to wonder whether it is actually true that "all the best schools are monopolised by the rich"?

[Hakluyt]

(State schools, obviously. Private ones are, by definition!)

It's often said on Mumsnet, and nobody ever questions it. But is it actually true? And how do we know whether it is true or not?

Money in your pocket? Oh yeah, how much money?

WooWoo
Its worth taking a look at the report. One of the key findings is that less than 3% of entrants to GS are entitled to FSM but nearly 13% come from the fee paid sector.

Either there is a large disparity in academic ability between children entitled to FSM and children in fee paying education or other factors are affecting entry to GS. I don't believe it is the former.

I have no axe to grind as my children are in private education so I have clearly used my income to impact my children's education. I do recognise that wealth does give you a better chance to influence your child's educational choices.

I have a friend who works as a school admissions officer in a rural county, with a major city at the heart of it, so a mix of "good" and "bad" schools.

There are parents who own houses in one area of the county, but end up RENTING and moving into a short-term lease property in the area of one the "best" schools, and they live there until the child starts school. Then once the lease has expired, which will be after the child has started the school, they move back into their own property.

And by law, if the family are living in the property, that's the address my friend and her colleagues have to take (even if they know it's someone playing the system).

"They said if there are issues involved around the cut off they will ring primaries and ask for current levels,ability etc."

Retropear- just so that you know, they actually can't do that. I would be very wary if I were you.

Retro
Fair point it was lazy summarising on my part.

Rock re not worrying re Eng/maths(you only need a 50% pass) to focus on the VR with speed.Papers on their website etc.

Do not presume your school is the same.They vary hugely.The one down the road marks very differently,no dealings either primaries etc.

rockandroll I will find the report for you. I promise.
In the meantime, I can see from my access scheme shizle that:

The top three LEAs with the highest proportion of students going to Oxbridge are; Reading, Sutton, Bucks.

The top three LEAs with thebhighest proportion going to RG (including Oxbridge) are; Reading, Trafford, Sutton.

"That is not the fault of parents who do have high aspirations for their kids,who get informed and who aren't put off by the grammar for rich kids myth."

Why do you think it's a myth? It is a bad thing, obviously, and we should b doing everything we can to counter it. But it's not a myth- it's statistically true.

Hak erm they can and do.The head and dep described how it can happen at cut off,extenuating circumstances on the day etc.

If I thought my dc would be borderline I wouldn't be applying,journey I suspect too far anyhow so don't worry.

chaz

just begining to skim that link, amazed thus far to see how high % of people paying for tutors when child already in private school

Show me the stats that show only rich(some definition needed there) are in grammar schools.

I've seen stats that show there needs to be an approx increase of 10% fsm kids in grammar schools to equal national fsm stats but not that only "rich" kids (whatever they are)attend grammar schools.

Retro, if you're talking about appeals for kids who have not made the cut, then the primary head teacher can appeal on a child's behalf. If you are talking about deciding between two children on an equal score, then they are actually acting illegally.

Our local grammar school has no year 7s who attract pupil premium.

ummm also says gov should make all info easier to get ...

I don't agree, the info is out there some people just do not want it.

They show this by not searching for it, its there.

My neighbour was far better off than us, is abroad now in gulf state going to cartier polo matches.

She was not interested in education that much, she thought she was, but compared to me, I would say not.

Rock I agree but think some parents don't bother,not the fault of the kids so primaries should push it more with the more able kids as a whole not just those on fsm but those just over and above that- the maj of which are clearly not rich.

Retro in our local area unfortunately the distance from school does matter. There are certain postcodes that have priority when it comes to selection...i.e if there are 2 kids that have the same results, priority will go to the one who is closest to the school.

I'm not sure how much you can tell from that TheWordFactory. Reading, Sutton and Trafford's grammar schools all soak up children from far outside their borders because they are all small boroughs.

Bucks doesn't, but compared with Surrey where 25% (almost all of whom will be above average, ability-wise) go to private school, you aren't comparing like-for-like either, because in Bucks many children go to grammar school instead of private.

Save which is exactly why putting all desirable schools and anybody over fsm under the same umbrella is ridiculous.

They differ- hugely as do circumstances,income and disposable income.

Retro
I don't think anyone is saying that only the rich attend GS. Broadly what I think that research is getting at is that the population of a GS tends to have less children on FSM and more children from a fee paying background than would be found in the local area around the school. This does tend to suggest that the cohort attending the GS are wealthier than the than the general population of the local area. This doesn't mean they are wealthy but that they are wealthier than average for the local population.

Rock, it's an open secret that the kids at the well-regarded private school up the road from us are tutored privately as well to get those 100% results. I just don't get it.

I'd love DD to go to the outstanding Catholic secondary in our borough. We are not in catchment. To move to a similar house in the catchment area (under 5 miles from where we currently live) would involve a price hike of £500k. Even the 1-2 bed flats are the same price as our four bed house. Rents are at similarly ridiculous prices.

However, our immediate area is possibly unusual, in that the school intake seem to be split not by money but by race - 2 schools are seen as being 'Asian', 1 'Jewish', 2 'White' and 2 'Black', with only 1, newish school in the area being genuinely mixed. If DD were to go to her local, outstanding school that we are in catchment for, she would be one of the only white children in her year. It is beyond bizarre, but seems to be a self-fulfilling prophecy as no Asian parents want their child to go to the 'Black' school and few White parents want their child at the 'Asian' school, etc. etc. so an awful lot of juggling and self-segregation seems to go on. The two 'Asian' schools are both outstanding, the 'White' schools are both bottom of the league. Make of that what you will...

No I thought it said there were higher private applicants than statistically on a national level but they're still quite small numbers ie there are a massive band of kids in the middle not on fsm but not privately educated either.

3% of fsm kids are in grammars with 4 times as many privately educated ie 12%. Privately educated kids are only 10% of the population so clearly there are 2% too many.Not great but 88% state kids indicates a lot of kids who aren't "rich"(whatever that means) are actually there.

Right. Everybody knows- even if some try to deny- that the demographics of oversubscribed faith and grammar schools are very different from the demographics of comprehensive and high schools.

Now, about this business of high archiving comprehensives being the preserve of the rich.........Any stats, proof- anything but anecdote to support the view?

Retro obviously I don't know about 2015 entry but for 2014 for the girls' school and the one we were really aiming for, the 120th place was decided on distance as the crow flies if there was a tie. We were happy to take that gamble the first time, it wasn't a gamble this time round since there were fewer kids than 120 in category A for our first choice school. Had DD2 been in category B we would have taken the gamble though.

Actually it's more complicated than that Retropear. I can't be arsed to dig up the stats, but nationally 5-18 only 7% of kids are at private school Not 12%. For 5-11 it's less than 7%, and for 11-18 it's more.

However the grammar school areas tend to be richer and a higher proportion of kids will be at private school than the national average.

The FSM stat is worse, in that nationally the FSM % is 16%.

Reading, Sutton and Trafford's grammar schools all soak up children from far outside their borders because they are all small boroughs.

Not sure how true that is. I don't know anything about Reading, but I went to school in Sutton grammar (and subsequently went to a RG uni!) I'm pretty sure that not many kids were came from that far away, most seemed to live quite close to the school or a short bus ride away.
And now I live next to Trafford and from the research I have done, you do seem to have to live pretty close to the grammars if you want to get in...hence the house prices close to these schools are at least double what it is outside of catchment.
But if what you say about Trafford is right and it does have pupils from much further out, then that's is good news for us!