Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think most would not really want a secondary modern

508 replies

inkyfingers · 20/11/2010 17:09

OK, tell me why the 'grammar school system' is good for the 85% who don't get a place? I love the pace and challenge etc the GS offers (as many MNers tell me), but how does the alternative serve the huge majority of pupils? (cos surely a 'system' has to benefit as many as possible??).

If it's a really good wheeze, then the GS supporters would surely be happy if their own DC don't get places?

OP posts:
RitaLynn · 22/11/2010 13:43

The only people I've seen who favour GSs are those who think their kids will get in.

Cortina · 22/11/2010 13:45

LeQueen I got As 24 years ago or so. I am reasonably bright I suppose but no intellectual giant. I didn't get As in Maths and Science but interestingly I didn't 'believe' I could either, but that's a different conversation.

I think I could have done, if I'd known I had it in me. I would have had to work extremely hard as I find that area less interesting and more challenging. As I see it it's about breaking things down into manageable chunks and learning the basics well first.

We didn't have the option of retaking back then in the same way as things appear to work now. My friend has a daughter who is weak in Chemistry, she retook a unit (?) couple of times and ended up with an A.

piscesmoon · 22/11/2010 13:50

' if people failed the 11+ they just got on with life, and ended up on a different job path, doing something more artisan/practical. Most didn't expect to be academic and go to GS, back then.

Do you know how difficult this was?!!
I failed 11+ and suddenly the height of my ambitions was supposed to be shop assistant! I got fed up of telling people I was going to go O'levels, go to the 6th form of the Grammar school and on to university-which is what I did- and so did a lot of others. Some of the cleverest people I know failed 11+.
I certainly expected to pass-it hadn't occured to me that I would fail- I knew that I could do the work.

piscesmoon · 22/11/2010 13:51

I shouldn't complain-it made me a stronger person as I thought 'I will show them!' (and I did)

RitaLynn · 22/11/2010 13:52

LeQueen,

You say those kids "got on with their lives".

The point about children who were poor at sport weren't held back as failures, whereas those who were deemed less academic, were held back as failures. Millions of people didn't lovingly trudge to the mines or the factories, because they were "more practical", they did it because they didn't have the opportunities to go to university, largely not because of their innate abilities, but because of their social backgrounds.

You're making the assumption that in life, there are academic kids, and less academic kids, and the 11+ just sorted them out (with no input from their parents, etc). Good for you and your family that you were the lucky ones. It's just poppycock to believe that.

I'm not saying all people are equally academic, but it suits you to think that your children (apologies for making it personal), are naturally more academic than some of their peers, rather than the fact they grew up in a house with two university educated parents, in a house stocked with books, etc.

piscesmoon · 22/11/2010 13:55

The 11+ sorted the top from the bottom, but it was hopeless for the middle-it drew a line between DCs of equal ability depending on the number of places.What would give you a pass in one area was a fail in another.

RitaLynn · 22/11/2010 14:08

As a thought experiment, if there were a perfectly reliable test of a child's innate ability in the womb, would you be happy to use that as the test (rather than the 11+) that allowed admission to grammar schools.

If not, why not? How many GS supporters would favour that system?

PrematureEjoculation · 22/11/2010 14:11

no ..because effort matters?

i don't lke the 11+ either, it is divisive as you say, and unnecessary - there are other meansto select (i believe the german system allows them a year in which to prove they can keep up.)

Cortina · 22/11/2010 14:12

LeQueen there was a stigma about 11 plus failure, perhaps there still is? The 11 plus was/is a test to determine how intelligent you are. It isn't a good feeling to feel less intelligent that others. As it is this sort of IQ that seems to be valued most by society. You are a superior being, as Plato would see it a leader not a follower. Cognitive scientists have challenged the way we think about intelligence over the last 20 years and perhaps things have changed. The mind is more expandable and intelligence more learnable than we've ever realised.

The 11 plus was designed as a weeding out process to identify those who will benefit the most from higher levels of education. In order to see whom would give the best return on the state's investment intelligence was tested. It was seen, and still is by many, as a unitary quality of mind distinct from memory or perception. Being curious or tenacious were not seen as the same thing.

Your intelligence was seen as a mental competence that would determine how you'd go about a wide range of tasks. Your 'brightness' or 'dimness' would got with you to your meal times to your lessons etc. Being 'dim' stayed with you the same way as being 'bright' did a bit like your hair or eye colour.

Your performance at solving abstract logical puzzles devoid of context, personal relevance and experience - especially if you could do it fast and under pressure was a great indicator of how much 'intelligence' you had. Such tests could be a quick, reliable dipstick of how much intelligence a person had and this became a very important thing to know about them.

The thinking behind the Spens Report of 1938 spawned the 11 plus. Some may still agree with its sentiments including many of the infant teachers I've met with who can just tell so early on who is bright and who is dim which can lead to unconscious labeling and self fulfilling prophecies. As LeQueen said children have a habit of living up or down to our expectations:

Intellectual development during childhood appears to progress as if it were governed by a single central factor, usually known as 'general intelligence'...it is possible at a very early age to predict with accuracy the ultimate level of a child's intellectual powers..It is accordingly evident that different types of children, if justice is to be done to their varying capacities, require types of education varying in important respects.

Some of this is taken from Claxton's research. I am a big fan.

Cortina · 22/11/2010 14:14

Just to add you were a superior being if you passed the 11 plus a leader not a follower! :)

Tikitikitembo · 22/11/2010 14:17

The eleven plus is plain wrong. Why decide a childs whole future on 3 hours worth of work. Suppose they didn't feel well that day.

wrong wrong wrong

LeQueen · 22/11/2010 14:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:22

thought claxton has been largely discredited

Hullygully · 22/11/2010 14:25

I don't have any solutions, or vested interests - but I do know a tutor for the 11 plus who last year managed to get 15 of his 16 tutees into the GS. I know some of the children concerned and there is no way on earth they would have got in otherwise.

Quite how they'll manage whilst there is another matter altogether.

Cortina · 22/11/2010 14:25

By whom Fred? H

Lauren Resnick says much the same thing and she certainly hasn't been discredited.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:26

you see i cant believe this thick kids passing the 11 plus crap you hear a lot.

I passed it easily back in the day. I failed it when i took it last year Wink
its REALLY hard and really tests your mental agility - not just listing memorised facts.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:27

( if they feel bad on the day they appeal or sit it another day)

Tikitikitembo · 22/11/2010 14:28

Its not memorised facts but you can be taught the technique.

Tikitikitembo · 22/11/2010 14:31

I don't think many people would appeal because their kid felt under the weather TBH However, that could have an effect on the result. These are little kids not GCSE age.

Hullygully · 22/11/2010 14:31

Yep, knowing the techniques and practising over and over and over to get the speed up. If you have the money and the nous to organise that, you have an advantage.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:32

so what? why is that a problem?
surely applying the technique is a skill too. locally there is NO WAY you can pass the maths paper without having revised as half the stuff on it isnt taught in KS2.

even when you learn it its not easy.
anwyay = am no apologist for grammar schools, just think people need ot KNOW what they are talking about rather then repeat recieved wisdom.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:32

lots do it at home alone.

Hullygully · 22/11/2010 14:32

Agree with the maths.

FredAboutAFred · 22/11/2010 14:32

and i know of several able kids whose parents didnt put them through it as they couldnt be bothered.
so takes all sorts

RitaLynn · 22/11/2010 14:33

LeQueen,

Assuming you haven't responded further, it would seem you skimmed over some of the points made by Cortina, and are simply reiterating your point

"some kids are brighter than others (and mine just happen to be bright). Background has nothing to do with it. My bright kids should be advantaged over the less bright kids".

Swipe left for the next trending thread