If state grammar schools were for only state educated children…

Here's the thing, if great state education for all was achievable, or even a consideration, there would be no need to abolish grammar schools. They'd become obsolete soon enough.

Couple of hours expert 1 to 1 tuition a week, versus own work at home.

This is not even close.

Although I agree it's doable to pass without a tutor.

Remove the grammar schools and have great state education for all.

@GabriellaMontez I meant the child who got in because they lowered the scores for children from low income families , not children who haven’t been tutored . I know plenty of people who have got in by just doing extra work at home or nothing .

£15200 average last year. I think as a lot of Mumsnet is Londoncentric people tend to think all private schools charge the 30k+ a year which they just don’t. That said, it’s still a huge chunk of money. My husband and I send 3 (one secondary, 2 primary and hopefully one moving to grammar before no 4 starts) on 28k and they are the going rate in the area.

Worth a look

Id also @80sMonster say there are many Private senior schools throughout the country charging less than £30k
Ive just seen some on an ‘affordable private schools’ web. For senior years @£15K - £18k, after just a quick scan through

They really aren’t. According to the ISC, average term fees for day schools are £6.3k for secondary and £5.5k for junior.

Blimey. I don’t know any private senior schools charging £70k
Eton is £50 approx and one of the highest

I wouldn't want to be the bright but far from exceptional child who only gets in because they've been privately tutored for two years to pass one test. That's setting them up to fail.

My child tested this. Scraped the exam.

Flourished in grammar school where the expectations were high, academia was encouraged. The teaching was mainly excellent and behaviour better than at the local comp.

Many of those who got high 11+ scores had access to multiple tutors. Of course they did better!

🤣 I used to work in a very well known London grammar where most of the parents did this quite happily (because if they hadn’t got in then the boys would most likely have gone private). It was relatively common in the area. Where I am now also has the grammar system but nobody pays extra- i think it very much depends where you are

My rather crappy comp magicked up a swimming pool, paid for, designed and built by the PTA.

It was still a rather crappy comp, just with kids that had been taught how to swim.

It depends. In areas with grammar schools (but few ‘public’ schools with admission at 13) there is often a significant industry of schools specifically training for 11+ grammar entry.

So punish the child because their parents could afford a private prep? Really? You think that's 'fair'?

Fee paying Prep schools prepare their pupils for Common Entrance exams at 13, not 11+, although they may benefit from a better general education they will need to get support for the 11+ exams elsewhere.

I think it would be very interesting to see 11+ score mapped vs final GCSE and A level grades. Also including SATs score, if available, to compare ‘ability and teaching in curriculum subjects’ vs ‘training in 11+ test’. The issue with the latter being provate schools not doing SATs.

I wouldn’t want to be the child testing out that theory

No of course they haven't but that is irrelevant because as admitted today, they don't care about it making sense. This is purely an attempt to get rid of private schools, dressed up as making money for the state and sod the consequences!

Thanks @SpringKitten and ironically, I’d consider myself working class. I certainly had a working class childhood, my dd obviously hasn’t. I think it’s all very divisive. The ‘system’ if you can access it, isn’t impossible to crack (I’m in an heavy grammar county) and I am not sure what else could be done to broaden participation/understanding of that. Genuinely.

Ditto re: uni entry. There’s SO much support for ppl applying from a disadvantaged standpoint, but I’ve found that many around here don’t know about it and if their parent/parents didn’t go to uni, or English isn’t their first language, they’re really in the dark vs my clued up dd with a uni educated mum and a pushy private then grammar education.

@Bibbetybobbity that’s a shame. I think it is harsh to blame an individual for playing the game when the system is set up in a way that actively encourages middle class people to do so.

It reminds me of the other extreme:
some principled teacher-parents i knew who sent their kids to the local sink school in the 80s because they believed selective education was “wrong”. They had three gentle, bright, kind girls. Their kids got through GCSEs okay and one managed to complete a degree and had a good career, but I think they were somewhat crushed by the environment (gangs, disruption, no streaming and “not cool” to be bright or successful or ambitious). All the other parents judged them for this stupid decision. It turns out very few parents would choose to send their kids to the worst school if they had another choice. So it flows that you can’t blame parents for playing the system to get the best possible education.

Ours had a direct debit form at the start of year 7, not London. I just ignored it as we don't have spare money.

@redskydarknight no, I’d have stayed private although truthfully it would have been a huge stretch (and she’s 18 now, so whilst it wasn’t that long ago, it was before the extra 20% and it did feel more achievable then that with a small house and a crappy car, private was doable).

Yes, I've included day schools and boarding, these are the numbers I've seen where we are based, obviously not including the additional VAT. Particularly where you have a very high calibre of Grammar schools, the competition will intensify. Our local (one of the best in the country), only has a pupil premium (students from disadvantaged backgrounds) of 3.3%, I wonder if the implications of increased competition have been thought through, and sufficiently budget for in Labour's plan and numbers?

That's what I mean about having it so that if you are using grammars to opt out of paying private and take all of the places away from poor students, you should be charged to better the school and open it up further.

If Starmer's kid hadn't got into the grammar or had SEN he would be in a private like so many people in private are because there's little state provision that suits them.