To think that grammar schools should limit the number of places available to private school kids

[reallytired]

Many grammer schools are over loaded with private school kids. Bright state school kids just can not compete. It is a massive advantage being in a class of 8 with specialist teachers and no SEN kids.

I think that the number of places for privately educated kid should be limited to the percentage of private school kids in the area. Ie. if 10% of kids in a town go to private school then 10% of places should be reserved for private school kids and 90% of places should be for everyone else.

It would then give poor state school families a chance. My son got mostly level 3s at his key stage 1 SATS and is on the top table in his class for every subject, but his school does not think he would get a place at the only grammar in the area. Its crazy. Its no wonder that social mobility is at an all time low.

You could apply and see if he would get a bursary, he will have to sit the 11+.

You're not being unreasonable at all. My grammar school only had 5 state primary school pupils in my year group out of 96 pupil intake (of which I was one). Which, imo, defeats the purpose of Grammar schools!

Get your son to sit his 11+ anyway and don't write it off so easily.

The children who went to a private primary have as much right to a grammar school education if academically able as a non-private primary school scholar.

If a non-private scholar is academically bright enough, they will get in regardless.

YABU.

Absolute Rubbish!

The SEN provision is Grammar schools is far higher, purely because you have a predominantly 'middle class' parent who can afford to pay for consultation after consultation with private Ed Psycs and get their children all the Access Arrangements going for exams! The same also applies to independent and private schools.

Money can't buy brains - no matter how much you pour into a prep school. The best education comes from one-2-one with parents who bother to care enough to continue with educating their child out of school hours.

YABU whoever performs best in the exam should be given places regardless of what primary school they went to.

"The children who went to a private primary have as much right to a grammar school education if academically able as a non-private primary school scholar. "

I completely agree.

What I am suggesting is two seperate competitions. If you are right that going to private school is no advantage to passing the 11 plus then it will not affect the chances of a private school child getting in.

Let the private school kids complete against each other. Say for 7% of the places and let state school kids compete for the rest of the places.

Why not have a full meritocracy though where the best students get in regardless of the type/status of their primary school.

"You're not being unreasonable at all. My grammar school only had 5 state primary school pupils in my year group out of 96 pupil intake (of which I was one). Which, imo, defeats the purpose of Grammar schools!"

That is total utter madness. Were the 91 private school kids substantally brighter than the kids at your state primary?

It should be a simple exam. You pass the benchmark, you get in, you don't pass, you don't get in. Regardless of income, class, special needs, etc.

reallytired - sadly not. The private primary schools simply spent year 6 coaching the pupils in how to pass their 11+

Coach your child well and they'll pass the exam. But if you do that you must be damned sure your child can cope with the pressure - socially and academically - of being in a school like that. A lot of my peers ended up with serious MH issues (eating disorders, depression, alcohol issues) and the like.

YANBU

"What I am suggesting is two seperate competitions. If you are right that going to private school is no advantage to passing the 11 plus then it will not affect the chances of a private school child getting in".

That would not be an equal playing field, because there are less places to compete for. Therefore, you will end up with state school children who are less academically bright getting a place that a private school child would have got, because they have more places to win.

Which is like saying the state school child has more rights to that place, by disallowing a private school child to complete for that place, and allowing a less-bright child to take it instead, simply because he/she didn't go to a private school. Discriminating against a child on the basis of where their parents decided to send them to primary, when they have as much right to that grammar place as anyone else.

YABU!

Putting it simply though Grammar schools are most people's only chance of getting a good education for their child - the closest thing to a private education if you will. In those terms it seems extremely unfair that children whose parents could otherwise afford for them to attend private schools take up those places.

It's a simple exam your child passes he/she gets in. They don't they weren't smart enough. Why should the smart children be at a disadvantage regardless of what their primary shool. Remember some of the private school children may have got a scholarship to go to that school and so are no better off than your child.

MRH, that is shocking.

Really tired, a child with level 3s at KS1 is on target to get level 5s at KS2. 20-25% of children get 3 level 5s at KS2. So if depends on your grammar area; in lots of areas there is only room for 10% of kids are the grammars. So many children with 3 level 5s will not get in. Also the SATs and the 11+ measure different things.

Also, many 11+ exams standardise by month of birth. So in primary, a September child might be on the top table and get level 5s, when in fact the August child in the same room who gets level 4s may actually have a higher ability when age is taken into account.

Which is not to say YABU. I agree (although it isn't a problem at the school DS goes to), but have not considered before the method you suggest. It is a good idea.

I have got 3 kids at senior school in birmingham they all went to state primary. 2 are at grammars one is at the local comp. My kids (Y9, Y8 and Y7) were not tutored and sat the 11+ on their own merit.

The private school kids (and this is my own observation) may well be coached to pass 11+ exams but they can struggle to cope with the pace of work once in the grammar school.

Passing the 11+ is one thing but at the grammars they are pushed and pushed and pushed and even a private primary education can not prepare kids for that. My DD's (who passed the 11+ with no prep) have had no issue with the pace of work.

My comp. educated son is following a much more stimulating and interesting curriculum than his grammar school sisters which has surprised me. He's in top set for core subjects and his school arranges it so there are less than 20 kids per class in the 'A' stream so in some respects despite 'failing' the 11+ he's getting a better education thsn his grammar school sisters.

It's a funny old game, secondary education. Private or not kids will be kids and I know that all secondary schools have their issues...even grammar schools!!

Its like the age old argument though, if you can afford private healthcare you should, even though you pay your taxes...

But like the NHS, education is either free and open to all or its not.

I know there are holes in the comparison because you dont have to "compete" for NHS treatment - (well in a strange way it can be a postcode lottery but that's another thread) but its the same idea.

And private secondary education is a hell of a lot more expensive than primary. Many families can afford primary partly because of this and partly due to the spacing of their children (so you might have one child going on to secondary before youngest child number 3 starts primary so you only ever have 2 in private school at any one time). Who is to say that because you can afford private primary at that point, you can always afford private everything and your child, who has no say in any of it, misses out?

Alistron1 - you've just summed it up completely!

IMO i'd rather my dd go to a good comprehensive than a grammar school, education is much more than exams imo.

If you can afford to run a car, you should, because if you dont you are taking up a seat on a bus that a less-wealthy person who cannot afford a car could have sat in.

Etc.

Where do you draw the line?

Faithless, it's not about some abstract measure of 'smart', if one child is in a private school which completely prioritises training those children to get in, and one is in a busy primary school with 30 children in a class who may actually discourage you from applying, it's not a level playing field on which to assess that 'smartness'.

And, that's why many universities operate a lower offer policy for good comprehensive school students, a study came out the other day to show that when you compare private and state school students who got all A's at A level, the state school students come out with a better class of degree. So, having a set level at A-level obviously isn't a good enough discriminator, and does favour the coached as well as the truly clever.

Its not an even playing field the fact that a private school child is in a tiny class with better resources. Ofcourse they are going to ahead academically otherwise the parents would not be wasting 9K a year on the child's education.

Social mobility is at an all time low. In the 1950s a child from a council estate could go to the grammar and become a doctor, prime minster or a top judge. This is seriously damaging to us as a country.

TattyDevine, how to determine whether a child is "less bright"? If you have two children one from a state school and one from a private school with equal scores what is the chance that they have equal intelligence?

Prehaps grammar schools need to find varied and noval ways of accessing intelligence to stop spoonfeeding. Verbal reasoning and maths tests can be prepared for. Otherwise there would not be so many 11 plus tutors.

YABVU

I used to agree with you... not anymore though.
Bright state kids can and do compete.
My son just scored full marks on the 11+, he's bright, did some preparation but not loads..he's been in an ordinary state school his entire school career. 7 of his friends also passed, with high marks and that's not even counting the girls.
Now it's down to whether we get a place, we have a good chance but then the school maybe very oversubscribed this year. However the children who have been in private education and have also passed the test are just as entitled to a grammar school place.

Perhaps the answer is to bring back three tiered education? Bring in more grammar's and make them elite but not as elite (due to the sheer lack of schools).

By keeping the system as it is you are preventing social mobility and yes it should be the case that state school pupils get priority over private school pupils simply because that was the whole point of Grammar schools!

RT, any exam can be prepared for. Also, the point of the 11+ is to find out how able a child is. Surely verbal skills and maths are two of the most important areas of academic ability in a child?