Government's new plan on Grammar Schools

[????]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What happened to evidence based policy? Government

> Ministers should take a Hippocratic oath - first

> do no harm. Big systematic changes should always

> be trialed and outcomes properly analysed, before

> being implemented more widely. Shake ups in health

> and education should only be made on the basis of

> good evidence that they'll be effective, otherwise

> patients and children suffer, just to ministers

> can enjoy tinkering. There is just so much random

> on the hoof policy announced, seemingly based on

> little more than the 24 hour news cycle and the

> wim of some minster or other. Where are the grown

> ups?

Agree with this. So let's ditch Socialism as the abject failure it has been proved on so many occasions as a starter :)

[miga]

So, anyone know what the actual proposal is?

[????]

No-one knows :)

In reality, I think it will allow schools that want to to go selective..many won't as all the principled left wing people will give anything selective a swerve naturally*

*exceptions being Harman, Corbyn, Seaumus Milne, Shami Chakabrati, Emily 'hate the plebs' Thornberry, Diane 'the marxist' Abbot...I could go on (AND ON) but you get my drift

[BrandNewGuy]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I didn't mention empire. Anyone who thinks that

> income inequality will be tackle by a conservative

> government, is in cloud cuckoo land.

But you wrote of "an old England long gone" and " a backward looking, nostalgic little England". To me that sounds much more spinster-on-a-bike than it does Bob and Thelma.

And where on earth did I suggest that the Tories would reduce income inequality?

I was pointing out that not all nostalgia is petty, parochial and blinkered.

[DuncanW]

Quids, why does wanting to change a system (or prevent movement in a direction you disagree with) mean you wouldn't want to get the very best for your own children from the current system in play? That's ridiculous, surely?

[miga]

Loads of the successful London schools that keep on being referred to are already selective (in different ways). They're just not called grammars.

(you're forgetting all the many Grauniad writers who were privately educated - but let's get our knickers in a twist about grammars.)

[Earl Aelfheah]

Sure, fair point. I think people are (understandably in some cases) wishing to turn the clock back to a pre-globalisation world, which is a little unrealistic.

[????]

DuncanW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Quids, why does wanting to change a system (or

> prevent movement in a direction you disagree with)

> mean you wouldn't want to get the very best for

> your own children from the current system in play?

> That's ridiculous, surely?

So legal tax avoidance a la Jimmy Carr is fine then too by that logic and everyone banged/S on about that and he doesn't put himself up on a morally superior pedestal either. There's an absolute equivalence. It's rank hypocracy from those that preach and lecture so sanctimoniously....no excuse whatsoever

[DuncanW]

It's not got much to do with tax avoidance. But I think what Jimmy Carr did was wrong and I think the law has since been changed to make it illegal. But I'm all for a bit of legal tax avoidance - I call it my pension!

[uncleglen]

Unfortunately many of these privately over-educated, verbose know nothings do not want the great unwashed having the same opportunities as they had because then they probably won't get their votes- although the brexit vote was a kick in the teeth for them.

The comprehensive system has created an underclass on benefits because bright students in some schools hide their lights under bushels for fear of bullying. Young people who are not academically inclined (or have not had support at home due to their parents being 'educated' under Labour) cannot even get fairly well-paid building labouring jobs now due to free movement- so you get clever (and I have seen this) year 9 girls who just want a baby when they leave school- or younger-like their own mothers.(educate a woman and you educate a generation- Brigham Young)

remember it was Tony Crosland, Labour , educated at Charterhouse- (so what the feck did he know?) who started the wholesale destruction of grammar schools and the reliance we now have on educated people from the developing world to fill specialist posts- thereby depriving the developing world of its brightest!

[LondonMix]

uncleglen- grammars as they currently operate in the UK result in less social mobility and pupils in areas with grammar schools, do less well in comprehensives than equally able pupils studying in areas without grammars. These are facts. Lifting the masses out of their current condition isn't facilitated by grammars and this is well understood. Charities whose sole purpose is to research and advocate for fair education policies that help social mobility (like the Sutton Trust) understand these issues in a way that an individual's anecdotal experience cannot.

I get that we are now in a post-facts era and no one wants to hear about research and evidence etc. Let's see where that approach gets us and hopefully the pendulum will swing back the other way to evidence based policy

[Earl Aelfheah]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loads of the successful London schools that keep

> on being referred to are already selective (in

> different ways). They're just not called

> grammars.

>

> (you're forgetting all the many Grauniad writers

> who were privately educated - but let's get our

> knickers in a twist about grammars.)

Private education is of course a different issue (as its not something that the state pays for).

[Earl Aelfheah]

This is interesting: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jan/19/grammar-schools-lose-top-spots-after-league-table-shakeup

It would be even more interesting to see how independent schools performed on the same measure (how much schools advance their pupils? grades)

[Earl Aelfheah]

So I see that May is pushing ahead with creating selective Grammar schools, despite all the evidence showing that they lead to poorer outcomes for the vast majority of children. Depressing

[Jenny1]

I don't think she's particularly interested in achieving anything, just consolidating her 'brand'.

[uncleglen]

No-one has systematically criticised Germany for enabling the brightest students to achieve their best, or for enabling others to receive vocational education which is exactly what we had in the UK before the lefty idiot Crosland had his way.

http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/germanschools.html

As someone from a working class background who went to grammar school in a very deprived area, and as someone who has spent the last 20 years teaching in inadequate 'educational' establishments in Inner London I wholly support the creation of many more grammar schools because at the moment only people who can afford to move to Chislehurst and have private tutors can get into one.

Someone should ask the arch-hypocrites Harriet Harman and Jack Dromey what THEY think of grammar schools, and also ask Diane Abbott what kind of socialist she thinks she is

[steveo]

Shami Chakrabarti loves Dulwich.

Especially its college

[Earl Aelfheah]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No-one has systematically criticised Germany for

> enabling the brightest students to achieve their

> best, or for enabling others to receive vocational

> education which is exactly what we had in the UK

> before the lefty idiot Crosland had his way.

> http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/germanschools.ht

> ml

>

> As someone from a working class background who

> went to grammar school in a very deprived area,

> and as someone who has spent the last 20 years

> teaching in inadequate 'educational'

> establishments in Inner London I wholly support

> the creation of many more grammar schools because

> at the moment only people who can afford to move

> to Chislehurst and have private tutors can get

> into one.

> Someone should ask the arch-hypocrites Harriet

> Harman and Jack Dromey what THEY think of grammar

> schools, and also ask Diane Abbott what kind of

> socialist she thinks she is

And there is the problem - policy based on anecdote instead of evidence. Grammars will mean far fewer opportunities for kids from less affluent backgrounds. But it was good for you and it was good for May so it must be a good idea right?

[Nigello]

I am really uncomfortable with faith schools being in the mix here. If a religion/way of life is important to you, make sure your children get to know about it at home and in the wider community but not at a state-funded school.

The nauseating altar-crawling that some parents put themselves through to pretend to be a believer to get a child into a certain faith school goes against the ideas of honesty and humility that religions profess.

Ditch the GCSE/A-levels, go for a nationwide (including Scotland) form of examination that includes vocational and practical aspects/options and let students do BAs/BScs in two rather than three years.

[Earl Aelfheah]

It's absolutely outrageous that schools which are in receipt of state funding should be allowed to bar children from entry on the basis of their parents superstitions.