People against Grammar Schools Watch

chronic_fatigue
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#201
Report 8 years ago
#201
(Original post by Maker)
I have never been to a grammar school. Those that do must be really feeble because they need special coddling to get through exams while the rest of us just got on with it in a comp.

I think people who support grammars are lilly livered swots who can't take the rough and tumble of the real world.
I started a grammar school for sixth form and I have just finished my first year. I went to two different comps before and I have to agree with what you said. The teachers are no help but I have learnt to work without my teachers holding my hand into the exam room after going to comprehensive schools. The grammar school kids that have been there for 5 years and private school kids who started the sixth form have no idea of what it is like to work with people of different abilities and don't know what the real world is like. I am so glad I have had experience of both though.
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#202
Report 8 years ago
#202
(Original post by yawn)
The latest statistics that were obtainable under the Freedom of Information Act show that Year 7 bums on seats in September 2009 following appeals panels comprised 32% of the cohort. It has slowly and insidiously been creeping up over the last few years.
So have the average grades of the whole of kent, according to the stats a guy provided earlier
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#203
Report 8 years ago
#203
(Original post by Maker)
I have never been to a grammar school. Those that do must be really feeble because they need special coddling to get through exams while the rest of us just got on with it in a comp.
Wanting to learn in an environment without people getting stabbed is 'coddling'?

(Original post by Maker)
I think people who support grammars are lilly livered swots who can't take the rough and tumble of the real world.
I think that sentence just proved why grammars are ideal, if people like you fill comprehensives/secondary moderns.
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#204
Report 8 years ago
#204
(Original post by jammythedodger)
Actually your right... just as you said this I realised I made a huge mistake in typing the results into my spreadsheet :p:
lol thats ok

although its true what yawn said about sixth forms, you do get dumber ex-comprehensive/secondary modern pupils studying vocational subjects, being told to go to uni. As they went to a grammar sixth form they think they are very intelligent and then go to greenwich, graduate with 25k debt and work in mcdonalds... i actually pity them that nobody gave them good advice.
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#205
Report 8 years ago
#205
(Original post by chronic_fatigue)
I started a grammar school for sixth form and I have just finished my first year. I went to two different comps before and I have to agree with what you said. The teachers are no help but I have learnt to work without my teachers holding my hand into the exam room after going to comprehensive schools. The grammar school kids that have been there for 5 years and private school kids who started the sixth form have no idea of what it is like to work with people of different abilities and don't know what the real world is like. I am so glad I have had experience of both though.
People keep mentioning this 'real world'.....

So because the majority of the country are morons who love big brother, get drunk out of their faces and have kids asap, that makes it 'real life' and anyone who doesnt do that is weird?

Just because something is 'popular' doesn't make it morally correct....
0
quote
reply
Gremlins
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#206
Report 8 years ago
#206
(Original post by billydisco)
So because the majority of the country are morons who love big brother, get drunk out of their faces and have kids asap, that makes it 'real life' and anyone who doesnt do that is weird?.
...

What planet do you live on?
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#207
Report 8 years ago
#207
(Original post by chronic_fatigue)
The grammar school kids that have been there for 5 years and private school kids who started the sixth form have no idea of what it is like to work with people of different abilities
Yes exactly! Its not as if they ever come into contact with these 'plebs' in the supermarket when shopping, or when they go out (because every grammar pupil has a sign on their head so other grammar pupils can spot them and avoid the plebs), so i get what you mean grammar and private pupils dont even know what a 'normal' person looks like!!!

(Original post by chronic_fatigue)
and don't know what the real world is like. I am so glad I have had experience of both though.
Oh im sorry, i opted out of witnessing what it's like to see your friends stabbed in a London comprehensive. I guess that was silly of me, as i could have learnt a lot about 'life'.....
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#208
Report 8 years ago
#208
(Original post by Gremlins)
...

What planet do you live on?
Oh sorry, the UK is secretly a lovely place where flowers blossom, you can walk upto any black person in hackney and ask them where the nearest bank is to deposit your 10,000 in cash and the north-east of england does not have any sort of teenage pregnancy problem whatsoever!

It's not as if the sun 'newspaper' is the #1 in the UK is it?? :rolleyes:
0
quote
reply
yawn
Badges: 13
#209
Report 8 years ago
#209
(Original post by billydisco)
So have the average grades of the whole of kent, according to the stats a guy provided earlier
They would need to. They only just manage to do better than the national average because of the results of the grammars bringing up the average. Bear in mind though that Kent has both more failing schools and lower results than their statistical neighbours.

A previous Kent Director of Education was asked by me whether the existence of academically selective schools affected the poor performance of Kent's primaries at KS2. He agreed that they did because there was more emphasis on preparing for the Kent Test (11+) at the expense of SAT's preparation. Of course, it is always the ones who won't pass the 11+ that suffer the most, because their SAT's results are poor too, due to neglect.
quote
reply
yawn
Badges: 13
#210
Report 8 years ago
#210
(Original post by billydisco)
lol thats ok

although its true what yawn said about sixth forms, you do get dumber ex-comprehensive/secondary modern pupils studying vocational subjects, being told to go to uni. As they went to a grammar sixth form they think they are very intelligent and then go to greenwich, graduate with 25k debt and work in mcdonalds... i actually pity them that nobody gave them good advice.
It's the expectations that the heads of grammar sixth forms give them. These schools have no other interest in taking these kids apart from the funding that follows them.

It's both exploitative and cynical. The students would be far better off staying where they are and entering their own sixth form studying subjects that would get them into decent universities, because many of them are more intelligent that their peers who went to grammars at 11.

As I said, with the exception of the highly selective grammar schools, and there's less than a handful in Kent, sixth forms in academically selective schools are wide ability and should have the grammar designation removed.
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#211
Report 8 years ago
#211
(Original post by yawn)
It's both exploitative and cynical. The students would be far better off staying where they are and entering their own sixth form studying subjects that would get them into decent universities, because many of them are more intelligent that their peers who went to grammars at 11.
Without picking straws, i would say out of the 10 ex-comprehensive students who joined, the one who was very clever passed the 11+ but didn't go to a grammar and the other 9 weren't that bright. Out of the year of 100+, the ones on the sixth form who werent as 'academic' as much as the others was due to social changes in their circumstances.

In other words, the very clever 11 year olds were born into families where education was not supported and they ended up being lead astray by local friends who did not go to a grammar school.

The moral of the story is that its not just school which plays a part in how you grow up, but also your family background. You cant really change the latter.
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#212
Report 8 years ago
#212
(Original post by yawn)
They would need to. They only just manage to do better than the national average because of the results of the grammars bringing up the average. Bear in mind though that Kent has both more failing schools and lower results than their statistical neighbours.
Yes but that's expected Yawn.

Buckinghamshire admits what, 14% into Grammar schools? Lets assume it does... i know its less than Kent's 25%.

So children who are in the 15th percentile, in Bucks would not attend a Grammar school, but in Kent everyone up until the 26th percentile would go to a grammar- therefore Kent Grammars have 'worse' results than other county's Grammars because they admit less intelligent pupils from the 25th percentile.

Likewise, i've seen you state on here how education in Kent is worse....... but only by looking at the number of schools which are not obtaining 5 A*-C grades. This can also be explained due to the 25% proportion who study at Grammars in Kent. It means that whereas in Bucks there are pupils from the 15th percentile studying in the Secondary Moderns, the brightest in the Kent comprehensives are from the 26th percentile..... so generally speaking- the Kent comprehensives will have a much lower calibre of students.

You can PROPERLY check the education quality of kent by looking at the whole county's student population (as someone did above) and Kent has an overall better average for whatever type of student.
0
quote
reply
yawn
Badges: 13
#213
Report 8 years ago
#213
(Original post by Lord Hysteria)
I thought an appeal body had to be independent?
Schools that admissions authorities in their own right pick their own appeal panels. I have seen schools that, at offers day in March were greatly undersubscribed, exceed their PAN's (published admission numbers) in the September. The school will tell the appeals panel how many extra children they can admit...:rolleyes:

With respect, are you trying to say there has been a rise in appeal errors?
The appeals panels decisions cannot be appealed against. All that the parent can do is refer that decision to the Ombudsman who will investigate, but can only make recommendations and not overturn the Appeals decision.

What I am saying is that it is questionable whether Appeals panels (particularly in grammar schools where officially, only 25% of those taking the test can be assessed as satisfying the selection process) are 'independent' in view of my response to your first quote.

Such is the concern of Admissions Forums, that the whole independence question is under scrutiny.

You see, it is of no consequence if children are getting brighter each year because the selective system is not criterion referenced but norm referenced, ie the pass rate has to take into account the standard of that year's cohort because it's all about having sufficient bums for the seats available.

Unfortunately, in Kent we have areas of great deprivation so consequently you have more children in West Kent from advantageous socio-economic backgrounds in comparison to children in East Kent. When the LA are determining who will pass the test they have to take account of the more vociferious and ambititious parents in the west of the county...consequently that 25% assessed as of selective system standard will comprise something like 45% from west Kent and only 20% from east Kent, the rest coming from north and south Kent. You can appreciate then that in those disadvantaged areas, although there are sufficient places, there is a dearth of 'passers.' In order to fill those schools to capacity (and sometimes beyond capacity) those that have failed the 11+ will be admitted on appeal.

This is the reason why there are more children going to grammar schools, despite no increase in the amount of 'passers.'

It's enlarging the grammars by stealth.
quote
reply
Maker
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#214
Report 8 years ago
#214
(Original post by billydisco)
Wanting to learn in an environment without people getting stabbed is 'coddling'?


I think that sentence just proved why grammars are ideal, if people like you fill comprehensives/secondary moderns.
If you are lame enough to get stabbed, it means you shouldn't pass on your genes.

Grammar school kids are soft as a limp jellyfish. We nicked their milk in halls and they were too scared to complain!
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#215
Report 8 years ago
#215
(Original post by Maker)
If you are lame enough to get stabbed, it means you shouldn't pass on your genes.
So sitting in a classroom and suddenly having a knife through your neck means that you're lame?

What about if a boxer got into the ring and then pulled out a gun and shot the other boxer. Does this suddenly make him 'harder' because he killed the guy with a gun?

My point is that you're talking out of your backside with regards to survival of the fittest.....

Your friend who stabbed the 'lame' person would probably, two weeks later, get run over and killed 10 yards away from a pedestrian crossing
0
quote
reply
Planar
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#216
Report 8 years ago
#216
I'm from Northern Ireland, where voters were right-wing enough to keep the grammar system(they say it will be phased out very soon, but they said that when my mum was in school).
It recognizes that some people are just more intelligent than others. Academically, at least.
0
quote
reply
yawn
Badges: 13
#217
Report 8 years ago
#217
(Original post by billydisco)
Yes but that's expected Yawn.

Buckinghamshire admits what, 14% into Grammar schools? Lets assume it does... i know its less than Kent's 25%.
And because Bucks admits less of the cohort into the lesser number of grammars they have, the results of the non-selective schools are better than the results of the non-selective schools in Kent?

So children who are in the 15th percentile, in Bucks would not attend a Grammar school, but in Kent everyone up until the 26th percentile would go to a grammar- therefore Kent Grammars have 'worse' results than other county's Grammars because they admit less intelligent pupils from the 25th percentile.
I think you need to appreciate that Bucks is not a statistical neighbour of Kent's so their school set up cannot be compared to Kent.[/quote]

You admit then that the reason for the better results in grammars generally is down to one thing only...intake, intake, intake? Of course the results are better in grammars because the overwhelming majority of pupils are taken from between the 10th and 30th centiles. However, if one compares the results on a like-for-like basis with the top stream of a truly comprehensive school that has pupils from the same centiles, the results of grammars are no better, and apart from the borderline pupils, are worse for the 98th and above centile.

I do have to correct you on one misconception you have about Kent. At the meeting of KCC with community partners on 21st April this year, the Kent officer responsible for secondary transfers said "There is no right to a grammar school place if you pass the Kent test." And of the 4% (618 pupils) not allocated one of their four preferred schools 500 were non-selective and 118 had passed the Kent test.

Likewise, i've seen you state on here how education in Kent is worse....... but only by looking at the number of schools which are not obtaining 5 A*-C grades.
Since that is the benchmark, that is all we can assess on, as does the Dept. of Education when it issues notices to schools that they are failing.

This can also be explained due to the 25% proportion who study at Grammars in Kent. It means that whereas in Bucks there are pupils from the 15th percentile studying in the Secondary Moderns, the brightest in the Kent comprehensives are from the 26th percentile..... so generally speaking- the Kent comprehensives will have a much lower calibre of students.
Bucks is different to Kent inasmuch as they have no secondary moderns. Their comprehensive schools are more true to the 'all ability' meaning of comps. Conversely, because Kent grammars take up to the top 31% ability range, there exists less than a handful of schools that are 'all ability'...overwhelming they are secondary moderns because they don't have pupils from withint the top quartile. Those that do are populated by children of parents who are ethically opposed to grammars, and even if their child were to take the 11+ and pass with flying colours, they wouldn't express a preference for a selective school on the SCAF.

You can PROPERLY check the education quality of kent by looking at the whole county's student population (as someone did above) and Kent has an overall better average for whatever type of student.
You can only check properly when you have a complete breakdown of the academic abilities of the school population...and then compare it with the entire secondary school population, taking into account that very few grammars have near to a 100% pass rate considering the selective nature of their intake. If the top comp in England can achieve a 100% pass rate with an intake of 25% from top quartile, 50% from median quartiles and 25% for 25th centile, then a grammar with 100% student population from the top quartile should find it very easy to achieve the same.

Those stats that show that result are flawed because they don't take into account the fact that Kent is the only Authority in England which is wholly selective.

Another interesting observation: Because of Kent's poor performance at KS2, there is good progress made in Kent's secondaries between KS2 and KS3. It's a 'catch-up' process. However, Kent consistently disappoints by it's failure to maintain that progress in its grammars between KS3 and KS4 (GCSE) Generally - year-on-year - it fares worst amongst it's statistical neighbours with the exception of Worcestershire.

We both know, Billy, that we will never get the other to agree with our attitude towards Grammar schools. They are not only socially incohesive, but also are no more successful with their brightest students than students with comparable ability at comprehensives...but people will continue to believe the myths surrounding them because they've got nice uniforms and traditions....can't be any other reason, because they don't exist under close scrutiny.
quote
reply
yawn
Badges: 13
#218
Report 8 years ago
#218
(Original post by billydisco)
Without picking straws, i would say out of the 10 ex-comprehensive students who joined, the one who was very clever passed the 11+ but didn't go to a grammar and the other 9 weren't that bright. Out of the year of 100+, the ones on the sixth form who werent as 'academic' as much as the others was due to social changes in their circumstances.

In other words, the very clever 11 year olds were born into families where education was not supported and they ended up being lead astray by local friends who did not go to a grammar school.

The moral of the story is that its not just school which plays a part in how you grow up, but also your family background. You cant really change the latter.
Anecdotal evidence is not considered as reliable evidence. All I can say is that you must have come from a socio-economically deprived background because I don't recognise the scenario you paint. Maybe that's a factor in your attitude. It's sad that many sections of society are only interested in protecting that which suits themselves. We really need to move to an inclusive society without self-obsession, where all are valued and esteemed because of their humanity rather than ill-conceived perceptions about them. :confused:

Apologies for getting on my soap-box...again.
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#219
Report 8 years ago
#219
(Original post by yawn)
If the top comp in England can achieve a 100% pass rate with an intake of 25% from top quartile, 50% from median quartiles and 25% for 25th centile, then a grammar with 100% student population from the top quartile should find it very easy to achieve the same.
Look at the average house price and the type of pupils attending that comprehensive. I think you'll find the house price is sky high and the type of pupils are more middle class than the grammar schools.

Put it this way, if i have no money and my child is very bright, do I have more chance of moving to a catchment area of a good comprehensive school or my child passing the 11+?

How many lower class pupils from thanet would be able to attend a VERY good comprehensive if the grammar schools there did not exist? They would be completely priced out.
0
quote
reply
billydisco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#220
Report 8 years ago
#220
(Original post by yawn)
All I can say is that you must have come from a socio-economically deprived background because I don't recognise the scenario you paint. Maybe that's a factor in your attitude.
Yes i did, which is why Grammar schools are amazing. I have witnessed first hand many people (myself included) who have been born to single parent families, on benefits who have gone to the top 20 universities because of grammar schools.

As you say, Kent is the only fully-selective county. In Kent there are areas of VERY high deprivation (Thanet for example) and if you were to close the Grammar schools you would be denying many lower class bright children the education they would have got. They wont be going to a private school, they will be going to the local comprehensive. The good Grammar school teachers will flock to newly-opened private schools benefiting from the extra demand of ex-Grammar middle class parents wishing to avoid the comprehensive system.

If you want social mobility, you cannot close Grammar schools. If you want to improve the results of comprehensives/secondary moderns, i would concentrate more on toughening up the discipline.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you like exams?

Yes (132)
18.38%
No (436)
60.72%
Not really bothered about them (150)
20.89%

Watched Threads

View All