1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Grammar School in hot water

Discussion in 'Education news' started by blazer, Aug 29, 2017.

  1. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    They could/would/should but clearly don't so loopholes will be exploited.

    If it is illegal what will be done? Will schools be prosecuted for former breaches?

    Edit - what is the point in legislating but not monitoring and taking action? It appears that the regulators have taken their eye off the ball and themselves should be investigated, they have one job... to regulate and they are clearly unable to fulfil that brief.
     
    drek, Pallas and grumpydogwoman like this.
  2. saluki

    saluki Established commenter

    Ofsted has always looked at retention figures in FE. I didn't realise that schools were judged by more lenient standards.
     
  3. MonMothma

    MonMothma Established commenter

    Indeed.
     
  4. phlogiston

    phlogiston Lead commenter

    A few years ago, I was led to believe that pupil retention in post 16 was a key part of funding. This may have been back in Labour Government times.
     
  5. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    In school post 16 funding is/was retention based but of course schools can keep the students registered until the funding release date after which they can eject them, not the best timing for the students to pick up elsewhere... this is linked to what that parent was telling me about.

    Some schools would enrol anyone breathing to up the 6th form roll to this end.

    A scandalous, fraudulent scam if it still goes on, which I suspect it does.
     
    palmtree100 likes this.
  6. grumpydogwoman

    grumpydogwoman Star commenter

    I know I did some support at an FE College and everyone knew you had to tolerate them until the data-collection date. After which they could be thrown under the bus.

    And believe me, the Hair and Beauty Level 1 group who hadn't got their GCSEs were definitely eminently throwable.
     
    Shedman and saluki like this.
  7. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Indeed. Now however as I mentioned earlier in the thread we are faced with a higher school leaving age, so what is to be done with those students? (Even if tempting for your level 1 hair and beauty students I'm discounting the bus option.)

    Edit - in any case just because it happened does not make it right, nor does it justify getting rid of a C AS/mock grade student in year 12 in my view. That damages their future options and potential contribution to society as well as potential earnings, both short and longer term.
     
  8. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    What exactly do regulators regulate if not the potential for such actions?
     
  9. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Just to add... what it does do is make teachers/schools more openly complicit with artificially representing youth unemployment figures especially in reference to those who fall foul of the "bus".
     
  10. saluki

    saluki Established commenter

    We do not count our students until roughly the end of October - 6 weeks into term. We try to eliminate 'bus' students before then. If they're drinking vodka in lessons during the first week of October the situation is not going to improve by February. The 'bus' is the best option.
    Unfortunately, we exclude these students and then in November we recruit a raft of students who have 'left' other colleges. We are stuck with them and have to do everything possible to make them attend lessons, achieve their qualifications and exhibit good behaviour. No-one bothers too much about retention rates for teachers under these circumstances.
    It is compulsory for those who drop out of education to drop back in again. I believe that the local education authority identifies these students and despatches them to the local college. They have to take English and Maths if they do not have the qualifications and things like 'engagement' courses. They have to do things like writing their c.v. in which they can demonstrate to a future employer what an asset they will be. I have taught students who have 'dropped out' and those who have been chucked off their main course.
    FE could be a good alternative for these snowflakes from the grammar school. A levels are on offer and the culture change will do them a world of good. They will even get the opportunity to mix with level 1 hairdressers. They can spend the next 9 months working hard and reflecting upon wasted opportunities.
     
  11. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Does no teaching go on in the first 6 weeks? Don't they miss anything? Would that not affect their grades elsewhere? What about a November start, have they not missed 3 months of lessons from effectively a 10 month academic year? Do you then have to provide catch up lessons for the little darlings? How about keeping your own bus students and working with their needs and avoiding having to to recruit other institutions bus students?

    I despair I really do. Surely those who recruit to post 16 should be utilising a, filter not just the bums on seats for funding to justify their own jobs method.
     
  12. saluki

    saluki Established commenter

    Yes we should keep students who drink vodka in lessons and racially abuse teachers.
    No we don't do any teaching at all, ever. We just sit around filing our nails all day.
    My academic year runs from September to June with a week off in October, 3 weeks at Christmas, a week in February and 3 weeks at Easter. Plus vocational students have about 3 weeks off for work experience during that time.
    needabreak, you needabreak from school teaching. Come along to FE and meet the 40% of students who have been let down by the school system for 12 years of their lives. The government says that these young people should attend education. The schools usually chuck them out at age 16. Many have chaotic home backgrounds and no parental support. We pick up the pieces, in between filing our nails. We have spent the last 3 weeks filling in thousands and thousands of enrollment forms, administering diagnostic tests and other such gumph, trying to get the right student on to the right course. No such thing as 6 weeks holiday in FE.
    I bet I find my first undiagnosed dyslexic student within the next three weeks - who has spent 12 years being told he was thick because no-one noticed that he was dyslexic.
     
  13. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Clearly you misunderstand my view. I was not in any way berating the work of the FE sector, I was saying that if we are to keep post 16's in education in school we should be taking responsibility for them and not shunting them about in the middle of a course further disturbing their sometimes already disturbed lives.

    Talking of life, since you appear to be concerned with my career... I have had a life before teaching and also have one now. I have considered changing my "tag" on here but decided not to as it is a reflection on a period of time where it was appropriate and it is still very much representative of many of my colleagues.
     
  14. binaryhex

    binaryhex Established commenter

  15. binaryhex

    binaryhex Established commenter

    Last edited: Sep 6, 2017
  16. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

  17. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    The ability to leave one school "under a cloud" and work in another should be investigated. Either someone is guilty so should be dealt with or innocent so should be exonerated, it's gone on for far too long and contributes to the ridiculous levels of turnover in schools.
     
  18. inceywincey

    inceywincey Occasional commenter

    I missed this news. Our local grammar is ruthless with pupils who miss their targets at the end of Y12. I know why they do it - and say it is in the best interests of the pupil, but if you suddenly have nowhere to go that is not in the child's best interests and the school seems to feel no responsibility having educated them for 6 years.
    I know several children dumped this way - the local colleges are full by August and the other local grammars are frankly rude if you dare to contact them about a transfer.
    My friend's son was asked to leave. He had been made to do maths instead of geography because of his GCSE grades and failed. His other grades weren't great. Fortunately for him his family were moving to a comprehensive area, so the whole family moved instead of part staying so he could finish at the grammar. He went straight into Y13, took his geography in a year along with his other subjects. He got good grades including an A and got into a good university on the same course as a friend who continued at the grammar. He was lucky he had an option, some of his peers have really struggled and the grammar's standard answer is: 'it's not our problem'
     
  19. blazer

    blazer Star commenter

  20. binaryhex

    binaryhex Established commenter

    "Wakey wakey Governors. Where are you?"

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/sep/12/st-olaves-chair-of-governors-resigns

    Ah, now we know. It is the right decision of course.

    They should not have broken the law by allowing year 12 students to be excluded. They should have ensured the Head put in measures to support these youngsters, not throw them out like garbage. They failed students not just this year but in many previous years. We now all await the inevitable resignation of the Head, who failed probably more the Governors, because he was more interested in league tables than educating youngsters. If he won't resign he should be sacked. How many students' lives has he ruined by not following the law?
     
    Missbubbleblue likes this.

Share This Page