The Politics of Grammar Schools

Not read all the thread as too many of them.

We moved out of the gss area in order to secure a place in a good comp for my dc1. This is the best thing that I have done for my children. During year 5 we visited all the grammar schools they are all single sex anyway and also my dc just hates the atmosphere in any of them. So there's no incentive for my dc to prepare for the 11+ to try for any of the schools. Some of her year6 friends liked the gss so it s okay for them and they worked very hard for 11+. Looking back now 11+ seemed to have dominated many parents and children's primary school life and not always by choice. Some of the children cried throughout the test on the day.
My dc1 is in year 7 now and she already has some level5s and given some level6 targets for end of yr 7. I know she is only very average comparing to mumsneters' dcs. In her class some children are already level 7. These children are not less ambitious than those in gss. However many of them either didn't get a place or didn't take 11+ simply didn't want to. My neighbour next door their dd went to Cambridge and the other one nearby their ds went Oxford. Both of their children went to comps.
I am glad that in our area we don't have to worry about 11+ with my year 4 dc2 so she can continue to enjoy her brownie and dance lessons etc. Otherwise she may have stop her after school enjoyments in order to make time and save money for 11+ preparation. Also we feel that we have a much better community atmosphere in this area. I believe it is partly to do with the fact that most local children go to their local schools together and socialize after school. I myself shall not vote for any political parties that are pro grammar schools. I don't want to have to go through all the stress a gain.

*Miggsie
If you need to do 2 hours work a night to prepare for the 11+ then automatically your child should not be doing it./

DC1 spent much the same time. By the time Y6 state primary sratred, sailed through and attained 6s and 5s. Did no work, and just played on the PS4 for hours on end, everyday.

*OneMoreMum
Surely Portico is (if genuine) just demonstrating why the grammar system is so damaging for children, and not just those who don't get in.

Her poor kids are spending huge amounts of their time desperately trying to prepare for an exam that will shape their whole future, imagine the expectation riding on them in that exam! If they fail it will be crushing, plus it leaves them with the apparently undesirable school as the only fallback unless they can pull some cash out and go private.

Clearly not all children have access to either huge amounts of input from their parents, funding for a private education or indeed above average ability at age 11 so this is not equitable, the only equitable system is a good comprehensive school available to all, where all children are taught according to their ability.

This is not a judgement against individual parents who have no choice but to operate in the system they find themselves in, but an argument about the system as a whole as being wrong.*

I agree but there are no decent comps near me. That being said, a Super-selective Grammar is by far the best.

*anothermakesthree
I really don't want to sound too critical Portico, it does appear you have already stirred up quite strong emotion on this thread.

However, I think it is important to present an alternative and perhaps (as I see it) more rational approach to sitting exams for the super selectives ( my ds is at a super selective in Barnet..bit of a give away).

Notsuretoday is absolutely correct in that the schedule you describe is not something all families embark upon. Some families take the view that a small amount of prep (2 hours a week, spread over the week) will suffice, if the child is naturally bright enough to gain entry to the school. If they don't 'pass', so be it. It was entirely my sons decision to sit for the school, he loved it and knew he wouldn't be able to go to our local school (not of the required faith).

What I have come to realise is that those parents that talk of grammars being 'hot houses', tend to be those parents that tutored their children so heavily, the momentum needs to be continued once the child was at the grammar. Homework that is supposed to take 30 mins, takes that child 60 minutes.

I do actually agree with some of your comments Portico, however I'm afraid you lost me when it became obvious that you are not actually in support of grammar schools, as they were originally intended, but what some have become.

Couldn't give a s### if I have stirred up a hornet's nest; it would be very boring if we all agreed.

I am in favour of grammar schools for what they become. Unashamedly so!!*

*farewelltoarms
Whilst Portico's schedule is completely bonkers, I do disagree with those who say 'no tutoring' is needed when said by parents with children at a private/prep school. If your child is a class of 15, mostly academically above average children then surely that's a form of long-term tutoring in comparison to my children in a class of 30 with some very tricky kids. I often hear prep/private school parents bragging that their children had 'no tutoring' apart from a 'few hours' of past papers with their parents as if they're morally superior when all tutoring in our case is trying to do is to even the playing field a bit. And then there are the prep school parents who are tutoring on top, sometimes at the recommendation of the schools themselves.

My ds is doing some independent school exams in January. I'm now terrified that, despite his hour a week with a general tutor, he's going to fail because he doesn't do 45 mins every morning with a word list and then working from 4 until 9.30 (with some breaks, the slackers) every night. He doesn't even do that total in a week with under a month to go...*

Don't worry. It is easy to prep for an Independnet School that it is for a CEM 11+. So, calm yourself down.

farewelltoarms
Please don't worry Another - I certainly never use the word 'fail' in this house. Am exaggerating in response to Portico's rather amazing revelations. Quite frankly if that is what it takes to get into a selective school (private or otherwise) then I want no part of it. It's amazing how all the children I know in rather normal comprehensives seem to manage to compete for university places at all and yet they do and in fact seem to outdo all the ones I know in selectives.

Which rather amazing revelations?????????????

Please don't worry Another - I certainly never use the word 'fail' in this house. Am exaggerating in response to Portico's rather amazing revelations. Quite frankly if that is what it takes to get into a selective school (private or otherwise) then I want no part of it. It's amazing how all the children I know in rather normal comprehensives seem to manage to compete for university places at all and yet they do and in fact seem to outdo all the ones I know in selectives.

"Why would parents pay fees to private schools if their DC were not receiving a better education than their state educated counterparts?"

I suppose it depends whether you think endless repetition of VR and NVR papers constitutes a "better education. If,in some alternative universe, my children were to go private, that is certainly not what I'd be paying for!

I wonder how many watched "confessions of a teacher" on Channel four last night. Here are some classic quotes. "The Boy should be given the stick, it Does wonders". Grammar School is the key to the Professions . A boy at a primary school " If you Don't pass the game's up" My absolute favourite though is a 1960s Headmaster asking a 15/16 year old girl what she wanted to do " I want to be a hairdresser " The headmaster replied you are good with your hands ,Never Mind". An absolute classic piece of film.

I do think some people still perceive modern schools to be the same today as they were 50 years ago.

farewell to arms

I think you will find the level of ability required in the exam, differs between Independent schools and super selective grammars. Just a matter of numbers, the thousand sitting pushes up the level of ability required to get through the exam.

I think you should be wary of the phrase 'he's going to fail'. If he doesn't get in where you would like, is that how he will feel?

Whilst Portico's schedule is completely bonkers, I do disagree with those who say 'no tutoring' is needed when said by parents with children at a private/prep school. If your child is a class of 15, mostly academically above average children then surely that's a form of long-term tutoring in comparison to my children in a class of 30 with some very tricky kids. I often hear prep/private school parents bragging that their children had 'no tutoring' apart from a 'few hours' of past papers with their parents as if they're morally superior when all tutoring in our case is trying to do is to even the playing field a bit. And then there are the prep school parents who are tutoring on top, sometimes at the recommendation of the schools themselves.

My ds is doing some independent school exams in January. I'm now terrified that, despite his hour a week with a general tutor, he's going to fail because he doesn't do 45 mins every morning with a word list and then working from 4 until 9.30 (with some breaks, the slackers) every night. He doesn't even do that total in a week with under a month to go...

I really don't want to sound too critical Portico, it does appear you have already stirred up quite strong emotion on this thread.

However, I think it is important to present an alternative and perhaps (as I see it) more rational approach to sitting exams for the super selectives ( my ds is at a super selective in Barnet..bit of a give away).

Notsuretoday is absolutely correct in that the schedule you describe is not something all families embark upon. Some families take the view that a small amount of prep (2 hours a week, spread over the week) will suffice, if the child is naturally bright enough to gain entry to the school. If they don't 'pass', so be it. It was entirely my sons decision to sit for the school, he loved it and knew he wouldn't be able to go to our local school (not of the required faith).

What I have come to realise is that those parents that talk of grammars being 'hot houses', tend to be those parents that tutored their children so heavily, the momentum needs to be continued once the child was at the grammar. Homework that is supposed to take 30 mins, takes that child 60 minutes.

I do actually agree with some of your comments Portico, however I'm afraid you lost me when it became obvious that you are not actually in support of grammar schools, as they were originally intended, but what some have become.

Surely Portico is (if genuine) just demonstrating why the grammar system is so damaging for children, and not just those who don't get in.

Her poor kids are spending huge amounts of their time desperately trying to prepare for an exam that will shape their whole future, imagine the expectation riding on them in that exam! If they fail it will be crushing, plus it leaves them with the apparently undesirable school as the only fallback unless they can pull some cash out and go private.

Clearly not all children have access to either huge amounts of input from their parents, funding for a private education or indeed above average ability at age 11 so this is not equitable, the only equitable system is a good comprehensive school available to all, where all children are taught according to their ability.

This is not a judgement against individual parents who have no choice but to operate in the system they find themselves in, but an argument about the system as a whole as being wrong.

In areas where parents do want to apply to GS, then yes, an industry has been born.
This doesn't mean it fulfils any necessary service.
It just feeds into fear and desire and markets itself accordingly.
Like lots of other industries that offer us the pleasure of buying shit we don't need
With bells on

Tutoring is an interesting issue - even the tutors vary widely and the types of tutoring required are different depending on the school you go for. In areas where you have a catchment for the grammar school and mainly local children are taking the test, very bright kids probably don't need tutoring. For super selectives with vast, or no, catchment, even the kids at prep schools are tutored! It's that competitive. I don't think the prep schools cater much for 11+, their focus has to be on CE. You can be 'selective standard' for one or two schools and not judged to have met the standard at others. It's not consistent and it depends absolutely on how a child did on one or more exams. That's fine - they have to select somehow. But I think there's a danger of judging a school by the hoops parents have to jump through - these schools aren't having to work as hard as comprehensives in improving outcomes for a wide range of children because they've already carefully selected the top 5% of the intake. Parents are supportive because they have made often considerable efforts to get a place. Behaviour is usually less of an issue as a result.
I have no vested interest either way - I am delighted with my DS1's comprehensive; I know other people are very happy with their alternatives!

Well first, a lot of people will cheerfully say that private school is a complete waste of money .

But leaving that aside, don't we need to unpick the general education being offered at a good prep school, from the fairly narrow things being tested at a n 11 plus for GS.

French, Latin, music, science, art, sports may all have been superior at a good prep school, but these are not tested at the 11 plus. In fact you might say that the breadth of education offered at a good prep could be a hindrance, because it certainly takes up a hell of a lot of time. There is almost no time set aside for verbal reasoning and wotnot.

I'm willing to accept though that there are 11 plus factory preps in Kent. It seems such an odd place, I'm willing t believe almost anything about it!

TheWordFactory - I disagree vehemently that state educated DC do not require top up education (which may take many forms) if they are to have an equal stab with privately educated DC for selective secondary education (if whatever sort). Why would parents pay fees to private schools if their DC were not receiving a better education than their state educated counterparts?

Bonsoir of course prep schools are in the business of preparing their pupils for secondary, but for lots of prep schools, the 11 plus for grammar schools barely registers.

For one thing, three of the biggest round here go right through to sixth form. I'm not sure how much effort goes in to prepare those pupils for any exams, let alone for GS. Why would they?

Second, we're not in a GS area. DD applied to one in the next county. She was one of 4 out of 60 in her year. No one else bothered. It would be quite far to travel and there would be no school bus.

Third, most people want private.

In areas where parents do want to apply to GS, then yes, an industry has been born. This doesn't mean it fullfills any necessary service. It just feeds into fear and desire and markets itself accordingly. Likes lots of other industries that offer us the pleasure of buying shit we don't need .

Perpetuating the myth that only tutored kids can get into selective schools doesn't help widen access, it just keeps the old cycle going...

Hakluyt - the very principle of English state education is that it is non-selective by ability until 16. Remaining grammar schools are an exception. State primaries are non-selective by ability and must not enter the "grammar exception" game.

"It is not news either that state primaries are in principle opposed to preparing DC for any form of 11+ selection, even in grammar areas (I am incredulous about this, btw)."

I'm not sure they are, actually. Certainly in Kent they are expressly forbidden to offer more than a couple of familiarization papers, although many do more. The problem is that while the received wisdom is that the 11+ is a test that all children take from a level playing field because it is tutor-proof, obviously LEAs are not going to allow schools to offer preparation. If they did they would be giving the lie to the publicity.

I don't think your analysis of your local situation (and who am I to do anything but take your word for it) works at a macro level. It is hardly news that the USP of prep schools is ensuring pupils get a place at the secondary school that is right for them and their parents. It is not news either that state primaries are in principle opposed to preparing DC for any form of 11+ selection, even in grammar areas (I am incredulous about this, btw).

The massive, institutionalised tutoring and 11+ prep industries attest to the need for state educated pupils to cover academic ground and familiarise themselves with test formats. To pretend otherwise is to cut state educated DC off from a realistic shot at 11+ tests. Why would anyone do this unless to reduce competition for privately educated DC?

I can see that would be a selling point in Kent.

There is a private primary- I am old fashioned enough not to call it a "prep" but others do- which sells itself almost exclusively on its 11+ pass rate. Which is usually 100%.

Special exams set by some public schools and the dreaded CE are, I accept a different matter.

I'm not sure how a state school parent could cover those without some experienced tutors.

I would agree with you Bonsoir if the prep schools were doing the job of tutors, but I really don't think they are.

There is no way prep schools round here are getting year 4/5s sitting down to familiarise themselves with the tests. It's just not necessary! And of course, for part of the cohort, pointless, as they're not going to leave at 11.
Perhaps prep schools are different in grammar areas?

State schools could very easily replicate what our prep schools dis in terms of preparation for exams in year 6. It wasn't remotely onerous.

Prep schools are in the business of ensuring DC get a secondary school and it is perfectly reasonable for them to advise parents of DC at their school not to tutor.

However, to extrapolate from advice given by prep schools and to take that as meaningful advice for families at state primaries would be incorrect and indeed quite contrary to principles of fair access.

My daughters aren't into logic puzzles or crosswords, more likely to be on trampoline or playing withtheir littlebrother when not out for ec stuff. In light of that I don't think 10 mins a day is excessive. The tutoring was ina little group with friends and they both saw it more as another club.

Trouble is, I had a shoo-in too! The level of panicky preparation in our social circle was noticeably increased the next year........

If you need to do 2 hours work a night to prepare for the 11+ then automatically your child should not be doing it.

It also gives the message that the only thing of value for the child is to pass an exam and that parental approval is dependent on this. A loathsome system.