How are Grammar schools so much better than comprehensives if they get the same funding?

If they are clever enough to get in, yes.

Are they?

Another option is an area on the border between Grammar and Comprehensive areas. Buckinghamshire's Grammar schools take a fair number of children from authorities that border Buckinghamshire, but some of those areas also have good comprehensives as the alternative. Within Buckinghamshire itself the Secondary Modern schools are very variable. So it maybe worth looking around the edges of a Grammar school county and seeing where children in those areas get school places.

My partner went to a grammar school in the 70/80's, kids were naughty there too and always a handful of really bad troublesome ones. He was also not pushed. Went from being top of his class in primary to not caring in grammar schools, nobody really made him work at anything so he didn't and not all teachers had control of the class, one teacher in his year left because couldn't handle the kids misbehaving.

I don't know how they are now but I suppose wherever there are kids going through puberty, there will be some trouble!

Because they’re selective. The kids have to take an entrance test and to do this you need parents who are fully engaged in their education.
This contributes to higher academic performance.

I’m a governor at both a grammar school and a comprehensive school.
The grammar school governing body is inundated with applications when a vacancy comes up. It’s a selective process and lots of the applicants are parents or alumni. I’m pretty much the only member who has no tie to the school.

Whereas at the comprehensive school we have two vacancies which we just can’t fill. We have one parent governor and she was the only parent who applied.

Indeed which means the parents at the school with the left over not as academic kids have less engaged parents, so more likely to be sink schools.

Obviously they select for ability, but the difference is more engaged parents, and less disruption in class so the kids can get on with learning.

Round where I am they are super selective. If you only take the top 1% of course they're going to get better results than a comprehensive (although over tutoring is a problem and some kids do struggle).
Also if the one my son is at is typical they don't get more government funding (if anything they get less as have very few pupil premium children) but they do have some very generous parents. DS's school asks for a voluntary contribution to the school fund, with a suggested amount of £50 a month. Not everyone can give that, but a lot do as they've come from private prep schools and it's a drop in the ocean compared to independent school fees.
It's not all good though. My DD is equally able, but the corresponding girls is unlikely to meet her SEN needs. They told me they currently have one child with an EHCP and can't provide 1 to 1 support. I'd like to think it's just lack of experience, but it wouldn't surprise me if they try to discourage children with SEN from applying.

The shock would be if pupils didn’t do better at grammar school given that they are selective- pupils are motivated, parents are generally more engaged with their children’s progress and are very supportive of the school

Sorry to sound silly but what do you mean by does the comprehensive stream?

I don't know if streaming is as common as it once was.

My secondary we sat exams first few weeks and there were sets for maths but rest was 4 streams - 3 classes in each bar bottom stream which had one. We only had lessons with kids from lower streams in PE and occaionally maths if they got in higher maths sets or someone was in a lower maths set. Streams were base on overall ablity not that partiular subject.

Neice went to same school and think it was still like that.

My kids secondary didn't always set classes and didn't stream. Some subjects like maths or english they'd set but rest it wasn't till year 9 they'd set so there was a real mix of ablities and behavior in the classes.

I got into top stream and maths set so behavior was good - my kids got into top sets but behavior could still be very poor and overall attainment at the school was low - but they still did really well.

I'd wait to see if your kids are academically inclined before moving!

My kids goto a grammar. The boys aren't all well behaved, but nothing like what I've heard about comprehensives.

Also their school has been good at keeping kids on for 6th form even if gcses weren't great - they want them to stay on.

It felt like the right school for my kids since the open day. That's why we worked hard to get them in.

Also note, schools do change! They might not be so stellar in 9 years time.

If you dc are still toddlers, you have no way of knowing if they are bright and hard working enough to crack the grammar system. I think it's foolish to move to a grammar area, instead, you could move to a place with excellent state primary and secondary schools. If your dc doesn't pass the 11+ they will end up in a school with middle and under achieving cohorts as the clever hard working ones have been hovered up by the grammars.

If you and your dh are very clever and are form long line of engineers doctors etc, you can reasonably assume your dc will also be clever. In that case it may be less of a risk moving to a grammar area.

Not sure if this hasn’t already been said, but isn’t the downside of grammar school areas that if your kids don’t get selected, they end up on worse schools than in non grammar areas because all of the motivated above average kids have been leached off? So
you’d better be pretty Sure that your kids are going to be bright enough!

I agree that it is generally the parents that make a good school. If children have parents that aren't interested, don't read to their children, can't even potty train them ffs, what chance do they have at school!

Kids at the grammar school did do drugs come 6th form. (Not my DC). But it was usually at private parties outside of school time. Some were caught doing them at a school event and were expelled.

Surely you would be better moving to an area that had better performing secondary schools rather than pinning hope on grammar

Or come to Northern Ireland where there are loads of grammar schools and majority kids sit transfer test (11+)

Don't just look at the results look at the value add metrics - grammar schools out perform most other schools on this measure too. They have much higher value add than other schools because kids want to learn and there is generally better discipline.

All children would have better outcomes if we had greater variety of schools to educate according to individual/cohort needs rather than a "comprehensive" system beloved of Marxists/socialists/woke brigade.

it is not at all complicated. If you test a kid at 11 and they score really highly something would have had to actively go wrong for them to not score highly on tests at 16 and 18. It's really hard to say that a grammar school has had much influence at all on that.

There are several grammar schools in our area and they differ wildly - Some are old and crumbling and some have amazing new facilities. Generally I would say the expectations are higher at the grammars in terms of behaviour and academic outcomes. My DC's school sets a lot of homework, but does offer great support for those who might be struggling.
There are some excellent Acadamies in our area too, so think it is always worth visiting before you make a decision.

Have you considered a virtual school:

https://www.minervavirtual.com

My eldest would have definitely suffered at the local comprehensive. He was the best in the year and others tried to bring him down due to intense jealousy. In the grammar school people were always competing to be at the top.

Some of the children his year at primary well they weren't exactly the brightest build in the box... About 1/3rd were significantly behind government expected attainment levels in year 6 so the school had to cheat the year 6 SATS.

Mostly boils down to the type of child and type of family background.

As a teacher who teaches in both sorts of school, the difference is overwhelming the parents. At the bare minimum, you have to jump through some hoops to get into grammar school although, for others they prep for years beforehand to get their child in. Every parent in grammar school wants their child to do well and supports them. This isn’t true in comprehensives and the children often take on their parent’s shitty attitude. Top stream in a comp can be decent as, again, you only tend to get the kids with parents who give a damn but unfortunately they still have to mix with the other type of child outside the classroom.

I could teach a class of 60 in a grammar school easily..in some comp classes I could do with a class of about 8 in order to teach them anything due to poor behaviour.

just to answer your specific question @Karma1387 "on why grammar schools do better academically". They select at 11 not only the the brightest but also those committed to learning. This usually means lessons from the get go are less disruptive and kids spend more time learning, they move ahead faster on the curriculum , can learn sometimes in a more interesting way - trips/ theatre etc - as there is less behaviour management.
this is general and obvs there are exceptions!.

We are in a grammar school area and I wish we weren’t. The competition to get into grammar is huge so people hot house their children to get into them. Because the grammar schools cream off the top 25% of students the other comprehensives feel so much worse than a regular one, they’re full of kids who have failed the 11+ (no shame in that) but not the same cross section of society.

my daughter is at a private prep but is probably borderline in terms of passing the 11+. If she doesn’t pass and she probably won’t despite private school and tutoring we will likely have to pay private for secondary because the comprehensive despite being rated “good”’is anecotally awful and has sniffer dogs on the gates checking the kids for drugs. An extreme example I know but it really creates a world of extremes. I’d want to be sure that my child was grammar material before moving to a grammar area.