to think most would not really want a secondary modern

[inkyfingers]

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?

Which secondary modern is that, Ivykaty44?

It's a fact that students from poorer backgrounds are less likely to pass 11+, less likely to do well academically and less likely to go to university. So we should right now, on this thread, stop talking about the 'academically more able' when we mean 'the better off' and stop talking about 'those who aren't suited to academic study' and say 'poor boys'. It's not a level playing field, grammar schools are there so that some middle class parents don't have to pay for their children's education and the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Not true. I was talking to someone the other day whose bright son has just passed his eleven plus. His family are definitely working class and he has had no extra opportunities. He is just bright.

My godson also got into a Kent grammer, also most definitely working class.

I went to a grammar school and I grew up in a workless household on a council estate so they are certainly not just for the children of the middle classes. Going to grammar school allowed me to get good grades and go to a top university and get the job that I have.

My friends varied a lot, the ones who have done best (degree etc) are from council estates with either disabled or partially absent fathers.

A lot though were infact from average homes, dad worked, mum at least part time, own house

We are working class, couldn't afford a tutor for ds, but he has a chance of getting into GS because he's a clever kid. We are lucky that if he doesn't get in, the local comp is a good one.

I think the only stipualtion on GS is that children from private schools should not be allowed to enter the exams. They will have an unfair advantage as private schools tutor children as a matter of course.

Curly, spot on about the private schools, also no children from places like Eton & Harrow should be allowed in the top universities

schools should be all inclusive and offer everything to all pupils of all abilities. there should be no grammar, selective or religious schools and chilren should attend the local school in their area by foot.

head teachers would be in charge of budgets and stream children accordingly.

more male teachers are needed and more physical activity.

children should all be given equal opportunities for education. our system is ridiculous as it stands and just segretates communities

Why shouldn't children from private primary schools be allowed into grammar schools. They have as much right as children from state primary schools to go to a grammar school

My dad was a miner, I went to grammar school. This doesn't change the fact that when I got there everyone else was called Fenella and had a pony. Grammar schools are full of well coached middle class children. This is a fact based on statistics and it's not a small gap - it's a huge one.

Souyheast, may I add public schools to your list. The perpetuation of priviledge and the "old school tie" where you get access to a top job because of who you know not your ability.

i would add that but i'm trying to be realistic

think it's cheeky to go private primary then work the system to get into a grammar

but i tend to worry about all children not just my own

isn't the problem that some comprehensives aren't helpin anyone out though?

i mean its al very well saying 'oh, garammar system lets kids from poorer backgrounds down' but if comps also let those same children down, as well as the kids from wealthier backgrounds - then it's neither beter nor worse?

We have 4 grammars and the local (rough as a badgers arse) comp is about to send a kid with 5 A* off to Cambridge, the kid failed his 11+.
The school my DC's prep feeds into takes the children who've failed the 11+ and the parents can pay, they regularly send children to study medicine, engineering, law and business at top universities who were considered not so bright.
It would seem to me that you have bad schools and good schools but ultimately it's down to the individual.

my buggerous keyboard is letting me down...

They will have an unfair advantage as private schools tutor children as a matter of course.

How is it in the private schools interests for the children to pass the 11+ ? They would rather the children and the money stayed in the private system so there's nothing in it for them to tutor the children, so they don't.

newwave why do you want to ban private school children from top universitys

there are too many types of schools, there should be just one to fit all imo. teachers could be a little more passionate too imo so i would also raise their pay to motivate them more

sea- it's very difficult to have more sports/PE in inner city schools, where there is a small tarmacced (?sp) playground and nothing else. The school on my street (ruled out for us in religious grounds) have to use a playing field 3/4 mile away for games, which is okay, but by the time the children have walked over there, allowing for walking back and showers, there isn't actually much time left for sports. Laughably it is a specialist sports college- goodness knows how poor the facilities are at the other 3 local secondary schools (DC v small)

But one size doesn't fit all, that would be extremely unfair on the top and bottom of the class, what a ridiculous idea.

mamatomany- preps in my area do prepare children for 11+, and pride themselves on their pass rates too.

huh? i'm saying one school, streamed to fit all, local school

we managed it in the 80s! we had lots of poshos at my comp who went on to cambridge et al

now their parents wouldn't consider it, parents are alot more selfish and paranoid about their children mixing now imoho