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.

I'm all for social mobility and there's certainly not enough of it!

I'm a working class background and she's already smashed our ceilings!!

But most of all I'm happy she's happy and she's considerate of others.

Have a good evening, off for a drink...

Lots of thoughts.

I went to grammar school from a private school and a lot of the private school girls were struggling by the third year. They had an early advantage but others developed and they overtook them. Was in the 70s.

Grammar schools were historically for the top 20-25% of the population. I think we need more grammar schools not quotas. If they were a bad idea the competition would be less.

Our dd went to a local state secondary for two years - supposed to be one of the best in London - we moved her to a middle of road gentle independent because we were disatisfied with communication, ethos and behaviour. That school had about 7 applicants for every place. DD was top band but certainly not grammar school (or high school) material in SW London. She would have been borderline in the good old days and we wouldn't have sent her because it would have crucified her self esteem.

One size doesn't fit all. Schools should be able to be more selective and there needs to be an appreciation that different schools suit different children. There needs to be more choice and more variety.

YES OP!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES. YES. YES.
(Particularly as local private schools offer unlimited 11+ practice, and sell places at the schools on the percentage of their pupils who get into grammar schools.)

What stops state schools and parents from offering unlimited practice mumblesmum.

How about, my child didn't get into the grammar school and the standards in the local comprehensives, especially in relation to behaviour, are so low I am entitled to received what the state would ordinarily contribute towards my child's education towards the school fees. At the very least I think it should have a tax break.

What we need are better standards across the board.

One size doesn't fit all. Schools should be able to be more selective and there needs to be an appreciation that different schools suit different children.

ITA. But crucially, schools need to be seen as 'different but equal' - I want to see bloody excellent schools for less-academic children. They'd probably need relatively more funding.

I was the last year of selective intake at a grammar-turning-secondary. The area went from having one good school and 3 mediocre schools to having 4 mediocre schools.

What stops state schools and parents from offering unlimited practice
Not all parents are able to provide this sort of help. Surely you must realise this?

What stops state schools? I have no idea. In my day the school familiarised us all and we all sat the 11+. No-one did anything outside school afaik (I certainly didn't).

My Mum went to grammar school in the 1950s. It was almost an entirely working class intake as it was in a working class area.

My mum was tutored in her state primary school, as was everyone else who was being put in for the exam. My uncle-in-law also went to a grammar school after being tutored by his state primary. He was in a different county to my mum - her Durham and him West Yorkshire.

So I don't think tutoring is a new thing.

As for parents who can't teach children enough to pass an exam for bright 11 year olds (for whatever reason), I don't think that is a fault of the school system. That is because of a lack of community education facilities like the WEA that operated alongside state education.

Surely some analysis could be done, to work out what percentage advantage a private school pupil taking the 11+ would have over a state educated pupil? Then suitable adjustments could be made. That's what some universities consider for admissions purposes.

marriedinwhite LEA rules.
In state schools (in my county) we are only allowed to do five sessions of familiarisation and three full practice tests.
Private schools can do as many as they like.

I should add that there is a thriving tutoring business lurking in every village hall.

I'm'm not entirely sure all private schools are a hotbed of 11 plus preparation. In many cases they don't want children to pass the 11 plus as they want them to stay on and pay for their senior school if they have one.

Common entrance, yes. But not so sure about 11 plus.

Probably depends on the area.

Are the county's guidelines based on legislation or local socio political dictat. If it's the latter, there's nothing to stop you. If you are scared invite the bright kids to join you in the library. When teachers start doing what's right and stop pandering to the left and the unions and start behaving like true professionals I'll chain myself to railings for your pensions. At the present the profession isn't doing what's right for children and therefore it doesn't have a great deal of my support.

A state primary near me won't prepare kids for the 11 plus (even though lots go from that school) because he doesn't believe in it. They all pay for (imo) pretty expensive tutoring.

'He' being the headteacher.

Havent read the whole thread, what I have read makes me grateful for the simplicity of the Scottish system! Catchment or non-catchment schools, with the option of private. The English system seems waaaaay over complicated and so competitive.

State primary schools do not prepare for it- they play fair.

Dunno marriedinwhite. Interesting question. I'll have to find out!

saintly Tis a fact in our area that the only 'results' some private primaries show on their websites are their 11+ successes.

(Clue: I am in the county that recently attracted the headline on the BBC news 'Affluence is factor' in tests, says 11-plus council')

I'm not sure about all, but I have lived in two 11+ areas and state primary schools have not done any preparation.

On our LEA website they state that state primaries have to do the designated number of familiarisations and practice papers before a child can sit the test.

State primary schools do not prepare for it- they play fair.
but that's not fair - it does their pupils a disservice. It was properly fair in my day, and SeaHouses mum's day.

we are only allowed to do five sessions of familiarisation and three full practice tests.

My DD went to a private primary, that sounds like rather more than she did for the 11+ . All the kids don't do it, so the other parents wouldn't be happy if they spent loads of time on it. The private school entrance exams were all later, they did more work for those.

My children's school gives no information on 11+ at all.

No test preparation. No advice. It's simply not discussed.

well is it a question of the sats being the right way to grade children? A good IQ test for example does not require prior knowledge so would this be a better way - one you cannot coach for but indicates the child's IQ?