First new grammar schools should be built in poorest areas, report suggests

The Daily Mail is reporting that a report has suggested that the first wave of new grammar schools should be built in the poorest areas to benefit the most disadvantaged pupils.

The first wave of new grammar schools should be built in the poorest areas and those with the worst school results to kick-start social mobility, a report argues today.

This would help boost the life chances of children from deprived backgrounds, according to the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ).

The think-tank also says the new generation of grammar schools – planned by Theresa May – should be required to ‘scout’ for academic potential among children from poor families who, it says, have the ‘odds heavily stacked against them’.

The report points out that children living in the most disadvantaged parts of the country are 27 times more likely to go to an inadequate school than ones living in the richest. Grammars could help break this ‘unacceptable cycle of disadvantage’.

The report says: ‘It is high time that children from more deprived families were given the same educational opportunities as those from the wealthiest in society, and a well-designed selective system could do this.’

More at: Put first new grammars in poorest areas: Call to kick-start social mobility by improving chances of children from deprived backgrounds

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below or via Twitter. ~ Meena

Don’t forget you can sign up to receive our daily email bulletin (around 7am) with all the latest schools news stories. Your details will never be given to anyone else and you can unsubscribe at any stage. Just follow this link 

We now have a Facebook page - pls click to like!

 

More recent posts...

  
Primary school children pick up swear words from watching local secondary school production of We Will Rock You
Grammar schools are snubbing disabled and special needs kids, slams Labour MP
Categories: Teaching.

Comments

  1. Nairb1

    Remove the best performing pupils who are also likely to be the best motivated and best supported from home and leave the rest in sink schools, with even fewer role models for aspiration and hard work. Welcome to May’s wonderful world of opportunity for all.

  2. Just started to read CSJ report – it starts by citing a Lloyds bank press release re house prices and proximity to ‘high performing’ schools.  But, as I point out here http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2016/09/selection-by-house-price-will-be-stopped-by-selection-by-ability-says-telegraph, no amount of wealth will get a child into a selective school (and all the schools in the Lloyds survey were grammars) if the child fails the 11+ or, in the case of Beaconsfield High School which is cited in the CSJ report, the child isn’t female.

  3. 76% of England’s secondary schools are good or better.  It shouldn’t be too difficult to find one near to where parents live.  These good or better schools can’t ALL be in affluent areas.

  4. Oh dear – the CSJ report seems to be bending the evidence slightly.  It says ‘A much more recent report published by ResPublica has argued that high performing children
    from disadvantaged backgrounds, specifically, benefit from a grammar school education.’
    The ResPublica report considered Knowsley, a small, deprived LA and suggested re-introducing grammar schools was‘potentially a transformative idea.’  CSJ has presented ResPublica’s opinion as fact.
    http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2016/11/think-tank-wrong-to-think-re-introducing-grammar-schools-is-potentially-a-transformative-idea

  5. CSJ repeats the obvious finding that grammars have a smaller gap between disadvantaged pupils and advantaged ones.  That’s hardly surprising since grammar school pupils are selected for their ability.  There would, therefore, be no gap to start with.  http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2016/11/attainment-gap-between-better-off-and-poor-pupils-disappears-when-schools-select-only-the-brightest-poor

  6. AllThingsMaths

    SchoolsImprove Agree completely with the first part of this quote. But to achieve? ALL schools equally good. So NO selection

Let us know what you think...