The Politics of Grammar Schools

EvilTwins, yes

Grammar school would not be right for my bright DS2, I don't think. School say he is bright enough for scholarship to selective private school. But I don't fancy it.

He is very (too?) sensitive and does not deal well with pressure. He works too hard as it is (perfectionist homework) and I would not want him in a hothouse environment, be it private or state.

I think he might be happier in a comp.

Some kids don't do well in high pressure environments, witness all the threads about self harming and stressed out kids. I know too many children with mental health issues in that sort of selective school (lots of my friends' kids) to risk it. They all say "it's a brilliant school! really great! ...sadly X now has burn out/sleepless nights/needs daily meditating to stop him freaking out/cries every day/self harms etc. etc."

No thanks.

What if I want my children to mix with a range of other children rather than just other clever kids?

What if I want my kids to realise that they have to have the social skills to work alongside a whole range of other children and that the word is not compartmentalised into "clever" and "not clever"

What if I want my kids to be educated in a place that represents real life?

I did not say for "every"bright child, there are always exceptions but certainly a grammar school is the right choice for the majority of bright children.

Evil Twins. I presume you are saying that a grammar school may not be the right environment for bright Autistic or those with SEN.

There is currently a debate going on in Autistic circles that bright Autistic children would be better suited in a grammar school setting. Simon Langton Boys Grammar in Canterbury is one of the few grammar schools that has a specialist unit and is proving that case well.

There is selection anyway, either within the school (sets) or with different schools (private selective or grammars).

I would not like to see grammars introduced in Hampshire, as there are many good comps, and I like the idea that a child (including my own) can start of a bit lower (esp. boys often do), and the gain momentum later on. It's nice if they are in an environment that does not put a ceiling on their achievements.

Saying that, some comps work with very rigid sets, rigid targets and predicted grades, so you can be "stuck" in a low set, with low expectations.

The problem with the comprehensive system is that not all comprehensives are good in this respect.

As schools vary so hugely, it is hard to generalise.

I'd think I'd favour a comp system which allows for movement between sets, and for sets not to be all linked (in some comps if you are bad at English, you get in bottom set for all humanities and languages).

I was lucky enough to find one like this.

But some people prefer rigid sets (usually parents of top setters). So they should have that choice.

I am grateful we don't have a grammar school here to fuck up the system (as the remaining schools would be "second best" by default), but I guess I don't oppose them. If that's what people want, give it to them.

"What makes you think that a grammar school is right for evey bright child?"

Well, if you are in awholly selective area, then a grammar school is probably better than the available alternatives for a bright child. Owing to that being where most of the other bright kids are.

Nicely circular, innit?

It is right for any child, who in agreement with their parents, wishes to try to get in.

What makes you think that a grammar school is right for evey bright child?

Quite agree Smokepole.

The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so.

Not using it is plain daft.

Its all good and dandy thinking about the "majority" of children or families and having a socialist outlook. The reality though is that in life today any advantage you have (whether in terms of Educational or Money) you have to use. The way the world is today and will be for our children, is that if you waste any advantage in this "Cut Throat" world you are either naive or stupid. The sure fire way of making sure you or your children end up at the bottom of the Pyramid is by not using your advantage. Therefore if you have a bright child and a grammar school is available not using it based on is plain daft. It is also against the child's interests to place your ideology above the correct school for your child.

Gosh- have I not made myself clear? I am opposed to selective education, and very pro comprehensive.

Hakluyt - where exactly do you stand. TalkinPeace is pro comprehensive, I am pro-grammar. You seem to say a lot. Where do you stand. Or do you just like to be provocative for the sake of it.

To all, we have an education system, and we have to deal with it as best we can. Some comps are great. Some are not. A comp does not need to have an Ofsted 4 rating to be shit. Performance tables' trends, speaking with teachers, speaking to students and the reputation of the school will inform school choices. I prefer the grammar school that my child attends as it provides a free and very high quality education - and I am working hard with my other child to enable them to join their sibling. There are some grammars that we avoided. PS, the CVA score at the grammar school is good.

Portico, I don't see any bile or invective on this thread. And no desire to "take you to task". You are one of the very few honest grammar school supporters!

Hak, there is a lot of anger and sarcasm in a lot of the posts. In terms of bile and invective, look them up. If you wish to take me to task today, I am up for it, today more than evert.

Maybe we need to "define our terms"

When I say "privileged" I do not necessarily mean materially. But educated switched on parents who understand the system, are articulate and confident enough to engage with it, who know how to support a child's education and can can provide a calm "education friendly" environment confer huge benefits on a child, whatever school they are at. And it is foolish to ignore the fact that those benefits are more likely to come in familiar which also have other privileges- such as being in higher socioeconomic groups. And for anyone who has been involved with grammar and secondary modern schools the class thing is impossible to miss, even though nobody talks about it.

I'd quite like definitions of "bile" and "invective" too. They obviously don't mean what I think they mean........................

In this context, I think privileged/advantaged means having switched on, supportive parents, rather than having lots of money. This is what really makes a difference to children's outcomes. The two are interlinked, obviously - it's easier to support your child if you don't have to hold down two jobs to make ends meet, or if you don't struggle to understand their homework because of your own poor education - but it's the engagement that makes the difference, not the money.

And I think it's simplistic to argue that selection by postcode is equivalent to selection by test (and it is selection by test, not ability). Both lead to inequality, but I think it would be easier to tackle the former if the latter didn't exist.

I am not ignoring any replies - I am unlikely to be online again until tomorrow- RL calls!

NotSureToday can you give me an example, this century, of one where there is not a supportive parent behind them? The supportive parent is the necessity- one that will read to them, talk to them, take them to the library. Can you give an example where they are disadvantaged in the area and the parents?

DH and I are what you would call "engaged and switched on". We are very far from being privileged, though. One doesn't automatically equal the other!!

The grammar schools that I and my brother went to (super-selectives now) are 75% non-white now (predominantly Indian and some south Asian). How does this tie in with your 'privileged few' argument, Hakluyt? They are not a group traditionally associated with privilege, but they do believe in tutoring to get places.

Mehitabel, not no possibility. It can be done and there are plenty of examples.

Absolutely no possibility though of being able to afford a house in the catchment area of naice comps

Hakluyt. Do you equate engaged and switched on parents with being the "privileged few"

Too much bile and invective (from the usual suspects) about those parents who are engaged in their kids education, and clued up enough to do something about helping them.

How would people feel with twins where one is at the grammar and one the secondary modern? I know 3 sets it happened to and all of similar ability.
Even more where siblings are either side of the divide.
I am so grateful that mine were all in the same school.

I have just googled 'return of grammar schools campaign' and lots of results. I then googled ' return to secondary modern schools campaign' and nothing.
I think that tells you all.