Please can someone answer this simple question about state selective schools?

Sod the covert bragging on this thread, let's make it overt: dd1 went to our local comp (no grammar schools here, so that ethical dilemma was off the table), and has just left sixth form with all A*s. So, um, I don't think I'm contributing much here except to say that I think a lot is down to how much work they do. I also reckon it does them no harm in terms of life skills to rub along with a peer group that isn't necessarily academic.

Mostly though, I am just posting to show off.

Portofino. Have you been watching the film 'Scrubbers' from 1982.

Your school sounds like a girls borstal ....

sorry bullying not bulling

PortofinoRevisited Ha. I went to a girls' grammar school and could tell stories that would make your hair curl. It was certainly not immune from bullying, drink, sex and drugs. Girls all together can be quite evil. And very competitive. Not necessarily in the good ways.... this is exactly why I have to question the decision LaQueenOnHerHolibobs has made to put her DD into an all girls grammar if bulling and disruptive behaviour was the real determining factor. I think they are going to be on a steep learning curve when it comes to dealing with clever bullies that use psychological bulling rather than physical bulling (which is far more detectable).

Ha. I went to a girls' grammar school and could tell stories that would make your hair curl. It was certainly not immune from bullying, drink, sex and drugs. Girls all together can be quite evil. And very competitive. Not necessarily in the good ways....

TsukuruTazaki 80% of the class going to grammar - whereabouts do you live?! Does make you wonder how LaQueenOnHerHolibobs can think that particular grammar is taking just "top group" children unless 80% of the children in her DDs year were in the top group which sounds very strange.

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs mum I think about 80% of her Yr6 class got into the grammars. 80%, really? How many children were in your DDs year and what is the PAN for the Grammar?

80% of the class going to grammar - whereabouts do you live?!

TsukuruTazaki I think academic selection by way of 11+ is probably fairer than this In the past maybe be some of the selective schools are so over subscribed that distance has become a tie breaker resulting in high property prices around the school. I see a lot of parents opting for private schools when their DCs don't get the 11+ mark needed to get into their preferred schools. The 11 plus does not make a jot of difference and even in 11 plus areas it still very much comes down to money, class and parental attitude.

True, mumtryingherbest ...perhaps this underclass contamination of the 'best and brightest' only appears at puberty?

My exceptionally bright (natch ) DD seems to be getting on just as well in her primary school class with a couple of kids with well-handled SEN, as she does at home with her little brother with well-handled (I hope) SEN.

I think divisions in school quality come about due to money, class and parental attitude just as much if not more than through 11+ exams. I have looked into the schools into Bristol, which is not a grammar area but has a very high level of social selection going on as most of the state schools in the city are quite poor quality (with a few very oversubscribed exceptions) and as a result many opt for private education or pay the high property prices to live on the doorstep of one of the few sought after comprehensives. I think academic selection by way of 11+ is probably fairer than this but I don't begrudge anyone doing their best for their child as I think that is completely natural. I don't understand people who are willing to put their "principles" ahead of their DC and I am a bit when people claim they disagree with selection and would always send them to the local comp out of principle. Often such people "conveniently" have access to a good quality state school. If it was a special measures school many would change their tune!

I would have no qualms about sending my child to a grammar, private or moving to ensure I was in a good catchment area. You do what you have to do. I have just watched Educating the East End on C4 and I would do all I could to avoid my child going to a school like that where lessons are constantly disrupted and the learning is minimal.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Or, here's a crazy notion - we could keep them all in the same school, assess them throughout each year, and put them in sets for the next year depending on their performance. Avoids cruising, avoids writing kids off, avoids assessing them on one day's performance - what's not to like?

Isn't this what happens in many junior schools? How many state primary schools have academic selection? If it's not needed at primary level to get results why is it needed at secondary level?

LaQueenOnHerHolibobs out of interest, did any of the violent, aggressive and openly disruptive children go to your DDs primary school or did every single child from your DDs primary school go to the grammar? Only asking because if, as you seem to suggest, your DD is exceptionally bright and didn't need teaching-to-the-test to get into the grammar, then those very children you are trying to protect her from don't seem to have held her back too much so far.

Amber, I like selection because my DDs are both 2E and need an appropriate environment in their school. I'm not afraid of 'scary poor children', I was one of those myself and trust me, I wasn't that scary. And nor were any of my friends. I actually find posh kids far more scary and objectionable than people from the sort of council flat background I come from.

"I personally think it much fairer to select the top 20% based on their SATs levels at the end of Yr5. A much fairer and consistent assessment of a child's true ability, I think."

Or, here's a crazy notion - we could keep them all in the same school, assess them throughout each year, and put them in sets for the next year depending on their performance. Avoids cruising, avoids writing kids off, avoids assessing them on one day's performance - what's not to like?

I think the answer to your question, Hak, is that people who like selective systems, in whatever form, don't like them because they think they produce better results, but because they enable them to keep their own children away from those scary poor children. Some people are honest about this, some less so.

Even if selection were proven to lead to worse academic results, I suspect lots of people would do it anyway, and find ways to justify it (you can't really compare the results because our children take much harder exams / you can't really compare the results because those other schools just teach to the test / those other schools focus too much on academic subjects at the expense of the rounded education my child's school provides...).

That there is a vast difference....

I want to dispel the myth that they is a vast difference between modern schools and comprehensive schools. There are modern schools that achieve results that only the highest performing comprehensives achieve and that parents would give their right arms for. Some of these 'modern' schools achieve up to 85% GCSE inc Maths/English and more amazingly up to 7% AAB in two facilitating subjects meaning up to 7% of their cohort are going to Russell group Universities each year.

There are of course some comprehensive schools that get 95% at GCSE and 25% AAB in two facilitating subjects. Lets forget both these types of 'super'
schools and concentrate on the average modern and comprehensive schools.you will find that the average modern school achieves around 45% GCSE inc Maths/English with the 'high ability' students averaging C+ or B- in their GCSE. The average comprehensive school achieves around 58% at GCSE inc Maths/English high ability students averaging between B- to B grades. When you compare , there really is not much difference in the outcomes of pupils attending your average comprehensive or average modern school.

We need to get away from this modern is rubbish comprehensive is good argument. I am pro selection but when DD2 was taking her 11+ (bearing in mind my worries about NVR) and DDs feelings if she failed, would have taken a comprehensive option . It does not make me like or want a comprehensive system, it would just have been a case of 'playing'safe.

The other thing that surprised me as I have stated on other threads, Is how well DD1s modern school did in educating her. The school enabled her to comfortably get on the competitive degree that she has wanted to do since 15 and eventually a career in the police.

Hakluyt, because what is actually being practised is a form of social selection, rather than anything with educational merit.

Phineyj- it's a common misconception that it's more difficult for grammar schools to "add value" onto the students they take in. Expected progress from KS2-4 is 3 levels of progress regardless of ability. In reality brighter students often make progress faster (who'd have thought it eh?). Almost all of the students at our school who made 5 or more levels if progress in English and Maths were from the higher ability band, a few were from the middle band. Whilst some of our students from the lower ability band made 4 levels of progress (so got L3 SATs and a C at GCSE) none made 5 or 6 levels of progress. Many comps get most of their value added from the students who come in on L5+ not from the less able ones. FFT based value added is a bit more complex than just levels of progress but generally makes it easier to add value to bright kids.

I very much want to keep my DDs away from some of the children who end up in the high schools. The violent ones, the aggressive ones, the openly disruptive ones...yep, I want my DDs as far away from those type of pupils as possible. What parent wouldn't? I'm not sure an all girls grammar school would be the best option for avoiding this. Just wait until the teenage hormones kick in full swing...

I think it very much depends on how the statistics are interpreted and presented.I live in a GS area and have seen statistics presnted saying the oppsite to your argument.
I believe any comparison is a nonsense anyway because:-
(a)no 2 boroughs are alike because of differences in ethnicity, income etc.

(b) there is so much leakage in both directions . What happens (here anyway) is the top 28% go to GS with the remaining places being taken by the most academic children from neighbouring towns..The lowest 30% go to the secondary modern . The remaining middle-ability children are bussed out to neighbouring towns with comprehensives.

(C) A highest level BTEC pass is, on paper, the same value as A* A levels in Further maths, physics , chemistry etc

Utter

Why does the Ipad keep doing that ie keep changing text after I've posted?

But you need to be able to do them at speed and if you're not naturally that great you'd have to be very dedicated to go through them over and again.

To be frank anybody with the tenacity to study methods,go through them,go over mistakes continuously deserves a place on that alone.They're utter tedium.