Come and tell me some of the benefits for children in going to a grammar school

Sorry- I was being simplistic with the all A*s thing.

Presumably the grammar school took most of the very high achievers, though? And some others went to other selective or private schools?

It would be possible to argue - and of course, I don't know the figures- that the few very high achievers who went to the comprehensive maybe didn't achieve as highly because there were only a couple of them? And if they had all gone there, there would have been enough of them to create a critical mass? The figures do show that overall the high achievers do very slightly less well in comprehensives. Which in my opinion is a price worth paying for the sake of the middle and low achievers.

I'm not sure I've said all six got all A*s but even the results of my lower achievers would be very unusual indeed at any of the local comps.

What a rubbish post : doesn't have the capacity to cream off the entire top set (etc).

So they got all A*s and nobody at the comprehensive school they would otherwise have gone to did?

at the local comp, or comps.

seeker in terms of raw grades their grades are almost unheard of at the local comps, or comps. Given that our superselective doesn't have the capacity to cream off the entire top of even the nearest comps, the grammar must have done something different, or extra, to produce those results. None of my DC are single minded boffiny types and on the whole they wouldn't be so far ahead of the rest that they'd stand out from the crowd. Nevertheless their results, compared to the comps' results, do stand out from the crowd.

Why do you think that, yellowtip?

You might also argue, NewFerry, that if your DCs have cousins that attend super-selectives, it is very likely that your DCs are of similar abilities anyway (which they obviously are if they've got similar results) and would always have been destined to do as well.

Anyway isn't there research that proves that grammar schools best benefit the less bright of the cohort (I am of course using the term loosely). I am not sure though whether that just applies to 'regular' grammars and/or the super-selectives too...

And of course I can't say 'conclusively'. But I can say that it's almost certain that they wouldn't have done anywhere near as well.

Our local comp is pretty good NewFerry. Knowing the results at that school and knowing my own DC that comparison is more valid than comparing cousins, which is pretty pointless really (possibly good for annoying a SIL you don't like, but apart from that).

Well I can't split my DC into 2 and simultaneously send them 2 schools, which I guess would be the only way to conclusively prove that they would have done equally well at either school.

Just as you can't say conclusively that your DC would not have done equally well at a different school, perhaps not your local comp, but your local comp is not my local comp!

You're comparing different DC NewFerry. If I attempted to compare my DC with their very expensively educated cousins then it would be arguable that an awful lot of money had been wasted.

Although the comp doesn't inflate their A level stats by offering general studies so A levels are in proper subjects.

That's from a comp by the way!

At a micro level, my DS have done as well at both GCSE and A level as their cousins at super selectives in Birmingham and London (king Edwards and Tiffin boys)

at seeker's going for first option every time comment. Anyone familiar with seeker's history will know the reason behind the " "

Well, as I say with boring regularity, it does seem to apply to grammar schools- there is no significant difference between the results of children at comprehensive schools and the combined results of a grammar and a secondary modern in a similar catchment. And in fact the lower and middle ability children do better. Personally, given th choice between lower and middle ability children doing better and high ability children doing slightly (and it is slightly) worse, then I would go for the first option every time. Particularly as it also avoids the iniquity which is selection at 11.

I agree to a point -yes, a bright child can do well anywhere but I think not only could they do better at a grammar but that it is easier to do better at a grammar. I went to a comp and did well (went on to do a good degree at a good university) but now I see the opportunities that my dc have at their grammars where they are being taught to a much higher level than I ever was. At their grammars it is expected that they will do well and work hard and as everyone around them is doing the same they get on with it.

seeker I also don't buy the 'if a child is able they will do well at any school' line. Some might, but that's about the highest that I'd put it.

At a micro level I absolutely don't believe that a single one of my DC would have achieved equally had they gone to the local comp. I really don't. Not in a million years. Same kids, same home environment but the type of results the older six (the ones who've taken GCSEs) have achieved are unheard of at the local comp, it just doesn't happen. And their school is the only grammar in a vast area, so takes away only a tiny number from the top set of the regional comps.

It's a comforting sound bite but I'm not sure it's much more than that.

seeker "...if your child is able she will do well at any school."

..not if they go to a certain school in Colchester... even one that, shock horror, has a "grammar stream". Been there, done that and got the Kevlar t-shirt to prove it. Those who know which school I'm talking about, will understand the Kevlar reference!

I think that is key, piprabbit - visit as many schools as you can and get a feel for them. Hopefully you and dd will get a gut-feeling that one of them feels particularly right! We knew that the schools our dc have ended up at felt right for them when we first visited. We are lucky to have good comps here but they didn't feel such a good fit for our dc as the grammars.

My DD and DS are at grammars in Essex. The key benefits which we have found is that they are able to provide opportunities for learning above and beyond the curriculum as they have a school full of bright keen students who are eager to learn. For example at dd's school she has been attending something called "Philosophy of History" every Wednesday after school since Y10. Students and teachers take it in turns to give a seminar on an aspect of history of interest to themselves which opens the girls up to themes and ideas beyond what they would cover in class. This is always well attended. I know at my comp there would not have been enough takers for this to run such a thing. They also have a History Society which invites visiting lecturers from different universities in to school periodically to give lectures to the older students and the parents thus opening the girls up to university style teaching. Again these lectures are always well-attended and there would not have been enough people interested in this at my comp to make it worth running.

Expectations are high and the students are encouraged to have high aspirations. At dd's school all Y10s go on a trip to Cambridge to show them what they could achieve if they work hard.

We have also found that dd has excellent relationships with her teachers (ds is only in Y7 so too early to say for him) and the teachers generally seem to be very relaxed with the students as most of them are eager to work and so there does not seem to be many issues around discipline. Of course, there are always going to be issues in any school but on the whole the students are self-motivated.

Pastoral care has been excellent - I am not saying this is anything to do with it being a grammar - just mentioning it as a few posters have said pastoral care was not good at their grammars.

OP a suggestion - can the staff at your DD's primary put you in touch with parents whose DDs attended the school and now go to the grammar? That might be more enlightening than posting here. Grammars are all different. Visit with your DD and see if you and she like the vibe or not. Consider whether you and she are willing to do a lot of practice for the test. If not, you're probably wasting your time as scores required are very high.

One question to ask the comps is how they set or stream. In the high school I was seconded to last year, they do not set or stream for humanities. The classes had a mixture of disaffected girls with no interest in learning humanities, girls with very poor literacy, middling ones and some very bright ones who were bored by the slow pace. Bright kids are pretty much left to their own devices in that set up (because the consequences of the struggling ones not getting a C are more serious than someone getting a B who could have got an A). By contrast in the grammar where I teach we can stretch the brightest and offer extra help to anyone struggling, because most students are doing fine. SEN support is also (IMO) better because there is less SEN.

Obviously 'your' grammar and comps may be different.

OP, remember you can always move your DD for sixth form if she does years 7-11 in the superselective and then fancies a mixed or sixth form college style for A level and vice versa if her GCSE results are good and you want more of an academic challenge at A level (the grammar may also offer IB or Pre-U in sixth form). At 16 it will be much more obvious what sort of student she is.

If the grammar where you are is like our ones they will be keen to recruit into sixth form as many go mixed then.