Reintroduction of Secondary modern schools for majority of children.

More information if you are interested:
www.studyinaustralia.gov.au/global/australian-education/schools

Gracesgran in Australia pupils attend until year 12 and leave school at 17 (compulsory until 16).
Quite a high percentage of schools are Catholic schools (charging fairly low fees) and some are independent. I think there are 80% public (state) schools.
After completion of senior secondary school (Years 11 and 12) students sit for exams and receive an official certificate of qualification. The name of this certificate varies within Australia's state-based education systems but regardless of what the certificate is called, it is recognised by all Australian universities, higher education and vocational education and training institutions, as well as many institutions internationally.

But currently they chose different subjects at GCSE and A Level M0nica, and some choose BTEC, etc., and to progress to these courses you have to have achieved certain qualifications at certain levels. To me the point would be that the courses chosen should be equally funded and resourced. Would you insist everyone did the same A levels?

I think any kind of specialisation of schools during the years of compulsory education is to be deplored.

UTCs or comprehensive schools that specialise in one particular discipline, whether sport or languages or science, are going, by definition, to short change those children allocated to that school whose talents lie other than with the specialisation the school has chosen and similarly some children who would benefit will be unable to get a place because of where they live, or because the school is over subscribed.

All children should, in principal, be offered the same educational opportunities in every school while they are below school leaving age.

I have been thinking a lot about UTCs recently. I think they're an excellent idea. Theŷ say they are non-selective, but as I understand it, they can only take about six pupils from each school as their places are limited (600 is a full house at the one in our city) so how do they choose which pupils they take if not by operating a selection system?

dd thank you for the explanation about the French methods.

I agree that different routes at 14/15 could be a really good way forward; the University Technology Colleges which currently take children from 14-19 always seemed a good idea to me but I would still want all children to be able, if they are capable, to access good and relevant Further Education or Higher Education.

Could I pick everyone's brains a little more. We tend to take GCSE at around 16; do other countries do the same?

I have never been quite so hung up on study by age and, as I have said before, would rather the early exams followed a similar route to music exams. That way you be assessed for Level 1 knowledge in the subject in year 1 and so on with some children going ahead and others taking a couple of years at some points. Most children would get Level 9 by Year 9 with those who have gone ahead getting additional gifted and talented work while those struggling get additional help. As this would finish at 13 it would not be current GCSE level but would mean the pupils had a thorough grounding and then chose what to go on to - shall we call them University Technical College or stream or, University Grammar College or stream (although I am sure there must be a better names.)

Enough of my dreaming and thank you for filling in the gaps in my knowledge(so far, I shall no doubt have more questions).

Daphnedill may I just say that I've found your posts very informative and interesting! Thank you!

The only part of the french system that I've heard about (from parents) is the secondary system,especially the specialised colleges.
I gather though that teaching in the primary schools is very rigid, and aimed at encouraging the brighter pupils.
Not much provision for special needs children.
So in no way am I saying England should emulate the whole french system.

Two GC are at a comprehensive which sets pupils, though the younger one is in the 'fast track' group, now in Y8. When I was at school, we were streamed for three years and then in subject sets for Highers.

@dj

French 'collèges' are nothing like middle schools. They provide secondary education - more like the whole of KS3 and KS4 crammed into four years.

@thatbags

Unfortunately, she'll experience that throughout life.

@Gracesgran

The French system has primary schools, followed by four year 'comprehensive' secondary schools, then pupils go their separate ways to different lycées.

I don't think the school organisation is going to be changed, but the teaching methodology and curriculum organisation. The curriculum is directed from the centre. Teachers have no say about how they organise and teach their lessons. Teaching is also very teacher-directed with no differentiation for different pupils. It's like university lectures, even for the youngest.

I've been into a number of French schools and, in my opinion, the teaching is appalling, but I do think the organisation of the schools, with different routes after 15, has something to commend it.

I don't see that socialism (or even communism) has anything to do with it. I expect the unions object, because French teachers are going to have to change their methodology to something more child-centred. I don't understand the reference to secularism.

Minibags is at a comprehensive school. It has setting for Maths and English. She thinks there is a large proportion of pupils who are scornful about academic ambition and she finds that hard to deal with (though she's getting better at dealing with it, I think).

Grandmamoira, my four children have (mainly*) been educated by the state in the Scottish non-selective system.

Two are now professors at prestigious universities in London & the US. One, still in her 20's, heads up a large team in a local government authority. The youngest is a medical student.

I'd like to know how grammar schools could have enhanced their achievements.

*two of my dc had some private education when we lived in developing countries for my dh's work, but the majority of their school career has been in Scotland.

Cross-posted DD.

Pupils in comprehensive schools are not in mixed ability classes GrandmaMoira. They are in sets for academic subjects. For example, my Year 9 granddaughter is in top set for almost all subjects and the second set for one subject.. She is in a mixed ability group for some non-academic subjects. I have not come across any secondary schools that do not have setting.
Streaming was far less effective because it did not allow pupils to work to their strengths in the same way.

I taught in comprehensive schools for nearly 30 years and my younger child has just finished at one. In all that time, I never came across a school which didn't have some form of setting. Setting is similar to streaming, except that pupils are set for individual subjects, so they could (for example) be in a top set for maths, but a lower set for English. The only subjects taught in mixed ability classes were PE and some small option groups, such as music. At my children's school, even PE was set.

I know of no comprehensives with totally mixed ability classes.

As I have written before, both my children did as well as I did at a comprehensive school, even though I went to a highly selective grammar school.

When I was at school, I didn't know of one child who moved schools, because he/she was a late developer.

I have yet to see on here anyone advocating changing bad comprehensives by introducing streaming. I maybe right wing, old fashioned etc. but I still feel strongly that no child does well in a school where all classes are mixed with children from the brightest to least able. When we had grammars, the 11+ put kids into a grammar, technical school or different streams of secondary modern. The grammars. technical schools and higher streams of secondary moderns taught an academic curriculum biased towards exams and the lower groups had a more vocational education. There was opportunity to move up classes or schools. I believe this old system from the 60s worked whilst the mixed class comprehensive from the 80s and 90s did not work.
Can you ladies please enlighten me as to how mixed ability classes work and allow children to do their best as I see a lot of people here who like comprehensives and don't want a return of grammars.

Gracesgran - the big difference is that France is a Socialist, secular country. Even the Communist party is quite strong, especially in rural areas.
The Unions still have a stranglehold, so it's win on the swings , lose on the roundabouts.
Having said that, the far right are beginning to get more support.

Gracesgran, I wonder why the unions are against those ideas.
I would be for them. It sounds similar to middle school teaching in this country, although the age range is bigger.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/09/12/the-sorry-state-of-uk-politics-is-laid-bare-for-all-to-see/

Someone on here mentions throwing raw meat into the lion's cage.
Doesn't mean the same. That's not to distract people, but to pacify her own backbenchers.
However, like me, they are wondering what she is distracting us from.

Ana ... a political term ... you throw a dead cat on the table and it distracts everyone from the difficult/controversial stuff. You may bury it later.

or 'be'

I do appreciate it is now 2016 so it would eb interesting to know what did happen

Following up your comment dd on the link Tricia put on about French education. All is obviously not well there and I think the whole world is looking at education as employment makes such great changes. This was what caught my eye.

In 2015 the French government is proposing controversial educational reforms to the collége system (middle school for ages 11–15), to make it less elitist and give all pupils, whatever their background, the same educational opportunities. These involve the teaching of modern languages and history, encouraging teachers to work together to teach topics across different themes in interdisciplinary classes (the traditional French way is one teacher-one subject), reinforcing secular values and allowing schools to set part of the curriculum themselves. Teaching unions and right-wing political parties oppose the changes, and have enacted strikes against these reforms.

Interesting that they are talking about less elitism. It is surely the only way to get many more better educated citizens.