An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I thought I'd answered this. There is more flexibility and chances to move back 'up' in the comprehensive system.

there is exactly the same chance of moving down.

setmefree2

CLAPTON wrote: »

which raises the question of how one knows that an IQ test doesn't give an accurate measure unless you have a measure to measure it against.

Which raises the question why would you want to use a dodgy concept embodied in a dodgy test to segregate children at 11?

Answer : because it suits the middle classes who don't want their kids associating with working class kids.

setmefree2

CLAPTON wrote: »

there are plenty of people who pay good money (well borrow it) and are willing, even keen, to go to Unis that aren't oxbridge

And that comment is relevant how ??????

setmefree2

bobbymotors wrote: »

But none of it really matters. Corbyn will never be Prime minister.

Sadly I agree. And I'm not sad because I like Corbyn, I'm sad because I really am fearful for the damage that the May government is going to do to education in England.

However, as someone else posted on the other thread - there is still plenty of time for May to !!!! up - particularly over Brexit. The 2020 election isn't in the bag.

CLAPTON

setmefree2 wrote: »

Which raises the question why would you want to use a dodgy concept embodied in a dodgy test to segregate children at 11?

Answer : because it suits the middle classes who don't want their kids associating with working class kids.

I have said I don't support grammar schools : however that shouldn't stop rational logical discussion of the issues.

The selection process for the old grammar schools was never based on an 'IQ' test but a collection of tests mainly of attainment.
I don't know about current grammar schools but would think they still do this.

TrickyTree83

setmefree2 wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9755929/IQ-tests-do-not-reflect-intelligence.html

Plenty more where that came from if you want me to clutter up the thread.

Look, before this gets out of hand, lets wheel back over to what you originally said. And see if the actual content of the article you posted as evidence to support it chimes with what you said.

You said:

Some scientists dispute the concept of IQ entirely....but I wouldn't expect you to understand that......

The sub-heading of the telegraph article:

IQ tests are misleading because they do not accurately reflect intelligence, according to a study which found that a minimum of three different exams are needed to measure someone's brainpower.

Where does that dispute the concept of IQ entirely?

So please do, continue to flog this dead horse, or we could agree that the comment was ridiculous just like flat earth theory.

bobbymotors

I think you'll find the May government to be fairly moderate as time passes. The tories, unlike the present labour party, are extremely aware that elections are won from the centre and lost from the fringes. Moderation is the key to success come election time, always has been always will be.

CLAPTON

streaming, settting, mixed ability schools

Setting and streaming are commonly linked with
expanding inequality of student achievement. As
time goes by, high-level students gain more and
more, while low-level students fall further and
further behind. Assignment practices play a causal
role in this process, as higher-level classes
typically constitute better learning environments.
• Setting is less problematic than streaming.
Problems are likely to be most severe under
streaming, where students are assigned on the basis
of a single criterion for the entire school day,
compared with setting, which is subject-specific.
Because students need not be enrolled in the same
sets for all subjects, setting is a less powerful
segregator than streaming. Moreover, because it is
subject-specific, it offers the possibility of
instruction targeted to student needs in low-level
classes.
• At the primary level, setting and within-class
grouping may be effective when assignment and
instruction are closely related to student capacities.
• Streaming at the secondary level may benefit high
achievers, but these benefits invariably come at the
expense of losses for low achievers. Setting is also
associated with increased inequality, but inequality
has been mitigated in some cases.
• Mixed-ability grouping also has problems,
particularly that the academic curriculum may be
diluted in an effort to teach a wide range of
students. Schools that use mixed-ability teaching
must be aware of the need to maintain a high level
of challenge for high-achievers. By the same
token, schools that use setting must ensure a higher
quality of instruction than commonly occurs in low
sets, if they wish to mitigate the problem of
unequal opportunity

http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF%20Files/Brief025.pdf

setmefree2

CLAPTON wrote: »

streaming, settting, mixed ability schools http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF%20Files/Brief025.pdf

As I said no body streams any more. Every High School use setting. Primary Schools may use setting for Maths but mostly tend to set within a mixed ability class.

From your article :-

Setting is less problematic than streaming.
Problems are likely to be most severe under
streaming, where students are assigned on the basis
of a single criterion for the entire school day,
compared with setting, which is subject-specific.
Because students need not be enrolled in the same
sets for all subjects, setting is a less powerful
segregator than streaming. Moreover, because it is
subject-specific, it offers the possibility of
instruction targeted to student needs in low-level
classes.

Are you suggesting that schools shouldn't use setting?

CLAPTON

setmefree2 wrote: »

As I said no body streams any more. Every High School use setting. Primary Schools may use setting for Maths but mostly tend to set within a mixed ability class.

From your article :-

Are you suggesting that schools shouldn't use setting?

The paper I quoted says in the summary (first page)

When students are divided for instruction by ability, either through setting or
streaming, their achievement levels tend to become more and more unequal over time.

what I am suggesting that peoples unresearched certainties don't seem fully supported by the research
but I'm sure there is research to support any and every view.

by the way, I am unable to find a reference that says no-one 'streams' any more or indeed that every school 'sets'