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?

Mind you, it would bad luck if you got one of those old fashioned public school people reading your CV who looks down on "grammar school boys"!

Our managing partner is a bit like that. He was most put out when myself and another partner pointed out to him that although the partner went to the posh boys school down the road, my comp was a better school in those days.

I would find it rather odd for a candidate to even put what school they had been to on their CV; I neither know nor care where my employees were educated as children. For new graduate hires I might pay passing attention to what university they attended and their degree results. I rather think the 3 day interview process and 6 month probation we put prospective hires through tells us more about the candidate than what school they happened to go to when they were 13.

It is a mistake not to be interested in a candidate's background, malinois. Where people spent their formative years often tells you a great deal about them, though not necessarily during the recruitment process - further down the line, as they progress in their jobs, many people have hurdles to overcome that can be addressed by taking a good long peer at the attitudes that prevailed in their childhood.

where are you Laqueen?
11+ tests which use VR and NVR tests frequently throw up some unexpected results.They are not looking for hardworking, concientious or high attaining children.They are measuring raw potential

bonsoir I don't think knowing what school a candidate attended tells me anything about the attitudes prevalent in their childhood. I've just asked one of my star performers what school she attended: Redwood High School. Even after a quick google, I really can't infer anything from this.

I would try just a little bit harder than "a quick google" . Honestly, we go over this kind of stuff a lot - my DP is a CEO and when his senior management team have professional development issues, knowing where they grew up is massively helpful in identifying the best ways to help them overcome their hurdles, what sort of training etc.

Russian- you will notice that, as usual, this was a thread about selective education- a subject I am very occupied by from a political point of view and have been for longer than i have had children. It was not about my children's education until someone else brought it up. I actually thought people had given up doing that but no.

LaQueen- that was a rather churlish response- oh well. I hope things go the way you want.

Lazy parents like comprehensive education.
Pushy parents like selective education.

Seeker, I certainly didn't bring your children up. And you do start threads about them. Often. On a variety of subjects. I don't think you can invite people to speculate about your kids in one thread and then declare them off bounds in another thread. I haven't liked it when posters whose names I haven't recognised have made comments about DD1's SEN or the fact that she is musical but I can't really object (although I do sometimes name change when people get weird) because at the end of the day,the reason some people know that DD1 has SEN and does music is because I mentioned it (although I have never started a thread about either of these things).

But you haven't answered my question. And I'm genuinely interested. Why aren't you overjoyed with the school your DS attends? Is it because (as I strongly suspect) the government's method of measuring these things is so broad and lacking in nuance as to be useless? This speaks to the issue of what actually makes a 'good school' which another person raised.

Ah, I'm not senior management nor are any of my direct reports. I'm a techie, and so are they. Most CVs I've seen from technical people, at least experienced hires, just have their degrees and any professional qualifications and certifications under the 'Education' section - as I said, I've never seen anyone other than a new graduate put anything about their secondary education on their CV, and it would be seen as odd in my sector.

We also recruit a lot internationally and non-Brits generally don't put their secondary education on CVs as it's not seen as relevant - I've never seen an American resumé with any mention of high school education on it for example (although they are usually dripping with various unintelligible university honours - ooh, you are summa cum laude and Phi Kappa Theta - how very interesting...)

What a peculiar thing to say, bonsoir!

That's your sector malinois. For other sectors it may make a material difference to the shortlisting process, since the school results are obtained from add context.

Bonsoir I must be an exception to that rule.

An observation made from the world around me! Many lazy parents love comprehensive education - it makes their children look so good...

ARe there any other kinds of parent, or just lazy and pushy? Seems rather a binary view. And if there are any other kinds, what kind of education do they like, I wonder?

There are loads of sorts of parents - I wasn't claiming to capture the universe!

seeker - last night you mentioned your DS and his school in your post in order to make a point. Now you are having a go at people for pulling your son into the conversation????

I don't suppose you are sharing your "seeker" ID with DP? I'm askiong because sometimes it seems that "your" posts are coming from two different people.

seeker-1 complains about how the GS parents look down kids that go to the SM.

seeker-2 goes on about how the adults don't make the kids feel like failures.

seeker-1 complains about the SM isn't as good as the GS that the DD goes to.

seeker-2 goes about about the great A-C results at her SM and how happy she is with the school.

seeker-1 starts threads about her DCs

seeker-2 complains that people keep dragging her DCs into threads.

I find your posts so

I have some cousins whose child went to a grammar school. They got him in by sending him to a very expensive preparatory school.

Somewhere out there, there is a clever working-class child who missed out on a grammar place because my cousins were able to pay for their posh prep school.

Social mobility my arse. Scrap the lot of them and get on with the real job of reforming the UK's rather mediocre education system.

First mention of my children was at 1.28 this morning by TotqllyBS. And inaccurate. Up to then, even though many know the details of my personal life, we were having an interesting and largely reasonably well natured debate about grammar school education. Without resorting to ad hominems.

I know I have said this before but different types of school suit different kids.
No disrespect but I knew none of my dc would pass an 11+ or even that they will be high flyers or ceo's because I believe how they turn out is pretty much to do with nurture and conditioning. So nobody will ever be assessing their ability on schools attended. Yes ok there are some that break the mould but its horses for courses surely.
If I had a particularly bright child of course I would encourage them down the 11+ route irrespective of our family income. The same for any other talent they have. My dd is a very talented musician at just 9, we would be silly to not encourage the right education for her.
Grammar schools should be available to all, this imo isn't the problem. To me its the implications for those who do not pass. However, I see pretty much the same thing with SATS in terms of stress to the dc, them losing confidence if they don't get a certain level. These are the problems not the school per se.
As a parent I am neither pushy nor lazy, but admit I can be a tad bit of either sometimes.

ToadInTheHole - why didn't your cousins' son have a right to that grammar school place?

I keep telling myself never to fall into the trap of responding to Seeker - or even reading her posts - in the education threads and just stick to the good threads like the AF one. One day I will actually listen to myself. Seeker, it's impossible to discuss anything with you because you change the rules with every post. At one moment it's fine for you to talk about the most private details of your DCs lives with strangers, at other moments if they get mentioned it's an outrage. You ignore posts and questions from some people - which is of course your right - but then I've seen you hound other people in other threads to answer bizarre questions of yours which sometimes don't even make sense. On a simple cost benefit basis there is no point in engaging with you on these threads. I know that it's no loss to me.

TheOriginalSteamingNit

I'm another type of parent, and along with dh we are unconventional to say the least, lol.
Our choice of education for dd is H.ed
The other 2 ds 21 and 18 went to school because we didn't know any different.