Local parents protest against the unfairness of grammar schools in Berkshire and might force them to become non-selective

Francis Gilbert's picture
 952
Berkshire parents are taking a stand against the chronic unfairness of the grammar school system. Local parents are forcing a ballot in the Reading area of Berkshire -- using legislation set up under the Labour government -- to see whether the local community actually wants grammar schools in their area. Since very few local children go to the schools, it appears that these schools will lose the ballot and be forced to lose their grammar school status. Last night it was confirmed that a group of parents in Berkshire had begun the process of forcing a vote on the future of the Reading School and the town’s other grammar, Kendrick School for girls

Today's Daily Mail presents these parents' arguments in a negative light, but even the Mail's biased reporting can't hide the fact that these parents have a very good point: the two grammar schools in their area, Reading School and Kendrick School, are both highly selective state schools which do not admit many children from the local area. Reading School, a state-boarding school and grammar school, is clearly full of children from more privileged backgrounds, with the latest data on it showing that it admits just 0.5% of pupils on Free School Meals (FSM), compared with the national average of 20% pupils on FSM. Kendrick School admits just 0.4% of pupils on FSM. Have a look at the school's websites and you'll see that they are essentially state-funded "public schools".

One way that the schools could take more control over their destinies would be to become Academies but this could mean that they'll only be able to select 10% of pupils who have a particular aptitude in a subject they specialise in; obviously, not enough selection for these highly selective schools.

Kendrick School clearly have the best "PR", publishing this leaflet urging parents to vote "No" in the vote: it has the highest Google rating on the subject. Meanwhile, the 11+ chatrooms are buzzing with chatter about the subject, which can be found here. I'm finding it difficult to find many details from the protesting parents, but will follow this up in due course.
Share on Twitter Share on Facebook

Be notified by email of each new post.





Comments

Dan W's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 16:56

How can you compare a difference in people claiming FSM and a social apartheid?


JFBizzle's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 16:58

Fiona, I come from a background of two parents who dropped out of school at 16. I'm about to go to Cambridge University in 3 months time. The comprehensive system, that the organisation you are vice-chair of promotes, is an absolute shambles. I attended one for parts of my secondary education and primary education, and I can conclusively say that they do not work. The environment provided by those unwilling to work, stops any from occurring, whilst at the same time the very brightest are held back. The only people who benefit from the comp system is those in the very middle, with the top held back, whilst the bottom are demotivated by the top and lose further ground on the top.

Grammar schools are one of the very few means of social mobility available in this country, thanks to the rapidly rising house prices around the best comprehensives, meaning that only the wealthier of society can afford to send their children there and let them achieve an acceptable education.

Your support of the removal of grammar school status of Reading and Kendrick, is a slap in the face to all those of the working class who aspire for better.

Kushal's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 18:38

but your side is basing their argument on FSM...


Tushar's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 18:50

If you use the phrase 'social apartheid' once more, I will get my school to contact you and force an agology for quite clearly inflammatory statements.


JFBizzle's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 18:50

Fiona, I come from a background of two parents who dropped out of school at 16. I’m about to go to Cambridge University in 3 months time. The comprehensive system, that the organisation you are vice-chair of promotes, is an absolute shambles. I attended one for parts of my secondary education and primary education, and I can conclusively say that they do not work. The environment provided by those unwilling to work, stops any from occurring, whilst at the same time the very brightest are held back. The only people who benefit from the comp system is those in the very middle, with the top held back, whilst the bottom are demotivated by the top and lose further ground on the top.
Grammar schools are one of the very few means of social mobility available in this country, thanks to the rapidly rising house prices around the best comprehensives, meaning that only the wealthier of society can afford to send their children there and let them achieve an acceptable education.
Your support of the removal of grammar school status of Reading and Kendrick, is a slap in the face to all those of the working class who aspire for better.

James's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 19:07

I'd just like to make a direct point to you which I don't think has been raised yet.

A selective grammar school does not only benefit those that get in but those that don't as well. I'm not sure how well this will be conveyed through test so I'll use an example.

If ten people are in a class and 8 are stronger in the field being taught than the other 2, than those two are likely to get left behind. Similarly, if 8 are less gifted in the field and 2 are more gifted than they are likely to get bored of the work and not push themselves. As a result you bring in two schools, each specialised in getting their students to achieve the best they can.

Specialisation occurs in every other environment in the world as it is proven to bring in a more productive system than if there was no specialisation. University's specialise and even classes within schools specialise by using ability sets. So why should the schools themselves not specialise?

Reppin rs's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 19:24

Fiona Millar you are a one string guitar..... you only play the same tune.
Develop your argue or gtfo

G's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:11

whats the difference between across the country and the national average?


Reading resident's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:21

you tell them! Its us the adults who are gonna be making the desision anyway!


Tom Hayes's picture
Fri, 27/05/2011 - 22:17

Ms Millar,
You are right, there does seem to be a surprisingly low number of people who receive FSM at these two schools compared to inner city schools such as the one attended by your daughter.
There is more to this than meats the eye. Firstly, as has been said before, this statistic is discrete, and doesn't actually do justice to the overall demographics of the schools, only that of one category.
I believe that most children from low income families do not apply to take the tests, and are perfectly happy with going to their local comprehensive.
'Apartheid' is a bit much to say, but you have a point there is segregation, as can be seen by which schools contribute to successful applicants to Oxbridge; private schools represent the richest of the country and they have a very large share of the places at these universities.
Schools like Reading and Kendrick provide a bridge, giving children from lower income families a better chance for a place at a top university. See the Sutton Trust figures on 'oxbridge' entrance. They are allowing people who can't afford a private education, one which is just as good.
One last note, whilst these schools aren't exclusive to the local area, they take part in helping out the local community, and more people attend these schools who live in, and close to, Reading than not.

One more last note, you should't just generalise all schools of a certain type, it would be wrong of me to suggest that comprehensive schools have low academic standards, and equally wrong to say that private schools were full of 'posh' people. Every school is different, and the education system needs to be finely tuned. My suggestion is to build more schools, this provides jobs for the construction industry, teachers, admin and maintenance staff, the new schools will be well facilitated, and children and parents have a wider range of schools to choose from.

Thank you for reading this comment, I appreciate time taken to consider my opinion, and I look forward to a reply.

Warby's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 16:51

*Fewer. Jeez


Warby's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 17:08

*If i get the grades.

Sweeping condescensions are no more valid in our argument than on the other side and only serve to undermine us.

Peter's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 17:11

I would completely agree. The comprehensive system now no longer serves people who needs it. To get rid of a grammar school would seriously impact the chances of those who cannot afford a good education.


Murph's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 17:21

well said


RS's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 18:58

Well said dude. Absolutely right. Twisting the facts to suit their bloody purpose. It is not a fair way to judge a school's intake let alone compare it to bloody apartheid!


I dont wish to say who I am's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:56

Yeah but we are the next generation, and we are actually going to the schools so we have a right.
Dont discriminate by age

Jamie's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 16:57

Alright Warby, sorry. :P


Reppin rs's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:04

Its funny cause the reading school boys are arguing well thought out and direct points, and Fiona replies with made up facts that mean nothing


Reading resident's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:19

That isnt true, fiona is makin excallant points, just you scool buys aint listening


RS's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:25

We really are listening. And we aren't just "school boys". Your condescension is ironic since we actually have better grammar and spelling than you.
It's "school boys", by the way. Not "scool buys".

Joseph's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:25

Ladies and Gentlemen, please don't feed the troll...


Reppin rs's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:28

Reading no man, scool is not a word, nor is excallant please tidy up your language, and return with some valid points.
I may actually respect you then .....

Tushar's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 21:05

us 'scool boys' have listening, and realised that her argument has no standing whatsoever. If the people getting into this school are primarily middle-class or upper-middle-class, then that is the fault of others. It has NOTHING to do with the schools themselves, and using this meaningless statistic as an argument renders it invalid.


Reading resident's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:29

yeah but havent lifed in the area for 5 years now have you. I think I get a say over you lot cause I have kids and actually know the area. My kids show me more mannars than any of you lot


Dan W's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:36

Why on Earth do you expect manners from us after the way you have stereotyped us and been rude to us? The idea that because you've lived round here a while gives you the right to respect is idiotic. Respect is a meritocratic system, you earn it and others earn yours by doing things equally of merit. If you don't like that system then tough, this is the world we live in. You need to accept that.


RS's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:39

Edited version: Yeah, but I haven't lived in the area for 5 years. I think I get a say over you lot, because I have kids and actually know the area. My kids show me more manners than any of you lot.

Try again.

Reppin rs's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:43

But didnt get into reading school, thus your anger
And i lived in the area 18 years

I dont wish to say who I am's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:54

Stop accusing us of being rude ok? Tbh we dont care about how nice your boys are.
UM and ive lived her for 9 years so i know the area more than you.

Alistair's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 21:13

PLEASE with the ignorance. I've lived in Reading for 17 years, nearly 18 - almost 6 of which, I have attended Reading School. I have a 23-year-old sister, who attended Bulmershe School, received satisfactory grades at A-level, and went on to higher education at Thames Valley University. I have a 21-year-old brother, who went to Bulmershe School, received 3 good A-level results, and went on to study at Reading University. I also have a younger sister currently at Bulmershe, and a special needs 8-year-old sister, who attends The Addington School. If anyone knows about the opportunities for education in this area, it's the members of my family.
There are two things I'd like to say:
a) Whether a child has 'manners' is down to their upbringing more than anything else;

b) Reading School is just as much a 'special needs' school as The Addington, therefore, why don't we get rid of selection for them and open it up to people who aren't disabled?! (Please note the sarcasm here).

Reading boy from east Reading's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 21:19

We are trying to be mostly nice but you are trying to stop are school from bing selective just because the local people arn't getting in. When I failed the first time, i didn't have massive moan, I just stuck my head down and worked.


Luke Barratt's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 21:29

We show you more manners than you show us.


Reading resident's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:44

What are you suggesting? Cant argew now can you cause you now theirs some truth behind what i said? An I said 'yeah, but you havent'- dont twist what i siad


Dan W's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:47

I'm sorry, I don't follow what you're trying to put forth as your argument?


RS's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:47

What truth? Just because your older does not mean you know this place more. You think you know more than someone who's lived in this area for over ten years? Whose Dad's on the council - and is, by the way, supporting us? And as for manners - do you think you have manners?


Tom's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:50

If we're going to argue about grammar schools can we argue about gramamr then too?
> "Can't not cant"
"argue not argew"
"there's not theirs"
"And not an (technically you should not begin a sentance with 'and')"
I can't be bothered to go on...

James's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 21:42

Your argument is you have kids. Therefore, no, we cannot argue about that. However, we can argue about its relevance in the argument. You may just view us as naive and arrogant school boys who live a sheltered existence only leaving the manor to get our chaperone to drive us to school in the stretch but we aren't. I for one have lived in Reading for my whole life and do not come from a privileged background. I have also spent the whole of my secondary education at Reading School and therefore am likely to have more first hand knowledge of the way it works than a parent who has had little to nothing to do with the school. I welcome any counter arguments because if I am wrong or misunderstood anything you have put forwards then I will be more than welcome to correct myself.


RS's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:50

Daniel Weeden?


Reppin rs's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 20:58

Reading resident, how do you know all the facts you read about reading school are true/correct?
How come you raised no valid points?
And why do you insult our intelligence?

Murph's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:21

so now that people have a different view to you, you want us to 'burn'. I'm sorry but your obviously not a reasonable person and don't want to listen to other peoples opinions.


Greg T's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:21

Why are you still here?


Reading School Boy.'s picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:24

no, the people at school are simply defending the school itself. we are not bigging ourselves up but simply preventing the attacks on the school. OH YEAH! YOU BUY REALLY FANCY WORDS! no. this is the education shining through. Its the teachers who have given us the confidence to use clever words, we havent had them delivered to us under silver cloches by our butler.

Sir, with the greatest of respect, you have no idea what youre talking about, and Reading school will provide the country with many successful people. You might have lived in the area. That doesnt make you the next prime minister / a doctor/ a lawyer...

I think that the people from school actually have a connection with it. Last Friday was my last day, and my whole year decided we actually really enjoyed our time there. Were a fairly good bunch of lads. Its the likes of Francis and yourself who suggest entitlement, or even that the school shouldnt exist that makes us angry.

Yes, I totally agree. shove us in a curry and off to thailand, and then your child can go to reading school. that makes perfect sense and your child will come out with straight A*s. Seriously man. Have a think about what youre saying. These 'arragant yungsters' are the countries' future. If youre so mad about us being there, why dont you quietly pack up and move house?

Peter's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:26

To assume that most people who go to grammar schools are posh seems uninformed. They are designed to help intelligent people, not rich children. My family is not *posh* and my alternative would gave been a comprehensive if I hadn't got into Reading and been able to use the advantages of a grammar school. Contrary to outside opinion, hardly anyone at the school is *posh* but got in on their own merits- like uni or a job.


JANA's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:27

At the end of the day, the reason the students at Reading School and Kendrick get such good results and have a chance to succeed in the future is not because they have rich parents. Here are some reasons;
1) They work hard. I'm in the process of doing GCSEs and i do more than 3 hours each day of revision for them, and that's not because my parents force me to., I WANT to do well.
2) There is a hard working atmosphere. In comprehensives, (I went to one before RS) people don't care about their results; it is almost a competition of who can do worst. Reading boys pride themselves on doing well academically.

The country's educational problems are not down to grammar schools not letting the less intelligent students in, they are the responsibility of comprehensive schools and the environment there.
Grammar schools are an easy scapegoat for parents whose children failed the entrance exams, but the blame for poor results should lie with comprehensives.
The teachers at Reading School, while in some cases very good and in others not so great, are not the reason the school is so successful. It is the resposibility of students to get good results.

Dan's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:28

Somewhat unnecessary. That will really help our arguement -.-


Tim's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:29

Before anybody gets too angry or upset by this discussion, please read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law before you decide to continue the argument.
It basically warns against this type of internet discussion.

An idea's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:30

The word "nazi" was used long ago we are now in uncharted territory...


Dan's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:31

Bit late- That happened sometime about 11 oclock last night


Goose's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:31

Some of the arguments people have attempted here are a load of trash...Luke I couldn't agree with you more buddy. Also, in an intellectual debate, will people like Reading Resident PLEASE learn to spell. It pains me.


lambo's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:33

Reading School and Kendrick provide an environment where intelligent and academically capable students are pushed to their limits, something that would not happen at a local comprehensive to such an extent. While the students would still be able to achieve at local comprehensives they definitely would not achieve the standards they do upon leaving Reading School or Kendrick. I contribute my academic achievements as well as my personality and values to Reading School. To quote our prospectus: "adding value and adding values".
I went to my local primary school from Year 1 - 4. I moved to a local private school for years 5 & 6 as I was not being stretched enough at my local primary and I was fortunate enough to get a full scholarship (if I had not I would have stayed at the local primary school). However, I do not feel this means I am posh or bought my way into Reading School, only that I was fortunate enough to obtain said scholarship and had parents who wanted to push me as far as possible rather than be content with me coasting along.
The whole argument that all Reading School students are posh and rich is nonsense, I know many students from poor back-grounds on EMA and I am in a minority coming from a private school (just like any other state-funded secondary school). The students are there because they are academically capable and show an aptitude to learn. If the school became a comprehensive this would not be the case and standards would fall because of that. The reason Reading School performs so well is because of the students who go there. They show a willingness and ability to learn and this would be squashed in a local comprehensive as jealous kids pick on them (much like jealous parents are currently doing to us).
If Reading School and Kendrick were to be made comprehensive, results would fall and nothing would be achieved except for a general lowering of standards across the community as students who are academically capable go to their local comprehensives and don’t achieve as highly (due to the reasons outlined above) and the school becomes a local comprehensive which won’t achieve as highly as there will not be the intake of intelligent students with a willingness to learn.

Haters gonna hate

Jamie's picture
Thu, 26/05/2011 - 14:34

Don't. It's just childish and stupid.


Pages

Add new comment

Already a member? Click here to log in before you comment. Or register with us.