Whats the difference between a comprehensive and a grammer school?
Related Topics
"Samsonknight" samsonknigh...@btopenworld.com
Is a grammer school better then a comprehensive?
Whats the difference?
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 00:11:24 +0000 (UTC), "Samsonknight" Comprehensive schools are generally non-selective modern schools open to all. Grammar schools are generally selective on ability, and so generally have a higher calibre of student(?). It has recently been shown that a grammar school education is a very good one to have in order to succeed.
"Samsonknight" samsonknigh...@btopenworld.com
Do you have to pay per term, like in private schools?
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 02:19:23 +0000 (UTC), "Samsonknight" Nope.
"Adam Atkinson" gh...@mistral.co.uk
On 03-Jan-04 01:19:40, Toby said: However, there are comprehensives which do streaming (or setting, if that's different) and I'd guess that being in the top set at a comprehensive ought to be a bit like being in a grammar school.
--
Adam Atkinson (gh...@mistral.co.uk) But what *IS* the internet? It's the largest equivalence cl*** in the reflexive transitive symmetric closure of the relationship "can be reached by an IP packet from".
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
yeah that's true, that happened at mine, I think it's common practice.
"Adam Atkinson" gh...@mistral.co.uk
On 03-Jan-04 09:04:37, Toby said: I think this varies from place to place, and perhaps over time: These things go in and out of fashion. I don't know who gets to say whether a school starts or stops doing this. Head teacher? Governors?
Divisional education officer?
--
Adam Atkinson (gh...@mistral.co.uk) When we declare an alien species to be raman, it does not mean that _they_ have p***ed a threshold of moral maturity. It means that we have.
"jess" jessicacl...@hotmail.com
hah.
--
typed whilst listening to Brenda Holloway - All Your Love percentage of Americans who think they're in the top 1% of US earners: 19% (source: Time magazine) Composed by Mailer Signature (http://www.unusualworks.com)
"John Porcella" bronso...@btinternet.com
Grammar, not "grammer".
In answer to your question...grammar schools have historically been selective, so that they pick the brightest pupils. Comprehensives have tended to take people from a wider ability range. The latter has made their published results less good.
--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella
"John Porcella" bronso...@btinternet.com
No.
--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella
"Adam Atkinson" gh...@mistral.co.uk
On 03-Jan-04 11:24:45, jess said: Could you elucidate? I can imagine it would also depend on the staff.
There some comprehensives which are ex-grammars but still have all the same staff. In that sort of case, I could very well imagine that the top sets will be fairly grammar-school-like.
--
Adam Atkinson (gh...@mistral.co.uk) "I got the first three wrong" he said, forthrightly.
Ian/Cath Ford m...@privacy.net
It varies between departments within schools and is all down to a whole bunch of different stuff. We couldn;t stream/set for geography even if we wanted to (which we probably wouldn't most of the time).
Divisional ediucational officers (do you mean County EOs?) have very little say in anything schools actually do nowadays I think.
Setting is setting is setting. Sometimes it can be useful, at other times it's probably not. It depends. Nothing more to it. Best not to worry about it.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles I loved the words you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday No e-mail address. If you want to talk to me then talk here to start with and we can go back to your place later...
Ian/Cath Ford m...@privacy.net
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 02:19:23 +0000 (UTC), "Samsonknight" No, although some fee paying schools. iirc, hide behind the name Grammar school but are infact fee-paying.
It's all a hocus pocus that's really not worth the trouble anyway.
Grammars might be good at some stuff but are crap at others. Same is probably true of comps.
I went to a grammar school. Taught me loads of answers to university challenge questions but not much stuff about work.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles I loved the words you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday No e-mail address. If you want to talk to me then talk here to start with and we can go back to your place later...
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
Sounds good to me; I'd rather learn about work at work :P
Matt mattbliss...@hotmail.com
Independent schools are not supported by the government, you either have to pay fees, have someone else pay them, have the school 'pay' them from donations or a charity will pay them (esp. for religious schools).
They might be called "something high school" or "somewhere grammar school" or anything, usually they are selective in some way and expect the pupils to get high exam results.
State-maintained schools are, in some areas, all comprehensive schools: every pupil within a "catchment area" is entitled to a place at the school, so there is a near-full range of ability. The pupils will probably be streamed - that it, the brighter ones will be taught seperately from the less-bright ones. Some LEAs (local education authorities) also have state-maintained-grammar-schools, which are selective by an exam taken by the pupil, often at age 11. This is the same principle at the streaming, it's just a different school instead of a different teacher + cl***.
HTH
--
MAtt
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
"jess" jessicacl...@hotmail.com
yeh right.
try "the top set will include all who might p*** gcse" and you might be closer.
--
typed whilst listening to Kanye West - 2 words percentage of Americans who think they're in the top 1% of US earners: 19% (source: Time magazine) Composed by Mailer Signature (http://www.unusualworks.com)
"Adam Atkinson" gh...@mistral.co.uk
On 04-Jan-04 03:23:16, jess said: Er. I've asked this before when people have talked about p***ing GCSEs ... what does "p*** GCSE" mean? If it means "not actually _failing_" then it means getting at least a grade G, surely? And very very few people fail to get a grade G. I remember being told when GCSEs started that they weren't about p***ing or failing, they were about measuring a level of achievement. And grade G certifes, er, a particular level of achievement. It was possible to fail GCSE, but at least in the early years I was told that only tiny numbers of people managed it. Half a percent?
I _suspect_ you're talking about "getting at least a grade C". If so, I think you'll find that the top set in a comprehensive is made up of people who really shouldn't have any difficulty getting a grade C.
Of course, there's no comparison here with the likes of St Paul's, but I suspect St Paul's outperforms most grammars as well.
--
Adam Atkinson (gh...@mistral.co.uk) Domanda: Come si scrivono le equazioni al computer?
Risposta: Con TeX o LaTeX.
"Adam Atkinson" gh...@mistral.co.uk
On 03-Jan-04 23:13:05, Ian/Cath Ford said: My school had two separate lots of setting going on: we were in one set for humanities subjects and another one for sciences. Geography was thus setted the same way as any other humanities subject.
My mother was a head teacher. I thought it was "divisional education officer" she used to, er, make comments about. Of course, this was 20 or so years ago. Maybe the terminology has changed, or I'm remembering incorrectly.
Well, on teacher training we were told setting was evil and wrong and bad and that was all there was to it. No doubt 5 years previously and 5 years afterwards, people were being told it was compulsory and good and wholesome.
--
Adam Atkinson (gh...@mistral.co.uk) What's yellow and equivalent to the Axiom of Choice? Zorn's lemon.
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
hmm youcan't normally do A Levels without a GCSE grade C or above in the relevant subject, though I'm sure this varies from school to school.
"jess" jessicacl...@hotmail.com
top set was people who *might* get a grade c or above. so actual grades went E-A*. not quite what i'd imagine a grammar school is like.
--
typed whilst listening to Kanye West - excuse me miss percentage of Americans who think they're in the top 1% of US earners: 19% (source: Time magazine) Composed by Mailer Signature (http://www.unusualworks.com)
Ian/Cath Ford m...@privacy.net
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:44:05 +0000, Toby Unfortunatly when it doesn't equip you with the skills you need to be effective at work and everyone else has them there is an incy-wincy problem brewing. Not so cool.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles I loved the words you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday No e-mail address. If you want to talk to me then talk here to start with and we can go back to your place later...
Ian/Cath Ford m...@privacy.net
Well, there is that charity thing, but we've done that before.
Is this necessarily true though? Because fee-paying schools rely on the ability to pay fees they can't presume intelligence/ability can they? Some are slective on ability first; others select their bursary students by ability, but there's not **necessarily** going to be a higher ability intake (aside from the creaming off nature of bursaries) in every case.
I would say *in most areas*. Every pupil is entitled to a place *if one exists* - not always the case. Admissions are not only made by geographical areas - one school in Bracknell takes pretty much first on religious grounds yet calls itself a comprehensive. If you go to sunday school for long enough you get in.
Full range of ability? Yes, *probably*, although the distribution of that spread will vary tremendously between schools (and between years in schools in many cases).
No. Not true. May be streamed, yes. May be streamed for some subjects in some year groups, yes. Every cl*** that I teach is mixed ability (and I include my Yr 13 in that btw) In no way is this the same principle as streaming or setting or any other kind of comprehensive teaching. The richness and flexibility of a comprehensive are lost entirely by taking people off at age 11 or 13 to another building. This is a loss, imo, for all sets of people involved with the schools - educationally and socially.
I suffered from a grammar school education. I wouldn't want my son to suffer in the same ways.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles I loved the words you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday No e-mail address. If you want to talk to me then talk here to start with and we can go back to your place later...
"Becky Loader" becky.loa...@btinternet.com
Do you reckon, on balance, you suffered less than if you'd failed the 11-plus and gone through your school-life thinking you weren't very able?
I'm going back before your time, but my mum didn't p*** her 11-plus and has always doubted herself, especially as her brother and sister both went to grammar school. She's actually very bright, but she wouldn't believe it, which is rather sad.
Becky
Toby tobacious-nos...@btopenworld.com
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:47:26 -0000, "Becky Loader" My mum didn't p*** her 11-plus but as soon as she got to her school they sent her packing off to the grammar school.
| To Top |