammar stream: just a marketing buzzword? Any different from being in the top set?

[ParentOfOne]

I have noticed that some state, non-selective secondary schools now have "grammar streams".
They do not admit any pupils based on a test and regardless of distance.
They still admit mostly based on distance. But admitted students sit a test and the best ones are put in a "grammar stream".

They make a big song and dance about it, but my question is.... is this any different from dividing students into different sets or streams but without shouting "grammar stream" from the rooftops? (I understand sets can vary by subject while a stream applies to all subjects, right?)

This is an article from 5 years ago about this trend: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/91656-2/

At this school https://www.barnsley-academy.org/education-with-character/the-grammar-stream "They will be taught a more challenging and in-depth curriculum from Year 7 onwards, as well as having access to a programme of extracurricular opportunities". The structure in most schools (academies) of this group seems the same

It seems that this group has taken over a number of schools which weren't doing well. So is this just a marketing buzzword to signal that, under new management, they are much better?

Or is there some merit to it? In which case, what would be the difference from the typical school that divides students into sets or streams?

Hurlingham Academy? We applied here but their catchment went from 5 miles in previous years to 2 miles for 2024 so we missed out!

We really liked the sound of the grammar stream with the high achieving emphasis and extra curricular activities. Their ethos sounded very similar to the private schools we visited but without the price tag.

I looked at a grammar stream school. As my son passed his 11+ he was eligible to apply. Once he had attended the school children from other classes could move into the top set dependent on ability. Other than the fact they could study two languages (which my son had no interest in doing) it was the same as any standard comprehensive.

The question I would be asking would be about those who don't quite make the grammar stream. Do they have any chance of joining it at a later date, or will that class have accelerated away from the rest in all subjects? If there's no flexibility, you've lost the biggest benefit of a comprehensive.
Usually, with setting, it is reviewed regularly, especially in year 7.

@lanthanum Good point. The school https://www.thehurlinghamacademy.org.uk/grammar-stream says it will be reviewed annually. I also wonder about the impact it would have for a child to leave the grammar stream. I suspect it could be devastating for some kids' self-confidence as it may be seen as a big deal, certainly more than changing sets.

I also wonder what happens to the non-grammar stream pupils: are they divided into sets?

The impact on a student of being removed from the grammar stream had occured to me too.

The grammar ethos is about absolute segregation and is not compatible with the comprehensive ethos, whatever people might try to argue. If it is a 'soft' grammar stream all about Y7 recruitment and teacher retention and not really anything substantial, why use the G word unless it is your intention to be deliberately dissembling.

If it is a 'hard' grammar stream (eg different breaks, lesson patterns etc), then the school is on its way to being a single site Grammar and Secondary Modern via the backdoor. No one campaigns for more Secondary Moderns, but that is what you are doing if you seek to expand the Grammar system.

My DC did not bloom academically until they were Y10 and were not initially all-rounders; they would not have passed an 11+ or got into a grammar stream. Setting in a comprehensive and the ability to move up and down sets worked for them.

In my DC's experience, and in contrast to a previous PP's view, teachers were passionate about their subject and it was not all about teaching to the test. In unsetted subjects, brighter students had to get used to stretching themselves in addition to getting some teacher input and that encouraged an independent mindset that carried through to A-levels.

IME the difference is that in a whole grammar students are effectively streamed (by way of being at the grammar) for every lesson.

In a comprehensive pupils are probably streamed for maths, english and maybe science but not anything else. So French, geography, history, etc not streamed. So you have a teacher trying to teach to a very mixed level class which benefits nobody.

I do agree it's harsh to write a kid off at 11yo and even as an ex grammar school student I don't think they should exist. I think there should be more funding and more streaming for comprehensives and then at least kids have the ability to move up and down sets as needed. I think this grammar stream is a way of doing this - I'm not sure about using the terminology as a buzz word though. Creates a divide. Just have a top set in every subject.

@ParentOfOne they'll have 1 or 2 weeks of open mornings soon so it'll be easier to ask them directly.

I went to an open morning at Hurlingham last year and was shown around by a student, there was no talk and no teacher interaction. I would recommend calling them and asking if you can get 15 min with a teacher to ask all these questions before your visit.

I asked the girl who showed us around but she wasn't certain of the answers.

Great school though, I really loved it on my visit. We are a bit out of catchment and didn't get in although ended up with our first (more local) choice so all ended ok for us.

I went to a grammar school and my kids go to an "outstanding" comp. There is more teaching to the test in the comp, but I suspect that would be the case for my old grammar school too these days, and I think it is much better that the skills needed to do well in exams are explicitly taught rather than being basic common knowledge to kids with educated parents and a mystery to the rest. But I think that in general the bright kids in the comprehensive get an education that is generally much better than I had, with the exception of language teaching, although I think that's a problem in states schools in general.

There’s a school by me that splits the cohort into three and all lessons are taught within the stream. They have effectively created three streamed schools, as the streams are taught in different buildings with different teachers.

Streaming is generally considered to be a bad idea. Setting, however most people think is a good thing.

What year group was she from? We got Y11 student at a different school and got so much information, but I had a list of questions.
Schools normally offer "the best" students for tours so I hope to get someone from "grammar stream" if I go there :))

@WonderingAR "Schools normally offer "the best" students for tours so I hope to get someone from "grammar stream" if I go there"

Why do you think that someone from the grammar stream would be the best at showing visitors round?

@CurlewKate it's just what schools do - they offer the best students they have to make the best impression. We'll see soon anyway.

@WonderingAR @CurlewKate it's just what schools do - they offer the best students they have to make the best impression. We'll see soon anyway"

The best students for doing the show round. Not necessarily from the "grammar stream" one hopes. Personally, I wouldn't want my child in a school that narrow minded.

She was approx 14 years old and from the grammar stream. She said they take a test twice per year and there is a little movement as the top 30 that year are taught grammar level. I asked her what happens if someone moves in to the grammar stream after 2/3 years and didn't have eg the second language knowledge and she didn't know the answer how they catch up. I agree that is an issue when people move sets and the curriculum is different.

I asked her about the test that she sat on Day 1 of year 7 for the streaming and she said it was a shapes based test. No math or english test and it wasn't anything like SATS.

@roses2 probably CAT test or non verbal reasoning?

Admission into the grammar stream at Y7 is based on the MidYis test https://www.thehurlinghamacademy.org.uk/grammar-stream

I had never heard of this test before.
This is the official page of the tests https://www.cem.org/midyis

It's not clear to me what tests are done to determine which students leave or join the grammar stream after Y7

@ParentOfOne thanks but no thanks :)) I prefer something based on actual subjects/SATs than on hypothetical "cognitive abilities".
Especially when I'm not aware if the school sets other students who didn't get into "grammar".

There is a school in my borough which does this. It's very sought after by the parents of the children who didn't get into the super selective (not a grammar area).

My son went to a very good state comp. and was in top set for subjects where they had sets (maths, English & PE). He's just started at the super selective for A Levels and, whilst early days, it's very different from the experience his friends from the old school are having. They are having the need to study outside of class drummed into them, whereas DS' new school is more discussion led, often by the students. It's way more collaborative and there has been no homework at all. Students are expected to do the study that's appropriate and then bring what they learn to the table the next day. It's a total culture change.Moglet44 describes it well earlier in this thread.

Yes.
And in an actual grammar school, they can set for at least some subjects eg maths. So that's likely to be a significant difference from a 'grammar stream' in a comp.

I have taught in comprehensives, independent schools and grammar schools and it sounds like pure marketing to me.

A grammar stream sounds worse than a top set to me. In a top set you are with the other students who are most able in that subject. In a top stream, presumably they just create a class of all the generally most able, but you might then have kids who are not particularly able at certain subjects.

In my grammar school we don't teach completely differently to how we would teach able sets in comprehensive schools. We still need to cover the GCSE syllabus, which takes a lot of time!

So it's a way to minimise interactions between the children of doctors and the children of single mums in council flats, basically?

Yes, I expect so. The comprehensive school my dc went to had one 'bilingual form' per year, about which they made a big song and dance. Similar motives. The middle class parents loved the idea, but it was pretty pointless (I say that as an MFL teacher!). It just meant their form tutor would be a languages teacher and they did a tiny bit of French/Spanisglh occasionally in form time.

I think it is inevitable that comps choosing to adopt a 'hard' v 'soft' grammar stream will trigger a rise in anxious strategising and covert tutoring in the run up to SATS and the Y7 'day one' grammar stream test and that, once a student is admitted to that stream, some (well resourced) parents will feel pressured to seeking tutoring in the background to keep their child in that stream. I am sceptical there is much subsequent movement and, as others say, differences in subjects, pace etc makes it difficult for a late entrant to catch-up and integrate.

Academic development is typically not smoothly linear, yet the grammar approach is based on that assumption and rewards those presenting (tutored or otherwise) with a particular type of intelligence at a particular point in time and hard bakes subsequent advantages into a group that it becomes difficult for others to break into at a later stage. I would be concerned, for example, if a 'grammarised' comp sealed off opportunity to do, say, Further Maths at A level from those gifted at maths but not at many other subjects because they were not the best all-rounders on day one of Y7.

@PerpetualOptimist "Academic development is typically not smoothly linear, yet the grammar approach is based on that assumption and rewards those presenting (tutored or otherwise) with a particular type of intelligence at a particular point in time and hard bakes subsequent advantages into a group that it becomes difficult for others to break into at a later stage."

I fully agree!
I suspect that a school which allows pupils to transition between sets, without making a big deal out of it (whereas being kicked out of the grammar stream does seem a big deal) is probably much better.

But I also understand that the parents of a child who is an all-rounder may want to prefer a grammar school or grammar stream.

Are there any grammar schools near where you live?

There are many types of grammar schools, so it can be hard to understand what "grammar streams" actually mean. In a school where all the students are exceptionally bright (top 2-5%), they tend to grasp concepts very quickly, allowing them to cover a lot of material in each lesson.

I’m familiar with one local super-selective grammar school, where the pace is extremely fast. Students begin learning two European languages and Latin from Year 7. Compared to another nearby grammar school, this one starts 5 minutes earlier and finishes 10 minutes later. They also have 50-minute lessons instead of the usual hour, which allows for six lessons a day instead of five.

If the "grammar stream" in your local school has only a few exceptionally bright students, with the rest in the top 10-15%, the class may not move at the same fast pace as the super-selective grammar and hence the top 2-3% may suffer from the slow pace. While the pace might not be as quick, having similarly high-achieving students in one class can still be good, particularly for building friendships of like-minded kids and keeping them motivated.