To think that grammar schools should either be scrapped altogether or available in every county?

[Perriwinkle]

How can it possibly be fair or reasonable to have them only in certain counties?

I know that many people will say "how can a system that supposedly favours the brightest ten percent of children, ever be fair?" but personally, I've actually got no beef with that provided that the opportunity to attend these schools is available to the brightest children in all counties.

How can it be equitable that the brightest children who live in counties which do not have a grammar school system are routinely failed by the comprehensive system whilst those who live in certain counties are not because they are able to attend high performing State-funded grammar schools?

I think if you're anti grammar schools altogether you should probably hide this thread. This is not meant to be a thread about the pros and cons, relative merits, inequalities or shortcomings of either the grammar school system or the comprehensive system. It is a simply a question of wishing to hear any reasonable justification that may be put forward for the continued existence of the grammar school system in its current guise.

How can it be fair to continue restricting the opportunity to enjoy a priveliged grammar school education (akin to that which many people pay handsomely for in the private sector) only to children who live in certain parts of the country?

Mine passed the eleven plus, one went, one didn't I'd scrap the system actually and put a boot up the arse of the secondary modern/comprehensive schools.
Just because the children aren't going to leave with 10 GCSE's is not a reason to not educate them to their full potential or to instil discipline in them.

The kent system is clearly nuts. I don't blame Seeker for being so vehemently opposed to it. If I lived in Kent I'd oppose it too.

My father went to one, I went to one and fortunately my sons have been able to go to one too. We are very lucky here in Gloucestershire to have grammar schools, which are a haven for those who want to work and make progress. They have hardly any problems with homework not done at my sons' school, at the local comp they have detention for about 80 pupils a week, mainly as a result of missing homework. YANBU, there should be grammar schools everywhere.

The Kent grammars are massively popular...

"We are very lucky here in Gloucestershire to have grammar schools, which are a haven for those who want to work and make progress."

So are the top sets of a good comprehnsive school.

"The Kent grammars are massively popular..."

Are they? They are massively oversubscribed- is that the same thing?

@bonsoir In Kent they are. I don't think many of us with kids at superselectives outside Kent are wringing our hands wishing our kids were at Kent Grammars.

I don't think the 77% of parents who's kids don't get in think very highly of them either. Or a significant chunk of the parents whose kids do get in, but who realize what a crap system it is for the majority.

I would say that dd's Hampshire comprehensive is a haven for those who want to work and make progress- which definitely includes dd herself. If we had lived in a grammar school area, dd would have been excluded from any such haven due to her poor health.

The beauty of dd's school is that nobody sees any reason why it should not have high standards of discipline and behaviour; because the children (and parents) with those expectations have not been creamed off into a different system, there are enough of their numbers there to have an impact on the whole school.

This also benefits those children, like my ds, who do not have a natural interest in studies. If he was wholly surrounded by other low achievers he would not know there is an alternative.

Actually, I don't wish my DS was at a Kent grammar either. I think that his comp is probably giving him a comparable experience except for not having a sixth form. I envy the yeomen (and women) of Kent that, I must admit.

I don't think any state school should be allowed to exclude half the population on the grounds of them not being bright enough. It's not fair to segregate children at the age of 11 and effectively write half of them off for being merely around or below average.

As for the idea that in the past, they gave children from poor backgrounds a better start in life, my dad passed his 11+, but his local grammar school didn't have enough places so he didn't get in, anyway. He ended up leaving school at 15 with no qualifications.

If all state schools in the past had been adequately resource and non-selective, my dad would have had a lot more chances in life.

Cory, that sounds like Kings in Winchester, or a very similar school.

Not all comprehensives are like that though.

Nicely put.

Higgle, your grammar school education doesn't seem to be helping you put together a coherent argument in their favour. Who exactly would be helped by 'having them everywhere'? Who would be harmed? Why do you assume that only the children who get into grammar schools matter want to 'work and make progress'? What if your children hadn't got in, would you still support the system then?

I'm not saying there aren't arguments to be made in favour of Grammars but 'I'm alright Jack' isn't one of them.

My niece's daughter is bright and she really wanted her to go to the grammar school.Practice test paper sare on sale in whsmiths for a few pounds, and I told DN that her dd needed to have some practice to familiarise herself with the style of questions and build up the speed necessary.
So she bought the books one week before!!!
Lots of her peers hadb't even seen a paper before the one familiarisation test that they all do.WHY?!
It's not a case of being middle class ,having lots of money.I genuinely can't understand why some parents allow their DC to sit the 11+ *(which they do by default if not withdrawn) without doing the minimal amount to give their kids a bit of help?

Chandon Mon 28-Jan-13 14:29:42
"Cory, that sounds like Kings in Winchester, or a very similar school.

Not all comprehensives are like that though. "

It is nowhere near as prestigious as that. It is an ordinary secondary in Southampton, modest results, very mixed intake, but a firm policy of supporting all students regardless of academic ability.

There should be more grammar schools. I have to say though, that my bright DD has been very well educated at her comprehensive school for the last 2.5 yrs.

My sons went to prep achool because I didn't like the "play orientated" teaching methods in the local primaries at the time. They learned to sit in rows, concentrate and work hard. They also learned to do their homework immediately after school without being asked ( compulsory prep from age 6 at their prep school, done before they went home). I didn't want all that hard work and effort going to waste when they got to 11 and quite frankly the local comps, with the exception of over subscribed ones with limited catchment areas, have low standards and lack discipline. I didn't want them educated with children who come from backgrounds where effort and diligence were not qualities which were encouraged.

Yes, most of the grammar school entrants are coached/tutored for 11+ but this also indicates a willilngness to work and try your hardest. Both my sons have achieved exam results we are very proud of, and better than their prep school friends who went on to independent secondaries. I'm afraid to a certain extent this is an "|I'm alright Jack" sort of attitude, but it is the same for the parents of children at the two good local comps, who bought their way in by living in houses we could never afford. As a poor but bright hard working family we are very grateful for grammar schools, and wish all children had the opportunity to apply for one.

Yanbu. Bring back grammar schools. It's time to help our bright students achieve their best, rather than just helping the low achievers.

How are you poor if you could afford prep school, higgle?

I didn't want them educated with children who come from backgrounds where effort and diligence were not qualities which were encouraged.

I would imagine that the majority of parents want to see diligence and effort rewarded. Why is that an argument that 25% have to be educated in a different building?

It all comes back to notions of privilege (or not). I would say you would have to be reasonably well off to afford prep school for DCs (plural) but sure Higgle will argue that they are not...

Sorry, Higgle, not meaning to start an argument here but I would argue that DCs who get into grammar school from a prep school are probably automatically at an advantage compared with any (even affluent middle-class, privileged children) educated in the state sector.

I think at DS's super-selective we were quoted figures on the provenance of the pupils in the year above DS. I seem to recall that in a cohort of 120, the boys came from 70 different schools and I'm pretty sure around ten of those were prep schools.

You are not a poor family if you have put two children through prep school.

Yanbu. Bring back grammar schools. It's time to help our bright students achieve their best, rather than just helping the low achievers."

Nice well thought out contribution there!