1. Exquisite Tweets from @Samfr

    PreoccupationsCollected by Preoccupations

    The sheer staggering ignorance.

    In comprehensive inner London last year 59% of disadvantaged pupils got good GCSEs in English and Maths.

    In selective Kent it was 35.6%.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    *All* working class pupils are disadvantaged by the bog-standard comps Mr Lammy’s Labour Party has imposed on them since it was taken over by well-off bourgeois bohemians in the 1960s. Don’t think he was referring to them.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    Untrue both those areas are at 40% - national average is 44.5%.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    1. And in most wholly comprehensive areas, especially those comparable to Kent in social conditions (Eg Wiltshire and Portsmouth), the figure was roughly the same as Kent. See hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2016/11/can-an…

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    I'm afraid it does make me angry when I see someone causally dismiss the work of 100s of thousands of dedicated teachers and millions of pupils on the basis of zero evidence.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    4. Your dismissive intolerance of differing opinions, and angry (ill-informed) denunciation of them, does not do much for the image of the organisation with which you are associated. Shouldn't teaching encourage open-mindedness?

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    I would say a 12% increase in attainment is not comparable. London also benefits from immigration but the national average is much higher than Kent.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    35.6% and 40% are comparable, and indeed 'roughly the same'. Kent, as you know, has many very poor areas. You are avoiding the actual point, which is that London *is* different and it not because it has comprehensive schools.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    Dogma totally unmoored from any of the data/evidence from the UK or internationally. Nine of the top ten performing countries in the world are fully comprehensive.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    1. Who said that?. You could hire a thousand brilliant builders to build a housing estate, but if you equipped them with spoons instead of spades, and shackled their feet, they'd still fail. That's what the 'comprehensive' system does to teachers and pupils alike.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    Measured by PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS all of which are more objective that what you've "noticed".

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    Measured by what objective standard? I don't notice academically selective Germany and Switzerland failing economically and socially, as we do. I'm also struck by the reintroduction of academic selection to former (comprehensive and failed) East Germany - by popular demand.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    Am I going to have to explain the difference between percentages and percentage points to you?

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    I'm not sure what 12% increase you are referring to. Lots of places apart from Kent are below national average, and have comprehensive schools. Which is my point. Kent is a county with many pockets of severe poverty and deprivation.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman

    Oh good God. It's 4.4 points not 4.4%. The difference is 12% (11.6% to be exact). This is basic maths you're arguing against now.

    Peter Hitchens @ClarkeMicah
    Well, it's a good way of making 4.4% look bigger, I'll grant you that . But it doesn't alter the point that Kent's outcome in this matter has more to do with its poverty than with its education system. And that the London effect is not caused by its educational system., either.

    Reply Retweet Like

    Samfr

    Sam Freedman