|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 4, 2024 16:50:23 GMT
This seems just terrible:
"A critical three-year period between the ages of 11 and 14 has been identified as the point at which talented children from low-income backgrounds fall behind their wealthier peers at school, according to new research.
The study tracked high-ability children from the age of five, from the lowest and highest income groups, and found that they progressed at similar rates until the first years of secondary school.
But by the time the two groups sat GCSEs or equivalent exams at 16 years old, those in the wealthier group were much more likely to gain top grades than those in the low-income group, and were more likely to take A-levels."
It’s terrible that working class kids don’t get to reach their full potential. Someone should do something about it.
I know, I know....
What if we identified these talented but poor kids? - Offered them a more academic education better suited to their talents? - Tested them - at, say, age 11 where the problem seems to start - and then offered them that more academic education in a different type of school?
That would appear to solve the problem...
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jul 4, 2024 17:00:06 GMT
Oh you can't have THAT,
Shirley Williams made a career out of bulldozing such places and bussing the people entitled to attend them to sink estate bog standard secondary moderns to make sure they stayed dumbed down
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 4, 2024 17:07:02 GMT
This seems just terrible:
"A critical three-year period between the ages of 11 and 14 has been identified as the point at which talented children from low-income backgrounds fall behind their wealthier peers at school, according to new research.
The study tracked high-ability children from the age of five, from the lowest and highest income groups, and found that they progressed at similar rates until the first years of secondary school.
But by the time the two groups sat GCSEs or equivalent exams at 16 years old, those in the wealthier group were much more likely to gain top grades than those in the low-income group, and were more likely to take A-levels."
It’s terrible that working class kids don’t get to reach their full potential. Someone should do something about it. I know, I know.... What if we identified these talented but poor kids? - Offered them a more academic education better suited to their talents? - Tested them - at, say, age 11 where the problem seems to start - and then offered them that more academic education in a different type of school? That would appear to solve the problem... It doesn't though. I was an intelligent working class child and scored highly in the 11+. And I went to one of the country's highest rated grammar schools (which it still is). Indeed, many of my friends are OxBridge grads. So, Hurrah and Huzzah, yeah? But no. You see that grammar school traded on the fact that it had high exam results. And it had those because it had the brightest pupils. With the pushiest/best educated/wealthiest/most caring parents. And, if their kids were falling behind, those parents either tutored themselves or hired someone else to do it privately. Especially if the “Education” offered by the school was shit (which in my school it was, hence I was privately tutored on top). So the kids did well. And the school reaped the results of that largesse and claimed the “Superior education” for themselves. Which was bollocks as I and my contemporaries have known for years.
Meanwhile my own kids, who passed the entrance exam for my old school but chose elsewhere, did equally well with no intervention.
Take a look at a book called “Freakonomics” (great book) where it actually quantifies this exact thing.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 4, 2024 17:38:55 GMT
There are always exceptions - but as the Guardian are pointing out, Comprehensive education does the working class no favours.
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 4, 2024 18:30:02 GMT
There are always exceptions - but as the Guardian are pointing out, Comprehensive education does the working class no favours. Are there? And doesn't it?
Meanwhile real studies (and real life) show that caring parenting (or self care) is the greatest determinant.
Failing which, people who can actually teach - ie quality teachers are the best determinant.
And, as a fomer star pupil, that's where I'll throw my money every day of the week.
|
|