Laura McInerney

Post code and income, I think.

I really don’t remember him looking so much like a weather forecaster!

I think we might still own the domain for the ‘would you go grammar’ tool which predicted if your child would be likely to get in.

I appreciate you continuing to debate despite mine too! We can continue another time 🤗

Because the very fact that the children were able to attain highly to 11 without being in a grammar school suggests they don’t need a particular focus. The reason we focus on SEND and FSM is because their results show the opposite.

If you’re not bothered about inequality why were you on about the house price thing in the first place?

It’s because we think that by saying the words ‘technical education’ it will solve the issues of low attainment and challenging behaviour that are often collected into those schools. Alas, it doesn’t.

Why would you care only about the most able kids having this? Thats what I find so baffling!

Are you planning to create more of those?

Oh don’t worry there will be plans for technical schools. There always are. That’s what UTCs were. And then those plans go awry and while some are good, most are not. But don’t worry Reform will defo get it right this time. Pinky swear. 🙄

Because, I’ll be honest, your original post sounded like ‘people a bit wealthier than me get top jobs and I want them extended down to people who are exactly as wealthy/smart as me but not further than that’

Into the power-wielding classes.

You said that currently only people in the top 5-10% get into those roles. (And I presume you mean wealth?)

Who do you *want* to be in those roles?

Right so it’ll take a tiny % of people in any area. Meanwhile we still have the house price problem unresolved? That’s bonkers. Who solves a massive social problem by saying “well, we’ll help a tiny % of people not having this problem and oop, job’s a good ‘un” ??

No what % do you want to get in. You don’t want it to the top 5-10%. But it should be… ?

I honestly cannot stress how weird it is to solve educational inequality by going ‘let’s pick out our favourite already-smart kids and let’s give *them* a great school’.

I honestly cannot stress how weird it is to solve educational inequality by going ‘let’s pick out our favourite already-smart kids and let’s give *them* a great school’.

But you can change the guarantee! There’s loads of ways. That all of them have problems is a symptom of trade offs. But you can have lotteries. You can have banded intake. You can randomly redraw boundaries every 3 years so you never know if your house will be in or not. There’s lots of options.

Iain, these are all the OPPOSITE of solving the house price issue you suggest you care about!

What % would that be?

Also, just to be completely pragmatic; has anyone modelled the transport costs?!?

Right. The reason this policy ends up foundering is that while people like the idea of a lottery ticket they don’t want the price of entry to be a loss in quality if they don’t get in.

But this is just the same as the house price problem? It’s a system where the wealthiest have the highest shot of getting into schools with easiest conditions.
Did you do anything to *undo* that privilege?

Is there still inequality? Of course. Can we make stronger and more ladders? Yes. Should we begin by removing some kids at 11 and making them travel far away to another building?
That is… a very strange place to start.

It is. But here’s the great thing: all across the country, millions of kids go to their local school, & regardless of demographics, get a great education & go to top unis. We don’t need to pick 20% of our fave kids at 11. It’s not about kicking away a ladder, it’s about building ladders everywhere.

What’s the aim here then? You can’t genuinely believe that people you know in education, who have spent decades dedicated to making things better for kids, are sitting around thinking ‘how can I make life worse for others except for my (almost grown up) kid’ ???

Was that in the tables?!? I’ve always just used Oxford and Cambridge’s own tables!

If they can do this they can also do it for GCSEs (as I did), so I’m not sure why they need a grammar school?

Some of us have advocated on admissions reform for a long time. Indeed, I think @samfr.bsky.social was instrumental in getting priority for FSM kids in admissions. What did you do on this issue, when you had the floor?

Well, I didn’t. And I think exactly the same as Sam on this. So there’s no reason to believe it’s got anything to do with his background and it’s unreasonable to silence him given a choice made for him.

I just don’t understand why very smart children need a whole separate building on a whole different site to have their best education. It genuinely baffles me.