to really regret the whole grammar school thing.

[newrecruit]

DS1 is in year 4 (DS2 in year 1).

I went to a girls grammar school and loved it. So when we moved out of London one of the reasons we chose this area was the schools. I don't think we are super selective (don't quite know what that means)

However, I was explaining the schools to him this morning as we drove past one and had an impending feeling of doom.

He's bright but can't be arsed. Resists pushing and I am against tutor on principal. I don't think he'd suit an all boys school.

What have I done! We should have just moved to a comprehensive area with a decent intake.

Some parents are already talking about tutors and its 2 years away. I want to hit them quite hard.

Please pile in and tell me to get a grip.

I find it a bit odd to report a poster for "revealing identifying detail" about a school, when the person who has reported named the bloody town the school is in on Sunday evening!

I would suggest the real problem is that I said what the school was truly like more than anything else! Now the post has been deleted, said poster can now keep up her little charade!

Seriously? I didn't see that!

But we all buy advantages for our children in some form.

We used to live in a very nice area of London. Everyone sent their children private (which we couldn't afford) which meant the state schools were dire, under subscribed from catchment with masses of problems.

We are woolly liberal types who oppose private education (aka too poor) so we moved out of London.

We moved to a nice village in the Shires with a lovely state school, no one speaking English as a second language and very few behavioural issues.

We are no better than the ones who shell out for prep school or lie their way into a church school - possibly worse as we're disingenuous about it.

The ones 'keeping it real' in London are paying £15k in school fees but brag about their 'cosmopolitan' culture.

It's an eternal debate over principle, and whether you sacrifice them or what's best for your individual child to prove a point.

My concern is still wants best for DS1, which may or may not be grammar but I couldn't possibly tell that when he was 3.

"But we all buy advantages for our children in some form."

'We'?

I know a good number of people who can't buy anything for their children, let alone educational advantage.

"The ones 'keeping it real' in London are paying £15k in school fees but brag about their 'cosmopolitan' culture."

Are you missing London?

There are many of us here who love the cosmopolitan culture who are not shelling out school fees.

"It's an eternal debate over principle, and whether you sacrifice them or what's best for your individual child to prove a point".

Oh come on, the majority of bright children with supportive families in a reasonably well run state school (and most schools are at least 'OK') thrive. Is keeping your child in a halfway decent state school in an urban area throwing them to the dogs? Some of us really, truly believe in equality of opportunity, and as long as we're not sacrificing our children's chance to gain an education and live happy and meaningful lives, then are willing to try to educate them within the community in which they have been raised.

Really think some posters should stop thinking grammar schools are a golden ticket.Some seem so obsessed with them they're basing everything on the assumption that a grammar school place equals a set up for life and not getting in equals being doomed for life.

We're not talking about Eton here.

It's utter madness.

Okay mini anyone who can pass on advantage does it. Be those advantages paid for or free.

I dunno, I had a disadvantaged childhood and the fact that I can now pass on some advantages to my DC is something I'm not remotely guilty about.

Maybe it's a middle class angst?

Exactly. But everybody does what they can.

That will be different for some people due to finances, but also due to conscious choices.

Exactly LePetitMarseillais my DS will not suddenly become completely written off at the age of 10 if he does not pass ..... The sneering attitude that only the best/nice/well mannered children deserve a grammar school place is beyond ridiculous. Regardless of whole tutoring debate - the notion that this exam will somehow filter out undesirables is quite rotten

Yup and some of that shizzle will directly assist their educational attainment. And many people simply won't be able, for whatever reason, be able to do likewise.

MrsMcRuff Wed 24-Sep-14 16:58:15

I agree with your MrsMcRuff.

Really think some posters should stop thinking grammar schools are a golden ticket

Of course they're not a golden ticket, but the gap, where we are, between the grammars and the majority of the comps (secondary moderns, in reality) is so wide that you would be foolish not to encourage your dc to try for a place at the grammar school, if you thought they were capable of passing the exam.

I had a disadvantaged childhood and the fact that I can now pass on some advantages to my DC is something I'm not remotely guilty about

Same is here.

How many people anti Grammer have had a dis advantaged childhood and been in a rough school?

Oh come on, the majority of bright children with supportive families in a reasonably well run state school (and most schools are at least 'OK') thrive

If you see this is how the majority are, why on earth are you so worked up by a teeny tiny percentage who go to Grammers/public school...when its a small fraction of the school age population.

WIN A "Golden Ticket to Grammar School with Persil and Mars " .

1000 free Grammar School Places to be won by "Saturday", just pick up your special boxes of Persil, Quality Street or Cornflakes , for your chance to win.

"We have teamed up with 50 of the top Grammar Schools in the country, to offer this "one in a life-time chance for your child.

In every pack there is a free "I love Grammar schools pen"

Everybody is a winner , In search for a Golden Ticket.!

I could be well of the mark here but I am understanding some of the posts as:
Parents who apply for grammar school for their DC and help them to prepare are doing something wrong because other parents (who might have equally bright or brighter children) can't be bothered to apply and help their children prepare.

Surely every parent can only be held responsible for their own children and should not have to feel guilty because another parent is either happy with the secondary modern or can't be bothered with a grammar school application.
Should people not do what they feel is right for their own children because other people are incapable / uninterested in doing the same?
I'm sure we can all agree that the system is unfair to bright children from families who for whatever reason can't / won't prepare for grammar school entrance exams but I don't think that we can hold individual parents doing the best for their own children responsible for the unfairness.
Most people prepare for exams of any sort - driving tests, workplace tests, formal exams etc and most parents would want their child to have some level of preparation before an exam. Taking such exams at the age of 10 is hard enough with familiarisation but I would imagine much more stressful without any preparation.
I don't agree that children need years of tutoring but I don't see what is wrong with doing a couple of sets of familiarisation papers. I do wish that all grammar schools were forced to publish free familiarisation papers on their websites that could be simply downloaded instead of people having to find ££ to buy them which some parents don't have.

I don't agree that children need years of tutoring

Yes but many state schools do not cover the necessary level 6 Maths in time for the 11+ where as a private school of course will aim to cover it, because they are a business and they know that's what parents want and why they are sent to such schools.

State schools are, some of them, not even allowed to mention the 11+ let alone prepare any child for it.

Yes but many state schools do not cover the necessary level 6 Maths in time for the 11+

The familiarisation papers that I have looked at are more like level 5 maths than they are level 6. Most top set children will be covering year 5 maths in year 5 at state schools.
When has the advice changed and become children needing to know all of the level 6 curriculum in order to be successful at 11+? Not many children achieve level 6 at the end of year 6 so on the basis that level 6 is needed for 11+ most of the grammar school places should be vacant as hardly anybody would be at the required level at the start of year 6.

The thing is....I am not sure who the really genuinely clever children are at DS school - so many have been in Explore and/or Kumon since Reception. Some, because the parents wanted to give them an edge, others professed their children were bored, or needed stretching. Who knows? Out of a year group of 60, maybe 10? weren't tutored (in some form or another) for the 11+
I wish all those who pass well - my son might, but we didn't do explore etc, because the teachers always suggested that he was bright, thought about things at a different level etc. He does, however have some kind of SEN - his maths especially seems to let him down. I think Grammar school may increase his anxiety, but we chose to let him sit it & decide nearer the time which school to pick.
Do I agree with the 11+ ? I would rather see a genuine comprehensive system, but we chose to live in Bucks. I am very aware of the different options that are available to us, and we are lucky in those choices.

No, they are all academic, obviously! That is why they are there, and why the intake is obviously not anything like as broad as comprehensive, however wide the circle your draw around it! That's like saying oxford has a really wide and mixed catchment because people come from all over the world to it!