"tutoring for grammar school is cheating". AIBU to be fuming at DSIL's attitude?

[twiceupinarms]

namechange coz as much as I don't care if she reads this, I don't want her to know my normal nickname.
I am getting my DD tutored for grammar school. DSIL thinks it's cheating if she can't get in without being tutored and will therefor struggle when she gets there. for fucksake, the exams are not based on school curriculum - it's like being a brilliant footballer but been trialled to get in the team on your ability to tie your laces. fucksake.
Anyone else encountered this attitude?
Oh I can add hypocrisy to the list? Her DD audtitioned to go to Stage Boarding School. Did she do any practice/preparations for the audition? Only 9 lessons a week, every week, for 6 years.

AIBU to be cross?

newpencil I'm sure there is truth in that.

I know quite a few professional parents who would have traditionally used private school, but are now priced out so have done everyhting in their power to take a GS place.

I think this whole concept that there is any such thing as 'natural ability' or that there is any possible way of measuring it borders on fascism. There is no such thing as a test of natural intellectual ability.

Do studies show that DC perform worse than they would in comps, taking their ability and socio economic backgrounds into account etc?

That's not fair, LaQueen. I think you should take that back.

NO, children from poorer backgrounds of high ability make more progress in grammar schools than in comps. Grammar schools are also the only type of school where children from poorer backgrounds make more progress than their middle class peers. Children who are of lower ability than their grammar school peer group on entrance make more progress in a grammar than children of similar ability in a comp. The most able in the grammar school do about the same as those of similar ability in a comp. This is from reports on the Sutton Trust website, which have been mentioned in lots of previous threads on here.

I realise this was a US case, but I believe Brown vs Board of Education has lessons for the UK. Separate is unequal. The perception of 'unequal' education has a massively detrimental effect on self perception and aspiration. A dearth of aspiration holds a country back.

The whack a mole theory that holds sway in virtually every aspect of British life, that if one group has something, the others can't have it, affects both the haves and the have nots. The haves fear equality of educational opportunity because they think something will be taken from their children, while the have nots believe they are being treated as second class citizens who are not good enough.

Your certainty worries me on your child's behalf.
I know what it's like for a child to expect to pass and for them not to and it was horrible.. A little upset that you would think I would wish that on another child.

However, I have been on the receiving end of your personal attacks before- I'm sure I will survive.

YANBU

So the Sutton Trust research shows that bright but disadvanatged DC do BETTER at GS than comp? Then why in gods name close them? Surely the answer is widening access? I mean we all know that there are too few disadvanatged students at Oxbridge but we don't advocate closing them down, do we? We just work at making them fairer.

Exactly Word.
With the exception of the point that some of the year will be MC/Tutored whatever, I think the fact a bright but disadvantaged child can excel SOMEWHERE is better than not having that choice at all.
Even if said disadvantaged kids are a minority in the year, one is better than none.

"I suspect that much of your dogmatic resentment towards selective education, on this type of thread, is primarily due to the fact that your DS failed the 11+"

Not true. I have always been equally dogmatic. As you well know.

Personal attack? Hmmm. Well, there have been several. The one that springs to mind was something about dying a little every time you saw me join a thread. Not as utterly low as accusing me of wishing ill on your 10 year old child- but not pleasant.

^If DD1 fails, then I'll take it on the chin, accept she wasn't good enough on the day and that those are the breaks...and, she will go to private school.

And, the very next day I will be back on this type of thread, defending the grammar school system.^

But you are hardly defending the system if you opt out of it as soon as the selection process does not go the way you would have wished.

Why don't they use the SATs results to rank order the pupils for GS entry?

Because the SATs results that are externally marked are taken in May. Far too late for any admissions process.

Ohhullits- that's the thing, the vast vast majority of DC in the uk do attend comps. And they have done for fifty years. Yet social mobility is at an all time low. I think we can safely sa that comprehensive education as the harbinger of social change has been a right royal effing failure!

Or why don't certain factors get taken into account on application as they are for Oxbridge. It would leaven out the tutoring aspect a little. Then have a massive push in primary schools to get all able DC to sit.

Seeker what I was trying to point out by telling my history was that these schools focus much more on getting the best out of the child.They tend to go the extra mile to find out issues and give extra help. You seem to be hung up on disadvantaged children, and I may be wrong here but assume you mean DC with dysfunctional families? Or does that not count, is it financial only? My family wasn't poor but my family was possibly one of the most dysfunctional I know! Families in tough times, such as the current economic climate, can turn dysfunctional very quickly and if the school isn't paying attention bright pupils become troublesome and disruptive as they struggle with their home life. This is were I feel some comprehensives lack.