Social mobility and grammar schools

Arrgghh! How did that appear twice?

I've been refreshing my memory of those days. It was in Hull, where they started the Comp. system in 1969, but tried to soften the blow by creating 3 tiers ie Junior High schools at 11-13. There was chaos for a year or 2, everyone re-applying for their jobs, new Headships created etc. Some so-called GSs remained.
On top of that was Local Govt. re-organisation in 1974 when Hull became part of Humberside.
Hull had one of the highest proportions of statemented children in England.

My sister was one of the first ones in that system, Tricia.
From Thomas Stratten, she went to Thoresby junior high, then to Wyke Hall.
Four of us, twelve years difference in age, all went to same primary but different secondary schools. My brother went to Riley Tech, I went to Tranby Croft, middle sister passed 11+ to go to Kelvin, and youngest was the only one who never took 11+. She was the one who enjoyed her schooling most.

There were comps before that, wiki lists one in Wales and there was of course the controversial Rising Hill. 1960-65 f you are interested they have a website www.risinghill.co.uk/

trisher I think the Welsh comprehensive system started in about the mid-60s. Lots of the big "high" schools date from then, I think. And the setting up of the first Welsh-medium schools date from then, too. They were Comps, of course.

My own Grammar turned comprehensive in 1973, as did most others.

I attended an Anglesey Comp from 1957-1963. It had been a comp for a few years then (started in 1953 I think). It was far from being a true comp; divided into Grammar and Sec Mod 'streams', only the A stream sat 'O'levels and were 'allowed' to use the library, the A stream studied latin and had extra maths lessons with only a term each of dom science and what is now called technology. There were 4 large Comps on the island so I suppose geography/logistics had a lot to do with the decision at the time.
As long as they close all 'Free' schools and remove 'Academy' status from others, I would consider that a step in the right direction. As for opening new grammar schools, will they too be 'free'?

Where we used to live the Grammar School had begun in 1658, closed for a few years then re-opened in 1921 and did not become a comprehensive until about 1984.
It is now an Academy.
Ofsted (2012) recognised that against the very tough new inspection criteria that the school is making strong progress towards the new outstanding grade.

Strange statement, Jalima. I would think that all schools that are not outstanding must be making progress towards the new outstanding grade.

I didn't make the statement, just copied it from their website out of interest
perhaps I should have put it on as a link

As a grammar school in the olden days the school produced four very distinguished artists, which is also interesting and not at all strange imo.
Let's hope it can produce more outstanding alumni in the future.

Of course I don't mean other children should be neglected but we lived cheek by jowl with the GDR and there everything was equal, so equal it drove clever intelligent children away from learning. There was no spark where should it come from everything was so grey and grey.
If you have intelligent children then they should be encouraged. They are the best a country can have no matter what field they evenually work in. Its true that I don't know much about comprehensives but I know that those in the bottom Sets felt just as neglected.
IN our part of Germany we have grammarschools but parents are quite content to send their children to the Realschule which ends at 16. They don't want their children at grammarschool becaue those children seek their way in the world, move away to study, and often don't come back.
Many parents would rather their children stay near home and do an apprenticeship and if lucky marry someone nearby and live near their parents.
WE have had to persuade some parents to send their boy with my GDS to the grammarschool. He was conistently top of the class and is now in the right place for him and is contented.

where we live now the schools had to struggle to get out of special measures, so yes, making progress towards outstanding is worthy of note.

But I forgot, it is an Academy, so a no no.

@Margaret

I visited the old DDR twice before 1989 - it wasn't just the schools which were grey, but the whole country. Schools reflect the society of the country where they are situated. In the case of the DDR, I don't suppose the pupils had much to aspire towards. I also visited a 'Gymnasium' in the former DDR (Jena) in the 1990s. The building was still grey and I can't honestly say the pupils were grasping the opportunities they were being given, which I suspect was to do with the society in which they and their parents had been raised.

I have a lot of time for the German 'Realschulen', but the UK never had technical high schools in all areas, although this was intended in the 1944 Act.

I'll put my hard hat on here. If I had a magic wand, I'd have selection at 15 in the UK (having abolished GCSEs, which are no longer necessary) and allow pupils to decide, in consultation with parents and teachers, their pathway for the last three years of compulsory education. They would be old enough to decide and would have had a chance to try all subjects in the first years of secondary education, so would be able to make decisions based on experience. Most importantly, they wouldn't sit a flawed exam at the age of 10/11. Big all-ability comprehensives, such as the one my children attended, already do this within the same building.

@Jalima

It depends what kind of academy it is and who's sponsoring it.

@Margaret

ALL children should be encouraged, not just the bright ones.

DurhamJen I remember all those schools.Riley was one on my patch, and when our Centre left Beverley Road we moved into what had been Thoresby JHS, off Spring Bank West.
I worked in Hull 1968-90.

It depends what kind of academy it is and who's sponsoring it.
I didn't say I was in favour of it, just relating how it has changed over the years and I know nothing about it having moved away over 30 years ago. Heaven forbid that it could be like the one on the news tonight in Bradford.

Just because one poster assumes what is in another's head does not make it true (not you dd)
one can make what one thinks is an interesting observation without being partisan surely.

I did a teacher exchange in 1992- in a Realschule in Marzahn, the concrete jungle in the most Eastern part of Berlin. But really- what is the point of comparing this with the current situation in the UK. Chalk and cheese surely.

As for the size of some Comprehensives, this is a separate issue - and has nothing to do with the system of education as such.

I'll put my hard hat on here. If I had a magic wand, I'd have selection at 15 in the UK (having abolished GCSEs, which are no longer necessary) and allow pupils to decide, in consultation with parents and teachers, their pathway for the last three years of compulsory education. They would be old enough to decide and would have had a chance to try all subjects in the first years of secondary education, so would be able to make decisions based on experience
I agree
Mind you, all of my DC are doing something completely different to what they chose to do at 18.

You would know where I lived, then, Tricia.
Born Louis Street, moved back to Hymers Avenue.

I realised it was an ofsted statement, Jalima, not one made by you.
It's still a strange statement to make. As I said, all schools should be doing that.

@Jalima

That's why I think all pupils should have a general education until about 15 (as they do in Finland), because it makes it possible to switch track if people change their minds later. They won't have shut any doors. Age 10/11 is far too young to pigeon-hole pupils.

By the age of 15, most pupils know which subjects they prefer and could choose an appropriate route, even if it's not job specific. The other side of this is that there needs to be investment in restoring adult education opportunities.

I'd be with you there dd, keep comprehensives, broad education to 15 - 16 (year 11 I think) when pupils could opt for either a more academic or apprenticeship type higher education. You are right about the need to invest in restoring adult education opportunities.
We need to invest in education and training, including for adults. So many excellent nurses, teachers, doctors go into their training as mature students. Many of them have children to support. Unless you become a GP, or get an oxbridge degree that leads to law/accountancy in the city, you aren't going to earn enough to justify spending £60,000 on your degree and pgtc/sw degree.

'That's why I think all pupils should have a general education until about 15 (as they do in Finland), because it makes it possible to switch track if people change their minds later. They won't have shut any doors. Age 10/11 is far too young to pigeon-hole pupils. ,

totally agree- but this is exactly what Comprehensives offer in areas where the Grammar/Sec Mod (Comp??) went a long time ago.

There should be better linking of apprenticeships with 6th Form/A'Levels- as is the case here in Switzerland. Students can leave at 16 to do an apprenticeship- but have the option to do this combined with more academic studies. I know many here who wer glad to leave at 16 but then realised they did want to go beyond the apprenticeship and had the means to do so and go to Uni afterwards. Takes 1 or 2 years extra- but then those students are so much more motivated and have gathered great and valuable experience on the way.

I couldn't agree more! Rather than muck about with the system by opening more grammar schools and/or academies/free schools, the UK should make post 16 education its number one priority. At the moment it's a mess and it could learn much from other countries.

Does Switzerland have more factory employment than the UK?