Schools admission criteria......

@Y7mum really depends on which 11+ plus process you are looking at. Round here it uses the entire year 6 curriculum so unless you have been taught the entire curriculum by the September you aren’t going to make it

Can I ask why you think you need tutoring to pass neither my children or my friends children had tutoring and my daughter passed in the top 2 percent

That's a shed load of projection on a single sentence.

If you read all of my other posts on this thread, I am fully in favour of PP children being above others in admissions criteria for grammar schools. It doesn't stop me knowing, as a senior leader in a school, that PP children come with additional funding. This funding is often used for extra teaching/interventions because these children do, on average, perform poorly academically. Your daughter, and others who get into a grammar, are not performing poorly academically. So, as I said, they've been protected from some of the disadvantages that are statistically more likely for children who are eligible for PP. Note that I never said they've been protected from all of the disadvantages. Note that I never said that shouldn't be prioritized. I just said that there are cynical, as well as virtuous, reasons for this.

I'm glad your DD is doing so well. I'm sure you're a major part of that. I'm sorry that I somehow upset you, even though it was unintentional.

More BS. My DD passed the 11+. She was born addicted to drugs and alcohol, she has foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, autism, ADHD and a rare autoimmune disease that is treated with weekly chemotherapy. Oh, and just to complete the full bingo card, she is blind and is a FSM student. I wonder which factors you think she has been protected from? So many bitter and sharp-elbowed people on this thread who resent poor and disadvantaged children having some perceived advantage over their heavily tutored children.

Cynically, a grammar school is onto a winner if they take in more PP students. These are students that passed the 11+, so it's fairly safe to says that they've been protected from some of the disadvantages that are statistically more likely for pupils receiving PP.

I think the BS comment was a response to the additional funding being a reason PP pupils being higher up the admissions criteria.

PP children (which also include forces children and children that are cared for as well)are under represented in grammar schools. Said schools have been under pressure to raise numbers.

These children receive extra funding for very good reason.

Schools do indeed get additional funding for pupils receiving pupil premium. In the current financial year, primary schools get an extra £1,515 for each pupil receiving pupil premium, secondary schools get £1,075.

Why do the government do this? We know that parental income is the best predictor of a child's educational outcome. That is changing in England, albeit slowly, as the outcomes for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds is improving. Pupil premium is designed to help with that by providing schools with additional funding they can use to help disadvantaged pupils.

Anyone else who gets in has also passed the 11+

So how would it be fair if another bright child from a hard working family who values education who lives closer but just so happens to be the eldest didn’t get a place because of sibling application?

You can phrase things however you like @LookingforMaryPoppins - if passing the 11+ is the first criteria then it’s safe to assume every family or child who gets in values education.

Or look at the another way, perhaps Covid meant you are lucky one of your children got into the grammar.

No of course no one wants their child to go to on paper a sink school but how you approach life and the circumstances you are in can influence your child immensely. Results aren’t everything there might be opportunities and amazing teachers you are dismissing because of what’s on paper.
If, and it’s still an if, she doesn’t get into grammar having a mum complaining it’s a crap school and it’s not fair she’s set up for failure now at the grand old age of 11 will be hugely damaging.

whoever gets a place is also deserving as they passed the 11+ as well

School applications can be a gamble. Some you win some you might lose.

@darksofacrime
Yep, I turned down a scholarship to a single sex private school with same concerns re bullying. And did very well in a poor comp, although I did teach myself much of the curriculum from revision guides. Had I not been very motivated and a clear career goal, it would have been a very different outcome.

We are not pushing for grammar, it's very much our daughters choice. As well as being academic she is very sporty and into drama, and the fact that both of these are far superior at the grammar compared to both our local comps is the draw for her. Along with the rumours about a lot of violence at our catchmented comp, which I also wouldn't be keen on her going too. Our other local comp is fine, but she is by no means guaranteed a place where, our village gets places some years and not others, and in her intake there will be loads of siblings which reduces her chances - bloody siblings policies again.

BS.

Because the school get additional funding.

Is this not the case anymore?
First I’ve heard!

It'll be because they were previously under represented. ie. Bright kids on a low income were less likely to get in due to not being able to afford tutoring/revision books etc.

Why do pupil premium kids get preferential treatment?

@Bushmillsbabe

My experience of single sex grammar was not great, although this was many years ago. Bullying occurred at my non-selective primary, but it was was mainly boys/quite easy to brush off. In an all female selective environment it was far more devastating. Whispers about appearance, being suddenly ignored, subtle social isolation. If you watch Educating Essex : it was Carrie/Ashleigh - but worse in a single sex environment.

My DD appears to be far more confident, secure in herself and is achieving in a good comp. I think it’s good that she experiences the full range of personalities that she’ll need deal with in adult life. I think she’d crumble with the competition/social demands in a single sex grammar.

They have a variety of private music teachers coming in, sports specialists etc. Space and DBS isn't an issue.

Schools bring in specialists to meet specific needs, to give children support and opportunities relevant to their needs and abilities. That isn't seen as giving an advantage, it's filling a gap which the school can't meet on their own to maximise a child's learning opportunities.

Ultimately the grammar school system is very flawed. Good concept aimed at improving equality for able children, which has ultimately had the opposite effect.

Surely we want all children to reach their maximum potential, whatever that may be? Whether that's supporting a child who is struggling or stretching a more able child? Ultimately the children of engaged and financially able parents will get them that advantage anyway, why not give that advantage to other able children? Tbh it's nor even giving them an advantage, it's just stopping them being disadvantaged compared with other able children, levelling the playing field to some extent for those PP children who most posters on here have advocated for being supported.

Timetabled sessions with an external tutor would put a burden on the school in finding a room, DBS checks etc

But as PP says, it’s probably more about a state school not directly facilitating one group of pupils over another (whether at their school or not)

i don’t think schools are legally allowed either?

In the situation that you describe, your daughter and her friends that are finishing their work early and having the opportunity for self led or other study would have an unfair advantage to the children that hadn’t finished their work early, for probably a lot of different reasons. And the school would be facilitating that advantage.

I appreciate the challenge with finding the time to support prep for it. But DD and some of her friends are finishing their work part way through a lesson and then being told to read quietly while others finish - they are getting through the work quicker so there is capacity within their day, even if it was self led study in small groups, or timetabled sessions with an external tutor. It wouldn't make much of a difference to us - we can pay for tutoring for the year rather than have a summer holiday. But it frustrates me that some of DD's bright friends won't get this opportunity due to their family circumstances. The school didn't phrase it as they didn't have time though, they phrased it as they were not legally allowed, which is very different

You're awful, stop using the term normal family and kids being dragged down (by the non normal families and LAC I assume). Why on earth would having a siblings matter in a grammar school. Maybe they should stop dragging down only child familes. You keep doubling down when so many people have told you how poorly you are coming across. Wise up.

State schools don’t prep for the test because most of what’s in the test isn’t in the national curriculum? Bar maths and reading comprehension content, which of course is. They would literally be teaching to the test. And would then have to miss out some of the actual curriculum.

This would obviously only apply to the minority of schools in a grammar school area.

What OP is describing, which is a sibling rule at grammar schools, is hugely discriminatory to only child families

And those with large gaps. DS2 is so much younger than DS1 that there was no sibling in the school when he was applying. It wasn't the right school for him anyway.

Yep and discriminatory to oldest children, to families where they have children of different genders (most grammar schools are unisex as far as i can see), in fact to anyone except those who have 2(or more) same sex children who are all academically able. And I say that as a mum of 3 able girls who would benefit from a sibling priority system.

I'm not sure Brightons system works well in practical terms, with children criss crossing the city to get to a school on the other side of the city when they live right next to one. But I do get the concept in terms of fairness.