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 either be scrapped altogether or available in every county?

999 replies

Perriwinkle · 27/01/2013 21:22

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?

OP posts:
TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:16

dd2 had to find out about the education system in Germany last night for homework - I was explaining about gymnasiums and realschules etc, and told her some places have a similar system in this country. I said something like 'glad we don't here - imagine how stressful year 6 would have been with that going on too!'

And in her innocence, she said 'I wouldn't have worried, because me and my friends are all about as clever as one another, so we probably would have all gone to the same kind of school, whatever that was'.

Hollow laugh internally and 'well dd, that's a good way to think about it', I said!

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:17

Seeker's sec mod is superior to your comp BS in that all anecdotes about it are at least current! Unless you're 19, are you?

TotallyBS · 01/02/2013 13:25

Recently seeker went on about the high number of GCSE A-C at her sec mod. That's higher than my local comp. Is that anecdote up to date for you. It has an orchestra but most players are grade 1-3. Hardly wow by seeker's standards. Is that anecdote recent enough for you?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:27

Oh, sorry, are we talking about your local comprehensive? I must have read you wrongly above, I thought you were talking abou a school you went to, as a child!

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:31

Seeker the ratio of As and A*s is higher at grammars/academic private schools than at comps. And if those same kids had gone to an average comp I would put a lot of money on them not getting such good results. Comps don't push as hard as grammars; the competition and high expectation at grammars really does make kids do their best.
TotallyBS at my comp which was a good school we also had limited options - no english language at A level for example.
And tho we had some good teachers we also had a couple of 'those who can't' teachers - sorry to offend anyone but it's true, this was a long time ago mind you. I imagine teaching quality in grammars is higher (but probably is across the board these days).

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:35

And if those same kids had gone to an average comp I would put a lot of money on them not getting such good results. Comps don't push as hard as grammars; the competition and high expectation at grammars really does make kids do their best

Well, folks, for anyone who thinks there's been too much generalization about positives of comprehensive education, this set of assumptions should cheer you up by redressing the balance a little!

And I imagine teaching quality in grammars is higher (but probably is across the board these days). Imagination is a powerful thing, indeed. I can imagine all kinds of things....

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:37

SteamingNit your DD shows great wisdom, I think given the choice most kids would prefer an environment that would suit their personality, whether they are budding scientists, sporty types or drama/art orientated and whether they enjoy swotting for exams or learning practical skills from woodwork to mixing music. I believe in choice and child orientated thinking with a view to equipping them for a fulfilling career as suits their ability/interests.

RussiansOnTheSpree · 01/02/2013 13:38

BS I am talking about secondary education. DD1 is at a super selective grammar. That's a secondary school. DD2 is at a primary school where the main method of teaching this week has been wear a safety helmet. HTH.

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:38

Oh SteamingNit I have a positive view of grammars, that's clear. If you have a problem with that at least be specific about what you disagree with, sarcasm is hard to respond to sensibly but here's me trying...

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:39

The point is, bringme, she's wrong. Knowing her friends and their families, I think there would have been a wide disparity in which children were coached, or entered for the exam. So despite them all being broadly on a level at primary, it would be - even statistically, if instead of eight comprehensives here we had two grammars and 6 high schools - it would be pretty unlikely they'd all have ended up in the same place!

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:41

Actually SN don't worry about it - we are both off topic and have gone down the path OP was trying to avoid. OP I apologise!

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:41

I am taking issue with the statements like 'I would put money on' and 'comps don't push' and 'I imagine teaching in grammars is better' - you're entitled to bet on or think or imagine whatever you like, but in the context of TotallyBS going on and on and on at Seeker for her points being inadequately grounded, I think it's worth pointing out that surmising goes on both ways!

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 01/02/2013 13:42

X posted, sorry Smile

And I don't mean to attack you, so sorry for sounding sarcastic.

RussiansOnTheSpree · 01/02/2013 13:44

Is there anyone else on this thread apart from me that currently has kids at both a super selective AND a comp?

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:50

SN, the tutoring thing is a whole different ball game and I am not going to go there apart from to say (I can't help myself) that tutoring a child for a school to which they are not suited is very unfair on the child and certainly does set them up to feel psychologically inferior either if they fail or if they scrape by and struggle.

I don't think you can stop tutoring, though it is unfair on those who can't access it. But in any school there are better and worse teachers and it's the luck of the draw who you get and whether a DC is inspired by them. It's just another variable.

As I have said, there should be provision for very academically bright kids to achieve their best, and for less academic kids to discover their talents and be inspired by great teachers that value different kinds of intelligence.

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:50

Sorry again OP :)

bringmeroses · 01/02/2013 13:55

SN I X posted with your surmising post, no I don't have any issues with you pointing out my admittedly sweeping generalisations and assumptions!

I do have a quite strong opinion on this and I know lots of people feel differently which I respect. I think debating it is important. Just not on OPs post (the shame.). I will stop now. Blush

seeker · 01/02/2013 13:56

BS- FYI, mentioning something once in the context of a particular conversation does not constitute "going on"

Surprising that you'd not understand that- going on being a particular speciality of yours.....

LaQueen · 01/02/2013 13:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

seeker · 01/02/2013 13:59

"As I have said, there should be provision for very academically bright kids to achieve their best, and for less academic kids to discover their talents and be inspired by great teachers that value different kinds of intelligence."

Absolutely bringmeroses. I couldn't agree with you more! Now, why can't those things all take place in the same school?

Bonsoir · 01/02/2013 14:01

They cannot take place in the same school because it is impossible to encompass the diversity of humanity and its needs in a monopoly single institution.

LaQueen · 01/02/2013 14:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

seeker · 01/02/2013 14:04

LaQueen- if your gym club is anything like the one that my dd attended for more tedious years than I care to remember, those groups were by no means fixed. Somebody from the lower group could do a development spurt and be moved up- somebody in the higher group could plateau and be moved down. And there were always gymnasts who were fantqstic at floor but couldn't vault for example. There wasn't a one off assessment which meant that 75% of them were siphoned off into another room, not longer allowed to watch, or spend breaks with the other, with no possibility of ever, however hard they worked, making the "squad"

LaQueen · 01/02/2013 14:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaVolcan · 01/02/2013 14:10

Yet bonsoir up and down the land they do manage to do that, (unless I have missed something and it is indeed Kent and Bucks grammars which are getting all the a/a*s.)

OK LaQueen let's go along with comparison with the gym club. What if next week when your daughter went along she was told 'forget it, she falls off, we don't want her here?' Never mind that she enjoys it, and is willing? What if you were then told, 'tough, she's not an elite standard so she shouldn't do it at all?' Furthermore, supposing it was compulsory rather than a voluntary activity and she failed her gym test at 10 but that dictated what other subjects she was allowed to learn?