Tories to bring back Grammar schools

I'm undecided on the subject.

I was a product of the 11 plus and was fortunate to go to a successful grammar school. I met and associated with others from very different backgrounds - mostly from richer families than mine, but some poorer (in a few cases very poor). There was a cross section.

My daughter goes to a comprehensive, a good one (from a choice of good ones), because we are fortunate to be able to live in a fairly affluent area. All her friends are from reasonably affluent, aspirational families. Through my daughter, I know and can name 8 (medical) doctors who are parents of other children plus another 5 who I don't personally know, but are also doctors. Also, 6 teachers. There are a host of other professionals, as well as people who run their own businesses.

Basically, my daughter doesn't know any underprivileged children, or any children who are not brought up in an aspirational family.

If I could be confident that those who failed at 11 would still have opportunity to prosper and move up through the system, then I think I would support grammar schools, purely because it does allow anyone from any area to succeed.

For the two examples I've given (ie me and my daughter), there are the other sides of the coins. I've little first hand knowledge of the life of those who failed the 11 plus. I went on to be successful at school and university, and had a career in a responsible, professional position. I don't know what happened to the others. Similarly, my daughter doesn't know what opportunities are (or more importantly, are not) available to other children who do not get the opportunities that she and her friends get. From talking to some of our teacher friends, it is clear that there is a big divide between some of the comprehensives. How much of this is down to the financial clout of the parents, the aspiration and expectation of the parents and therefore of their children, the ability of the children, or the performance of the school, I don't know. The views of the teachers I know (those that work in more deprived areas but themselves live in the "better" areas) appear to put it down mostly to aspiration and expectation within the home and community. If that is the case, then I am concerned that these children are being let down just as much (but in a different way) than those who used to be thrown on the scrap heap when they failed the 11 plus.

As a society, we gllorify the successful high fliers and so we should, but it is important (and maybe we should be judged on) how we help the poor and less successful ones.

No. I said that it would have a "limited effect". It would be an effect but a small one. A small number of kids would end up at the Grammar on account of tutoring who would not otherwise have made it in. A small number. Not a majority, certainly not all.

It's a shade of grey you see. The passing of the 11+ is determined largely by one thing and partly by another thing. I do hop you now understand my previous post.

This could be countered by state funded tutoring for the test.

I don't think anyone thinks performance in 11+ tests is down solely to tutoring with them but it's undoubtedly true that the more familiar you are with them the better you do - that's why wealthy parents pay for tutoring after all. Schools providing tutoring would help a bit but you'd be left with the situation where children of wealthy parents get the additional tutoring on top of the school provided tutoring.

I also suspect tutoring has a bigger impact than you think - there wouldn't be so much fuss made about it otherwise.

I don't think anyone thinks performance in 11+ tests is down solely to tutoring with them but it's undoubtedly true that the more familiar you are with them the better you do - that's why wealthy parents pay for tutoring after all. Schools providing tutoring would help a bit but you'd be left with the situation where children of wealthy parents get the additional tutoring on top of the school provided tutoring.

 

I also suspect tutoring has a bigger impact than you think - there wouldn't be so much fuss made about it otherwise.

Well that's a legitimate concern and well put if I may say so.

Perhaps a more thorough assessment is called for. Haven't kids already been through a bunch of standardised tests by 11? I forget now when they take them.

Well that's a legitimate concern and well put if I may say so.

Perhaps a more thorough assessment is called for. Haven't kids already been through a bunch of standardised tests by 11? I forget now when they take them.

SATs in year 2 and year 6.

That's what happens now. Look at the point Eater Sundae made.

Reintroducing grammar schools won't stop the problem of wealthier parents moving near to better schools go away. They'll just move closer to the better grammar school in an area.

The way to stop people moving closer to the better schools is to improve the poorer schools. This was done successfully with inner London schools, it should be done everywhere.

SATs in year 2 and year 6.

Right then. Ta. How about we use the year 6 SAT results instead of the dedicated 11+ test.

---------- Post added 15-09-2016 at 14:34 ----------

Reintroducing grammar schools won't stop the problem of wealthier parents moving near to better schools go away. They'll just move closer to the better grammar school in an area.

 

The way to stop people moving closer to the better schools is to improve the poorer schools. This was done successfully with inner London schools, it should be done everywhere.

What did they do to inner London schools that they're not doing elsewhere?

Reintroducing grammar schools won't stop the problem of wealthier parents moving near to better schools go away. They'll just move closer to the better grammar school in an area.

 

The way to stop people moving closer to the better schools is to improve the poorer schools. This was done successfully with inner London schools, it should be done everywhere.

I don't disagree. Why isn't it? What was so successful in London? Why are the Tories not replicating this around the country and instead want to bring back grammars?

Reintroducing grammar schools won't stop the problem of wealthier parents moving near to better schools go away. They'll just move closer to the better grammar school in an area.

But moving closer to better grammar schools won't guarantee their children a place - entry is due to ability.

I leave how things are taught to the schools/teachers.

 

You can follow public opinion, but I believe selection at age of 11 does not increase the attainment of children in the UK, so why do it.

 

Any pupil can transfer schools, but its a big change, and not often done.

 

I remember walking to school every morning, about 1.8 miles, do kids still do that, it would be good exercise.

Bring back a transport allowance if selection comes back?

It depends on the type of streaming/selection. If we have a one off exam and those who pass go a 'good' school and those who fail are written off then I'd NEVER support that. However, if the process for selection involved discussion with the child and parents, and the choice was between an academic route or a vocation route and took into account school performance from when they started then I would be in support and I'd say that would benefit those less academic as much if not more so than those who were 'bright'. It would remove the tag of being a failure if you aren't amazing at maths, allow teachers to offer a more suitable teaching style for both groups, encourage the children to exploit ALL their natural abilities including physical/practical skills as well as mental ones.

Would you be against such a system? I know this isn't whats being offered by the Tories at the moment.

What did they do to inner London schools that they're not doing elsewhere?

There were a variety of initiatives from the mid 1990s onwards to improve the performance of poor schools. Abolishing the Inner London Education Authority, focusing on the quality of management and teaching in schools and a big emphasis on improving primary schools. See Poor children in London get better grades than those outside due to improvements in the capital's schools and 'London effect' in schools due to gradual improvements not policies, says report.

Similar things have been done in Birmingham and Manchester.