Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

286 replies

reallytired · 05/02/2011 21:05

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.

OP posts:
jumpingcastles · 05/02/2011 21:53

I would really like to know how a private school student 'suffers' at a grammar school? I thought the general assumption that most people have is that private school pupils are already 'pushed'?

Private school parents pay taxes as well and have the same right as anyone else to have access to grammar schools

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 21:53

Ingles2 - has the exam changed because when I sat it everyone 'passed' but you were then ranked according to age, headteacher's recommendation, academic potential, finances etc etc. Full marks weren't enough to get into the school.

A1980 · 05/02/2011 21:54

YABU and I woud remark that going to a private school is no gurantee of outstanding academic performance.

One of my friends DC's went to a private prep school from the age of 3 and then failed his 11 plus and failed all of the exams for the private 11+ schools.

TattyDevine · 05/02/2011 21:55

I think you have a point about the exam as an entry selector. I just dont think its quite fair to limit so severely the amount of private students who can get in full stop.

Perhaps a sliding scale where extra points or special dispensation can be given to children from primaries or a slightly harsher marking system for private students or interviewing the 20 private students who scraped in and interviewing the 20 state ones who missed out in the ladder of scores and choosing a mix of 20 out of those 40 who impressed the most or something...I'm sure there's a better way that that and I'm sure there's a better way than what they are doing BUT I disagree that numbers should be so severely restricted to private students.

TattyDevine · 05/02/2011 21:56

I actually think there are quite a few assumptions being made about private schools, private education and the parents of privately educated students here...

troisgarcons · 05/02/2011 21:57

Having one at grammar and one in a secondary modern, I know which is groomed to succeed in life, is more roudned and confident - and I know which one is just primed to exist and make do.

If only the comps and sec mods didn't trreat their pupils like second class citizens, then mayube we would have a generation of go-getters.

But again a lot of it comes down to home influences.

Original poster
reallytired · 05/02/2011 21:57

"Private school parents pay taxes as well and have the same right as anyone else to have access to grammar schools"

I think they should have EQUAL right to grammar schools. At the moment private school families hog grammar schools unfairly.

I feel the admissions process should be adjusted to look for potential rather than the academic level a child is at.

A poor child has more to gain from a grammar school education than a rich child. Private school parents can pay for extra tutoring to make up for the limiations of the comp.

OP posts:
jumpingcastles · 05/02/2011 21:58

TattyDevine

Why harsher marking? What for? Not all private school pupils are academically bright you know?

The state schools should help those that are bright, guide them on the exam techniques etc

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 21:59

Tatty - i don't think so. The facts speak for themselves. Here the sole aim of the private primaries IS to get the children into the Grammar schools. That is a fact and it is proven year after year after year with the school intake.

Starting at a private school gives you a HUGE leg up in the world moreso than going to a state school which, imo, makes it a crying shame the leg up remains with them when there is the opportunity for less wealthy children to have the same quality of education for free.

I personally feel if you can afford private you should stay private.

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 22:01

jumpingcastles - you know that's not possible when a year group of anything up to 150+ pupils is all getting geared up for all levels of secondary education. Switch to private school and it's between 10 and 20 ALL being geared up for the same school.

onimolap · 05/02/2011 22:05

If there were more grammar schools - and in every borough - then you would not have so many families adding to the pressure by applying from great distances from the school

But entry should be irrespective of the child's previous education. There are too many variables to try to screen what is socially acceptable for a grammar. There are downsides to competitive exam, but any system which allocates quotas based on background is compounding the mess, not solving it.

jumpingcastles · 05/02/2011 22:06

yes MrsRichard

I am a private school parent in Bucks within catchment of 2 single sex and 1 Coed grammar schools.

At my kids prep school, the head will tell you if your child has potential to pass the 11+ and will not hesitate to tell you not to bother either!

jumpingcastles · 05/02/2011 22:08

but there were more grammar schools?

the problem is with the alternatives isn't ?

TarheelMama · 05/02/2011 22:08

I feel the admissions process should be adjusted to look for potential rather than the academic level a child is at

Really??? How exactly do you measure potential?

Because you think someone has potential does not mean it will pan out.

Schools have to have a measure of potential students and it needs to be quantifiable.

Willabywallaby · 05/02/2011 22:10

YABU

We send our 5YO to a private primary school because our catchment state school is oversubscribed, we were allocated a school under special measures. The fees are comparable to when he was at nursery 3 days a week. I am hoping he has the academic ability to get into the grammar. We definitely couldn't afford the fees of the private secondary schools round here.

notrightnow · 05/02/2011 22:12

reallytired, if you live in a grammar school area, why doesn't your state junior school prepare children for the 11+? Surely it's in everyone's interests for their pupils to have the best chance they can at it?

(my area doesn't have grammars and my children aren't in the state system so I don't know how this works - all seems a bit odd to me!)

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 22:12

You can't assess potential at 11. You can attempt to do so but it's not accurate.

Jumping - sounds like your school has a good headteacher. Doesn't mean the parents will listen though. My head told my parents to put my sister through for her 11+ but not to bother with me. I got in, she didn't.

Again it's not easy to assess potential at the age of 11 but it is easy to spot bright kids and spot those that deserve to be schooled differently. Intelligence is, imo, as much a special need as the other end of the spectrum.

onimolap · 05/02/2011 22:14

Jumpingcastles: when there were more grammar schools (say 1960s and 70s) you simply didn't see the levels of tutoring that you do now. parents did not apply to schools miles away (over county borders) adding to the insane pressure.

Should there be academic selection at 11+? a whole other question. But if there is, one way to level the playing field is to have enough grammar schools across the country, not weird pockets of very pressured behaviour.

MollieO · 05/02/2011 22:14

Ds is at private school. We are in a grammar school area. His school does no prep for 11+ at all. None of the private schools in the area do. The wealth catchment area for ds's school is less restrictive than the best primary school in our area. I can't afford to live there hence one of the many non-academic reasons Ds is at the school he is.

jumpingcastles · 05/02/2011 22:16

I think so many people have certain assumptions about private schools, private school pupils and their parents.

I think its crazy to assume that any child who goes to a private turns out to be bright.

State schools need to start helping pupils to prepare for these exams.

Private schools are any easy scapegoat in these situations

curlymama · 05/02/2011 22:17

Completely agree with the OP. Only a small percentage of private school pupils should be allowed to grammar schools.

The simple fact that teachers in private schools prepare children for the exams, means there is not a level playing field. Plenty of prep schools give the children preperation during normal lesson time, and give them extra preparation after school hours, meaning that even the brightest child that has not had access to tutoring does not stand the same chance. Prep schools are always going to do this because it makes them look good if they can advertise the number of pupils that got into selective schools, grammar or private.

I realise that state school children often pass the 11+, but they simply can't have the same chance as an equally bright heavily tutored child. And many parents of state school children simply can't afford tutoring. The books that are required to do it at home are ridiculously expensive, and the quality of teaching from an un experienced parent is hardly going to be the same as that from a qualified teacher that has knowledge of the papers and has been doing it for years.

Even the papers that aim to be 'tutor proof' can't ever be completely fail safe. Until they can come up with an exam that genuinely measures intelligence only, the system will be completely unfair towards those that cannot afford tutoring or private schools.

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 22:18

Jumping - i'd love to not have the assumptions i do about private schools but sadly, as i've already said, the assumptions are pretty much based in fact (or at least in experience).

TheMartorialist · 05/02/2011 22:18

What about those that can afford private and yet send their children to state primaries? Should their children have restricted access as well?

What about state primaries in more affluent areas? Should preference be given to those in deprived areas?

Which/Who is the more deprived - a child living with their parents in a terraced home in the London borough of Newham or a child living in a council home on a Stonebridge Park estate?

How about a child whose parents sent them to a private primary on a generous bursary/scholarship? Or children whose now deceased grandparents paid for them to attend a private primary and whose parents cannot afford to send them to a private secondary?

Or a child who goes to a private primary that falls below a state primary on a recognised/comparable league table?

All of these scenarios are perfectly plausible.

MrsRichardHammond · 05/02/2011 22:19

Can i ask though, those of you with children in private primary education what are your goals, educationally, for your children?

Will they be entering the state system for secondary or staying with the private system?

Willabywallaby · 05/02/2011 22:23

As I said I hope he gets into the state grammar school and reaches his academic potential.