You are in > manchester.com  > News > Non-grammar schools more selective, says report

Education

Non-grammar schools more selective, says report

11/10/2008

A report by education charity the Sutton Trust has found that grammar schools are less academically selective than their counterparts.

Research by Durham University's Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM) found that 50 non-grammar schools had more stringent admission procedures than the country's most selective grammar school. All grammar schools hold competitive examinations at the age of 11 in the country.

The report found that out of 100 schools deemed to be the most picky when it came to new pupils, just 17 were grammar schools while 54 of the most competitive were faith schools.

Dr Lee Elliot Major, director of research at the Sutton Trust, said an unexpected finding of the study was that so-called comprehensive schools were the most socially - and sometimes academically - selective in the country.

"Top state schools – whether non-grammar or grammar – are steeped in traditions of educating pupils from all backgrounds, yet the stark reality is that their pupil intakes have little in common with the local communities in which the schools are based," he continued.

"The figures also suggest that grammars are not enrolling as many academically able pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds as they could do. While ideological debates will continue to polarise opinion over whether England's remaining 164 grammars should exist, we believe more spotlight needs to be focused on ensuring grammars do all they can to reach out to all potential pupils."

Dr Major called for monitoring of the government's latest secondary school admission reforms as well of a review of the '11+' examinations, to ascertain whether bright pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are sometimes deterred from applying to grammar schools.

The report urged grammar schools to take further efforts to enrol children from disadvantaged backgrounds stating that under two per cent of those in grammar schools were on free meals, the yardstick for poverty, whereas 5.5 per cent of pupils in non-selective schools received free meals.

Research team leader Dr Robert Coe of Durham University's CEM, said the study found that commonly held beliefs about grammar schools such as the belief that admission would mean better GSCE results and the "creaming effect" caused by the best state school pupils going to grammar schools could not be proved.

"Another common view is that grammar schools raise achievement, but secondary moderns depress it," he commented. "We tried lots of different ways to test the first part and many of the models did suggest that those who get in to grammar schools achieve better GCSEs than similar pupils in other schools, though other models showed no difference – it just depends what assumptions you make.

"Also, grammar school pupils appear to be already making better progress between KS1 and KS2, before they even set foot in a grammar school. On the second part, we found no evidence that the performance of secondary moderns, or any schools creamed by grammars, was different from other schools."

Researchers based their study on research of 125,000 grammar school children between the ages of 11 and 16.