May backs grammar school expansion

1. Grammar schools are no longer full of working class pupils
2. What evidence do you have that Sure Start Centres weren't used by parents in deprived areas?
3. What evidence did your 'friend' have that the parents she worked with were comfortably off?
4. In 2016 the biggest predictor of academic achievement is STILL social class. What will grammar schools do to counteract this?
5. Still it's all their own fault so that's OK then.

 

You cannot tell a child of 11 that they have a lower IQ than another child because, at that age, they are still developing and some children are, perhaps, less mature at 11 than others - but that doesn't mean that they have a lower IQ or have behavioural problems etc. I was a late developer but hated to feel I was a failure in life. I'm probably still a late developer, ha ha Give them a chance. Bad behaviour is another matter and parents, perhaps, have a lot to blame for this.

 

The selection procedure takes account of age - within the year - by statistical methods. Because tests using verbal and non-verbal reasoning do not test 'knowledge' they are designed to be more a test of potential than a standard examination would be. Perhaps others with more experience of educational statistics can comment, but my understanding would be that IQ doesn't normally change over time.

 

Frank, there is a big difference between age and maturity. I was told I had a low IQ because I failed the 11 plus, but this was not the case. I've taken and passed many high level examinations in my lifetime, learned languages and taught for more than 30 years extremely successfully, but I do know that I was a very late developer both mentally and physically in my teenage years and I've met many young people who were the same. I've met many who attended Grammar Schools whilst I was at a Secondary Modern who did not achieve as much as I and many others from such schools did in life. There is a lifetime in which people can achieve anything they want if they only put their mind to it and work hard. There is a big difference between intelligence and being prepared to work all hours it takes to get what you want.

 

Not to mention the self fulfilling prophecy associated with identification within one group or another both positive and potentially negative.

 

Why does the English system always promote students at the end of each year? If a student does not do well enough then why not have them resit the year or even let them leave school?

Currently there are no consequences for students who do not want to learn, change that and the attitude to learning in the schools will also change. That seems to be the change everyone is wants?

 

Don't write children off at 11 years of age. Every child can shine in their own sphere. Nobody is a failure because we can't all do well at every subject. How many people don't discover their own genius until they are well into life? How many subjects would you like to be able to do well but simply can't - - - - yes, even if you are a teacher? I shone at my own subject and students did well in their exams, but if I had to teach maths, then they would surely have failed. Pair students sometimes to help each other instead of segregating them. Don't we pair in life? I think my doctor thinks she does when so many people go to her.

 

Grammar schools do not have to result in writing off those who don't get into them. This is a Trotsky Entryist myth peddled by Hard Left Militant Corbyn supporters, who send their children to Private, fee-paying schools, like Diane Abbott MP.

Bog Standard academies could provide a good education, smaller classes, vocational subjects and specialist help for feral students. Grammar schools would provide an environment where teachers teach and students learn. At the moment, teachers do not teach at the 100% level they do at Independent and grammar schools. They spend a lot of time on crowd control and behaviour management and most students are held back by the feral students amongst them. Personally, I'd like to see the vast majority of students go to a grammar school or similar, where an exam has to be sat to get in, a strict behaviour and mobile phone exclusion contract is signed by parents and enforced and feral students, who damage many other students' education are excluded into their own special(it's) schools.

 

In the unlikely event of a large scale roll out of selective schools nationally, there is no indication yet that the old 11plus is going to be reintroduced on top of KS2 SATS. It's just been a kneej erk reaction.
Teresa May is just flying a kite to gauge the reaction of the public.
They are stuck with the Gove legacy and they need to appear to have some answers.
They took their eye off the game and refused to admit that their policies were unpopular resulting in a significant shortage of teachers.
Nicky Morgan had no plans, no stratrgy, no policies. No one who spoke to her either in Parliament or in the Press got anything but the repeated stock response that things were better than ever and schools were improving.
That was not true.
Now they have to cover up the cover up by creating a distraction.
Let's face facts, top UK universities need overseas students for the high fees. Fewer UK students will be able to afford university.
Grammar schools in their new format are only going to pay their way if they attract funding.
How will they do this? The public is becoming increasingly disenchanted with rapid academisation and free schools have flopped. That money is gone.
where is the money coming from? Where's the return on investment?
Only the exam boards stand to gain by adding more testing materials to their inventory of compulsory edugoods for sale.

 

Perhaps we keep some students are kept at school too long. Perhaps, for some, it would be better if they entered the work place at 14, but continued their education as part of it.

 

So,having read the latest future policies leaked as to how a limited number of grammar schools may be set up in disadvantaged areas ,my question is, is anyone taking seriously what Toby Young says about letting Free schools select 25% of their intake.? The man admits running a school was a lot harder than he thought it would be !! and stood down from his position in a Free school chain.He spouts right wing drivel.

 

Toby Young's rapid getting back up on his feet and wiping the custard pie from his face whilst proclaiming "that was meant to happen" is classic of narcissistic types. He was another of Gove's boys who appeared to repent when he saw the writing on the wall and got out before he was pushed. Impressively wily.
Having painted themselves into a corner by alienating the majority of the people who have to implement the latest policy, the Government have to make a tiny portion of the profession attractive, in order to appear on top of things. It's a very cheap consolation prize.

 

I can't quite believe that we have reverted to the idea that teachers are the the authoritarian sanction wielding ogres and "good students" sit and absorb information presented to them.

Sometimes I despair ... must be getting old... seen it all before

Any comments on this?

https://community.tes.com/threads/i...ate-education-should-we.743342/#post-11794016

 

They never were.

 

I know that and you know that but the myth of 'social mobility' seems to persist!

 

Funny that. When I worked in grammar schools, it's true that there were lots of Hyacinths, Anna-Roses and Parker-Wallaces. But about a third were very much working class pupils. Free School meals ran at about 15% and a lot of pupils came from local primaries.

I do think though that the intake for grammars needs to change to ensure this social mobility thing is addressed. Grammars should be set-up in poorer areas and should be selective from those communities, and the priority should be places for pupils who went to local primary schools. I don't agree with grammars being able to take pupils from 30 miles away, and pupils who are coached should be automatically excluded.

 

I know academies which bus kids in from almost that far even though there are several other schools nearby.

 

This will date me, but I was actually doing my teaching practice (in a comprehensive school) when this song was in the charts. One lesson my Year 10s (not what they were called then, of course) sang it to me as I walked into the room.

I replied that the double negative in the verse rather suggested the opposite...

 

Ismay be a myth from the lower middle to Upper classes unless you marry royalty but does that make social mobility a bad goal? Perhaps we should just all know our place and stay there?