Would you send your child to a grammar school ?

Interesting that people don't have a problem with kids at level 5 and level 7 being taught together is fine, but the mere suggestion that a level 5/6 might have a level 3 sitting at the same table in the canteen gives them a fit of the vapours.......

LaQ - DDs GS doesn't set till yr9 and then only for maths. As you say, they've already essentially been streamed. Once they're doing their gcse options, timetabling to allow for all the various subject combinations (avoiding 'options blocks' which constraint choices) it'd probably be impossible to do much more by way of setting.

Yes but wuldric - our comp prides itself in only setting for Maths (half a term into Y7) and MFL (end of Y7)- up until GCSE choices impose 'setting' on DCs anyway. Otherwise, they don't set.

They are also the best performing comp, academically, in Hampshire.

But I would be being disingenuous were I not to add that the school's 'selection' in by house-price! As I have said way up-thread, it's not academic inability that wrecks DCs' potential attainment, it's poor behaviour in class in whatever set. And yes, I do believe that one tends to get poorer behaviour in lower sets if only because lower sets might contain able but disengaged, therefore bored and disruptive DCs (poor social background etc), but also because the 'less clever' might take rather longer to grasp the importance of the best qualifications one is able to get to provide the best chances and opportunities in life.

If I lived in a socially disadvantaged area, I'd be more a fan of rigourous setting, too.

I wanted DS 12y to go to grammar school because he is very lazy (like his ma) and at junior school, he just cruised along unchallenged going "what's the point? Its too easy."

Now, he is at the grammar school, he still just cruises along because "He'll never be as good as the ones at the top," Ho hum. But at least he is being challenged and he is happy.

So...for us, it wasn't a miracle cure for laziness but its a good school.

Our local comprehensive is jolly proud of not setting its kids until year 9 (and then they are only set for core subjects). It was the one thing that ensured I would never ever send my dcs there.

And yes, to teenagers the single most influential thing is their peer group. I absolutely understand what the OP is saying. But you know, the peer group in grammar schools ain't all that.

I have no problem with grammar schools if it is right for the child.
l have two dd's, both of them are very academic. However, i think that one of my dd's would thrive in a grammar school while the other would thrive in the fantastic Catholic school with good pastoral care.
I expect both of my dds to achieve excellent grades
I think some parents are so obsessed with getting their kids into a grammar school, that they almost ignore the fact that it may not be right for their child. The sad thing is that ultimately it is the child that suffers.

My point is about my DD not everyone else's.

absolutely... your DD and the schools available to her. From everything you've said, considering GS is entirely sensible.

However, 'I'm realising that we are losing her to her friends' - well, up to a point; peer pressure does become more important, but that doesn't mean you have to lose her to her friends or lose your influence over her. She's 9 - you still have a say in what she does out of school. Could maybe think of ways to broaden her horizons? Is there some activity she might be interested in which would expand her social group - it might be something she did just with other kids or something you could do too.

The reason I'm sending my daughter to a grammar school is that I think and hope that she will be happier. That's all.

I was an academic child. Top of the year group in every single exam I ever took.

I went to a decent but not exceptional comprehensive and did very well, couldn't have done better. 10As, 4As and an Oxford 1st (and a Ivy League PhD later). This was in the days when there were no A* and far fewer students got As.

But it wasn't much fun.

I was shy with it, and while I didn't experience any real bullying and had some friends, I had zero sense of belonging and have almost no good memories. I was looked down on for being clever and just didn't fit.

I know my daughter isn't me, and the comprehensive school here is probably a bit nicer than the one I went to, but she's not that different from me either. It wasn't an easy decision, but my gut feeling was that she'd be happier at the grammar school.

I feel a bit selfish because it's not good for comprehensive schools for the most able pupils to go elsewhere, but so be it.

(on a different point: we didn't use a tutor, she did some practice tests as you'd be daft not to, but only 2-3 weeks before the test)

curlew - and I wouldn't assume that a single, one off, off-beat remark made by the Head, unless it was among many others indicated that he was definitely 'nervous around parents; and that one 'Terry & June' remark indicated a school suffused in such thinking.

This is why one needs to do loads of research, speak to existing parents and pupils if possible, sit outside at chucking outside etc, get the feel of a place; not base your child's possible education future on an OFSTED and a badly made speech.

FWIW one Head ours had in juniors visibly disliked having to talk to a hall full of parents. He stuttered, failed to make eye contact, rushed through what he had to say; however in front of the entire school in assembly, he was completely in control; eloquent, articulate, commanding. He knew all the DC by name and all the DC loved him and the school's results rise noticeably under his headship.

Had I had to make my decision based on one prospective parents talk, I wouldn't have sent my DC there.

Anyway, we digress. Back to the OP!

I understand your fears, HeGrewWhiskersOnHisChin. Grammar school might help, it might not. Sometimes, some children have to go through years of behaving in ways that make their parents feel sad/deeply disapprove of, whatever school they are sent to. If their parents are nevertheless consistent and provide a stable background, those children normally end up back on the right track. They may have made their lives more complicated in the meantime, but sometimes, some people have to learn from their own mistakes, not the mistakes or achievements of their parents. Why not keep looking into the option of grammar school and what your dd's chances of getting in might be, anyway (bearing in mind that trying and failing to get in might make her even more anti-academic achievement as a result!), find out more about the alternatives, too, and at the end of the day, know that you have to be philosophical about what happens and deal with the consequences when they arise, rather than panic about the future.

"BOF - I'd probably look more deeply into a school than to dismiss it in its entirety due to a single, random, off the cuff remark possibly made by a nervous man in the name of misplaced jocularity, actually."

I would not want my child at a school where a) the head teacher was nervous addressing a meeting of prospective parents, and b) where there was a culture suggesting it was acceptable for men to make Terry and June type golf club "jokes" about women.

BOF - I'd probably look more deeply into a school than to dismiss it in its entirety due to a single, random, off the cuff remark possibly made by a nervous man in the name of misplaced jocularity, actually.

I went to an all girls grammar in Bucks and hated it with such deadly loathing that I made a choice to move to a non grammar county so my kids could go to a comp. I know that times have changed, and we are different people, but DD is so much more confident, poised and together than I was at her age. The grammar school shattered my self confidence, and DD has done nothing but blossom.

I don't know how the timings work where you are, OP?
The few remaining GSs in my county all do their 11+ next Saturday. I think many other areas have likewise moved their exams forward into sept of yr6 so the results are known before you have to make the admissions choices. So the open evenings are in summer term aimed at yr5s.

I wouldn't send my kids to this grammar school...

we have an excellent grammar here, plus 2 very good high schools

when DS2 was in Y5/6 he said he absolutely didn't want to go to the grammar, I think from talking to his friends; but that was before open evenings, & after going to those, he changed his mind

but the open evenings were in the autumn term of Y6, & the grammar entrance exam (not 11+ as such, just one full morning of tests sat at the school) was in the spring term. I don't know how the timings work where you are, OP? But anyway, at the beginning of Y5 there's plenty of time for you to nibble away at her resistance

Good luck :-)

I expect it depends on the size of the comprehensive and the area. When I think of the fuss kicked up at my child's school about one particular French teacher, who was thought inadequate for GCSE level, I really can't image the fuss that would have been made if they tried to teach those who intended to do French at university with those who had poor English skills!
Comprehensives need a very large top end, they can't risk losing the parents who would take their child away to educate privately.

Oh and inevitably, if you have not that many kids choosing a particular subject at GCSE, you only have enough for one class, so no setting. I recently taught a GCSE language class which had everything from potential Oxbridge candidates to lids who still had major literacy problems in their own language. Impossible!

SOunds like my dd's GCSE French set - worked out ok, but the teacher was quite good. As you say, GCSE options can't always be set, but most comprehensives set for most subjects most of the time.

Cross post where you explain it

Holmes, why do you think not setting is bad? I am not sure it is great as setting stops late developers from going to the higher sets, ie they will always have lower expectations if set in a low set at age 11.

Parents of top set kids usually like setting (90% of MNers ;) ) , parents of lower set kids not so much , IME