BBC news Kent 11+

"If selective education was so fantastic, Kent would have GcSE and A level results stratospheric ally higher than other LEAs with similar demographics but with no selective schools. But it doesn't. "

I think this is a fair and imoprtant system. if a system based on grammar schools and high schools is superior, the overall combined achievement should be better than in a comparable LEA which educates in comps.

It is also relevant to the thread as a discussion about how to make admission within a selective system fair and equable. Ensuring fair and equable access to state funded resources is surely of crucial importance> Sorry to see snide comments in response to wanting things to be fair.

If there is no way to make the selection method fair, and if there is no uplift of overall achievement in a selective county system, then why not simpoly abandon the selective system?

And ensure that all pupils are fully challenged and supported to reach full potential in a proper comp?

did not say that seeker. you can refer to my particular post so i can clarify.

Socareless- am I misunderstanding you? You seem to be saying that the children currently in grammar schools would get the same results if they were in a comprehensive area. If you are saying this, then what is the advantage of having grammar schools?

the 'you' in my post is plural by the way. not directed at any particular person.

i answered you seeker, maybe I shouldn't have as you are hell bent on your views. If you think your child is a failure because they did not get into a GM then you have only yourself to blame.

My question was "if selective education is so fantastic, why do wholly selective LEAs like Kent not have significantly better results than wholly comprehensive LEAs. I thought your post was intending to answer that question. Was I wrong?

I am puzzled as well? so what is the problem? you hate the exams and testing then do not enroll your child rather than wanting everything to be just the way you want it.

"Only the children that fit at a grammar and not at a comp! Maybe only a few. Not all comps stream or set, there are lots in mumsnet threads on that. Selective education may not be idealogically for everyone, but it is a huge relief for some children."

Is that a good reason to have an unfair and divisive system for all children, though?

well there was a rather long queue and I am sure our removals lorry overtook us at one stage

Owllady - am very jealous of your passing through the tunnel - i sometimes wish i could do that too

seeker, I used to interview for a large firm in Kent, mainly school leavers and those in sixth form college and I think you might be surprised how similar the results were from both grammar and the academys. I certainly couldn't see much difference (and I saw hundreds of application forms)

The attitudes on this thread about children who have to go to local schools because they didn't pass the 11+ or they chose not to take it are one of the reasons i sighed quite loudly with relief when we passed through the tunnel on the way out saying goodbye to Kent and saying goodbye to the foaming at the mouth mummies who are desperate to get their children into grammar. I refuse to believe that children should be written off as average or below at 11, it's absolutely ridiculous

Only the children that fit at a grammar and not at a comp! Maybe only a few. Not all comps stream or set, there are lots in mumsnet threads on that. Selective education may not be idealogically for everyone, but it is a huge relief for some children.

"seeker because Kent doesn't have 100% grammar schools. the SM 's will be akin to mid/bottom set in a comp area."

And the grammar schools will be akin to the top sets in a comprehensive area. My point exactly.
[puzzled emoticon]

"Selective education is fantastic for those who would be a square peg in a round hole at a comprehensive. That does not neccessarily mean that it will lead to better results overall, but it may be a happier time for many children."

But in a comprehensive school, the top sets will be the same children who would, in a selective area, be in the grammar school.

And who says that square pegs are academically able?

seeker because Kent doesn't have 100% grammar schools. the SM 's will be akin to mid/bottom set in a comp area.

I do think that is a fair question seeker, i haven't igonored it, i don't have the answers though. I think it proves your point but i can't help but wonder if other areas are selective, just tht the individual schools have their own selection criteria? Maybe having a county wide one is fairer?? If thy have to have one at all that is! Its all a bloody lottery really, because if there is a good school then only the more affluent kids will go there because of catchment areas. I know a school local to me that has a ridiculouly small catchment area and they had to enforce a new rule that you only "counted" as being in that area if you lived there for over three years as people were moving there to get there children into the school! Pricing everyone else out of course!

I wasn't aware that kent was wholly selective though - the secondary school in my hometown certainly isn't - no one in their right mind would choose to send their child there, it takes what is left over.

Selective education is fantastic for those who would be a square peg in a round hole at a comprehensive. That does not neccessarily mean that it will lead to better results overall, but it may be a happier time for many children.

Don't know the answer to that Seeker. What I do know though is that all the time the Grammars exist, and lets face it even Maggie couldn't get shot of them in Kent, tutoring will happen.

My feeling is that there is more scope for tutoring if the test is solely on English and Maths, as they are much wider subjects in scope, and taught at very different levels at different primaries. At least the VR and nVR are finite and easy to find resources for if you wish to support your child at home; with the new test only those "in the know" will have a good idea what to cover and tutoring from teachers/ those with experience of the CEM style test will be a a premium.

I always ask this question and it's always ignored. Maybe I'll try again!

If selective education is so fantastic, why is it that Kent, which is wholly selective, doesn't get significantly better GCSE and A level results than wholly comprehensive LEAs?

yes i heard that too. that is a shame I think.

Yes i agree, which is why i said that i could have quite possibly have been bullied for other reasons if i had gone to a grammar school. WAs recently on a train carrying loads of kids from local grammar and to be fair, their behaviour was appalling. I was

My only problem with selection is that it happens too young. Once you are slotted into that expectation, that follows you. Your exam grades are predicted when you leave primary school i heard!

sorry about your experience weighing. but I thing from your post if you could you would have preferred a school where you would not have been bullied for being clever irrespective of whether it is a comp, grammar or private school

No, my point - which i agree was badly made, is that in life we have to deal with all sorts of challenges and diversity. Diversity is the big thing these days isn't it? Well how are we encouraging that if we only have all the bright kids together and the less academic together?