DH had decided DD should not go to grammar school - Help!

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs mum you really do have far, far more energy than me on a Sunday morning - I think you need to pour yourself a cup of tea, and chill...it's the weekend. I don't think moving your fingers takes up much energy at all, especially as I type at 120 wpm.

I'm really happy with the school my DD is at ... it works for us ( shrugs) now this I do understand. However, I do challenge the naive notion that had your DD gone anywhere else she would have been bullied and all the local non selective alternatives have uncontrollable children in them who prevent all bright children from meeting their potential and bully people because they are bright. By your own admission, possibly only 2 girls from your DD2 class will get into the grammar. Do all the other children in her class fit the picture you have painted with regards to the type of children attending the local non selectives. Does she really only get on with 2 of her class mates?

I assume you must be pleased, for your own reasons, with the school your DCs are at...? Yes thanks. You might also find it surprising to know that although my DS gained Lv5 SATs at the end of yr 4 his close friends have a huge range of academic abilities with some of them being in bottom groups, some in middle groups and some in tops groups. I wouldn't have a problem with him going to secondary school with any one of them. In fact, irrespective of their academic ability, DSs friends are giving him a very positive school experience.

Sadly I fear her is trying to be the cool parents and setting you up is he trying to turn her against you this is very common with split couples they do the complete opposite just to be difficult even if this is not something that he would of suggest when you were married

My dd1 would quite like a single sex school, dd2 would hate it and to be honest she would be an absolute nightmare if there were not boys around for her to escape to from all the drama she creates with our girls.

DD2 was the closest we came to even thinking a grammar would be appropriate and I have to admit that I have sometimes lost my temper with her and used the grammar school as a threat. She is very strong willed and has done some very silly things at school, she can also sink to the lowest denominator.

They are fab still look brand new and super comfy!

I find it extraordinarily difficult to separate the 'good' and 'bad' bits of my own education. I went to what was originally a direct grant school. (They got phased out.) My husband went to an independent boarding school - and would never, ever send his children to a boarding school - even if our finances allowed.

But even if you do your best to do things better - or differently - you still end up replicating all sorts of stuff. Partly it's just one's own conditioning. Or your children's genetic inheritance manes they 'take after you.'

With my stepchildren I didn't really have any choices. I just observed - and tried to support my stepchildren. With my daughter, I have - to an extent - been led by her choices and wishes. Which, even at the age of 10, were quite reasonable ones. Again it's a mixture of support, occasional intervention with her school, and damage limitation!

so a regular state comp was never really on the cards for us when it came to schools for our DDs

I suspect that we all see what we want to see. I don't like selective schools and therefore I see evidence that supports that. You want a selective education so you see evidence that supports that.

Marianne I do think that very able or conscientious girls do place themselves under immense pressure, it is something we had to deal with at our school so I am not sure that grammars create those feelings of anxiety. Of course grammar schools will be packed with anxious girls and that can make the problem worse.

I do think that some of the issues around grammar schools are caused by just the fact that they tend to be single sex rather than the selection issue. Are there any mixed grammars?

Thanks LaQueen, not teaching at the moment but yes I was and it is something I am passionate about hence the career.

I think it would be sad place if we only cared about decisions that only immediately impacted ourselves.

I am happy with the education that most of my children have had, however I am not happy that a few miles up the road that there are some very poor secondary schools failing the poorest children. I hardly think that makes me some kind of saint, rather a pragmatist who worries about writing of the majority of society, especially when there is really no need.

If you want to educate your children in some kind of bubble that is fine, I do resent paying for it in my taxes though.

Young people change a lot while they are at secondary school, so while it's obviously pleasing if they settle in well at the start of Year 7 there's a long way to go - and no parent can know what issues will arise!

Certainly my stepson encountered difficulties at his grammar school later - when puberty began to kick in - and it's at that point when the poor level of pastoral care and support, as well as badly flawed communication with parents - began to kick in.

My own daughter is in Year 13 of a selective school now. While she is extremely able I feel that the rather hothouse atmostphere there has made her rather (unncessarily) tense and anxious in some ways. By this stage, both my stepchildren were in sixth form college, and I feel that the more grown-up atmosphere there was a healthier, happier one.

I do think that comprehensives have really upped their game over the past few years and it would be interesting to see how long ago your experience in schools is.

I also live in a rural area so get your point about driving.

If you are going to see bad behaviour in schools it is likely to be in a lesson that is covered, especially if the cover supervisor is new, lacks classroom management skills or is very inflexible. Behaviour in our school is very good, however we did have one cover supervisor who for some reason just managed to wind the students up. Statistically you are also more likely to get off task behaviour in a classroom where students are struggling to read or write. Not always, infact my hardest classes last year were set 4 out fo 5 and set 2 out of five. Those of course are the lessons where a TA would be working.

If your children get a place in a grammar school they are likely to be in top sets where behaviour issues are often less likely to happen - not always I hasten to add. I had a top set Year 11 last year, to be honest I could set them an hours worth of work and leave the room for a brew and a foot massage and they would be working away, in fact they would probably make my brew for me.

I am not doubting your experience of secondary schools Laqueen but I wonder how representative it is of the whole school and whether things have moved on.

As I said I taught in a comprehensive/secondary modern with a very mixed intake that was "only" rated good and yet we rarely see behaviour issues. Our brightest/hardest working are generally admired rather than bullied.

This is what is wrong with this country right here on this thread.

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs it's possible for other people to form a differing opinion based on very different experiences of grammars. Your daughter has only just started at a grammar so based on that I would say you have very little experience of them or were you a TA there too?

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs It's a fantastic place to be and learn did you actually attend you DDs grammar yourself?

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs Our grammar knocks all our local secondaries into a cocked hat all I can say is that the overall academic ability in your area must be very low if the presence of a super selective grammar is affecting the potential performance of the local secondaries. If it is I would say your area is pretty unique in that respect. If you take QE for example which is a super selective (out of interest does your DDs grammar out perform this one by any chance) they have children attending from as far as 25 miles away.

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs but I didn't like the atmospheres or the attitudes. you do realise that children pick up on things like this. I hardly think your presence at these schools was a good influence if this is how you felt whilst working there.

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs There are so few grammars nowadays, in just a small handful of counties...what real impact can they possibly make, really? A lot of people say that but looking at this list suggests there are more than people realise:
www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewforum.php?f=64

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs Oh, and philo I live I'm a naice area I think that somewhat contradicts your claim mum I went one better than just visiting our local non selective schools, before deciding on the grammar...I worked in a few of them, as both a TA and a Cover Supervisor. If you needed a car to get to them as they were several miles away, I really do have to question how local they were to you.

To be honest, if all the non selective schools in your area are performing so much lower than the national average and have such high levels of behavioural issues then I very much doubt you live in a "naice" area. After all lets face it if the Grammar has no catchment I would imagine a number of children attending the school won't even be particularly local so unlikely to have creamed off much of the local "top set" candidates.

Granted most areas will have "the" school that everyone wants to avoid. However, to suggest for one minute that all the non selective schools in your area have high levels of behavioural issues is laughable at best especially if you do live in a "naice" area.

By all means choose what ever school you wish for you DD, that is your prerogative. However, I am surrounded by selective schools (7 out of the 9 local schools to be exact) and I can tell you that pretty much everything you have posted so far falls far short of having any real factual basis to back your claims. I have already demonstrated that an area where schools select only 25% on academic ability can out perform some grammar schools with 100% academic selection. I have named some of those schools - Parmiters, Watford boys & Watford girls. Does you DD grammar really perform significantly better than these schools?

To be clear, I'm not against selective schools, however, I do object to those parents who believe that simply getting their children into those schools will guarantee success (academic ability does not occur through osmosis), makes them better behaved, makes them socially superior and someone a parent should be more proud of. No it doesn't, what it does guarantee is that your daughter will have to work her back side off to keep up with her peers and meet the expectations of the school (nothing wrong with that if that is what you want for your DD). It also means that your DD will be under significant pressure for the remainder of her academic life (again nothing wrong with that if that is what you want for your DD). I've heard many discussions on the pros and cons of a DCs being "a big fish in a small pond" vs being "a small fish in a big pond". The suitability of which comes down to the DC not the school.

I find the reasons for people's educational choices fascinating, but I am a teacher so perhaps not representative.