Father Ted wrote:
How many posters on here live in a current Grammar/Sec Mod area?
The idea that Grammars are for the "few" and Sec Mods for the "many" isn't the case any more and hasn't been for decades.
The Grammar/Sec Mod combined GCSE's results are far higher than Comprehensives. Most Comps can't get to the level of Sec Mod GCSE results. There's a Sec Mod near us that produces better results than almost all Comps in the UK except in Kent and Essex where they have selection by house price.
Listening to some politicians it's like a 1960/70s recording with the case for Comps as it was suggested way back then. It isn't like that now in Grammar Sec Mod areas.
BTW some may think this is a "posh" area but we have a Labour MP who this has reminded me I must ask what she thinks about our local secondary schools set up.
And using the "free school meals" barometer, which seems to be the current measure of "quality" for the catchment area, what proportion of those attending these schools are in need of help with lunch.
Success for most kids comes from having a stable home, parents who want them to do well, a decent school and teachers, plus, some academic ability.
In better off areas, half of this criteria is a "given" but, in poorer areas the opposite is true.
If you have decent teachers and a willing group of kids, it doesn't matter what label you attach to the school, the results will be good and this is the main point.
Grammar schools are not needed, the whole thing is a "vote catcher" for the wanabe middle classes and it has rock all to do with improving "education for all".
It sounds as though there may be some issues when this "bill" reaches the House of Lords anyway.
They are not happy that the new policy has just come out of the ether and perhaps some have seen straight through Teresa May's crude electioneering.