To think that if grammar schools were more available , private schools would almost 'vanish'

[smokepole]

The percentage of pupils educated in private schools is about 7% of the school population, similarly 4% are educated in grammar schools. I am wondering if there was a 'nationally' available network of about 350 grammar schools (including Boarding provision) , what percentage of parents would still use private education.

My son is off to grammar in September. My daughter (year 8) is at private school - and this is despite there being grammar provision for girls in the area. DD is dyslexic and benefits from the small class sizes at her indy [am using the term 'indy' because it really pisses off certain Mners] - 12 children in her class, I kid you not.

So private school would always be the preference for our dd. The grammars have class sizes exceeding 30

Another who says not all privately-educated children would make the cut in year 7. A tiny sample, I know, but the grammar I went to had a teeny tiny prep and the kids coming out were notably lower attainers.

They are the same level of ability, Marseillais. Most did not do an 11+.

If you compare a wholly selective LEA with a wholly comprehensive one the results are practically indistinguishable. So the bright kids get the same good grades in comprehensove schools as they do in grammar schools.

12? That's great.

Just thinking aloud though. If grammars are always selective, you have a very good chance of 99% of the class being attentive and willing, even if there are more than 30. So in that scenario, the class size doesn't necessarily bring the learning to a grinding halt because 10 kids have no interest in being there.

"am using the term 'indy' because it really pisses off certain Mners" Gosh. That's deeply mature of you!

Caught up on the rest of the thread - the rich but thick comments whilst mildly irritating don't bother me because (a) they are boringly predictable (b) they reflect more upon the intelligence of the poster (or more appositely - lack of intelligence) than anything else really...

Really don't give a stuff what you think Hakulyt

"Just thinking aloud though. If grammars are always selective, you have a very good chance of 99% of the class being attentive and willing"

Just like the top set of a comprehensive. Where those children would be in a non selective LEA............

That's probably true FastWindow - one would assume that children at grammar are more likely to be academically motivated, on the basis that they have prepared for and passed a fairly strenuous exam

If you compare a wholly selective LEA with a wholly comprehensive one the results are practically indistinguishable.
Really?

I really hate the term "indy", it's pretentious and generally silly.

Bullseye!

Smoke pole, Flo and Topseyt, why do bright childen need to be educated in a separate school?
There is no evidence to show that children meet their potential any better behind a different hedge!

My kids are too set kids at good comps. I cannot for he life of me think why more grammars should be built, the answer is surely to concentrate on getting all schools to offer the best to all abilities.

I don't understand this obsession with grammar schools and I certailnly don't know why we would turn the education system on it's head again in order to pander to the small minority of a small minority of parents (those fee paying parents who would choose grammar).

Quite right.

Hak you're talking rubbish.

It was reported everywhere last week that brighter kids do better in grammar schools than comps.Google BBC.

That said in answer to the op grammar isn't for all kids so obviously private schools would still be used.

Yes, it is true that overall grammar areas do not perform better than comp areas.

And whilst top sets in comps are the oases of academic concentration that is imagined of a grammar bad behaviour is also common, as it is in grammars!

It is not stretching credibility to suggest that most poor behaviour in any school comes from those who don't want to be there. The most obvious reasons for a child not wanting to be at school are: 1. boredom they are not suited to academic studies passed being able to function in society. 2. There is no point to them being at school after the age of 15 , so because of this 'what is the point' of behaving well. Society has 'Fucked' them, so who can blame them for acting up. However, it is not fair to other pupils for them to be in the same educational environments , messing up their futures .

Really? That must be new research then- up to now it has always been that bright children do very slightly if at all better at grammar school, and that the other ability groups do worse in selective areas.

Fastwindow, just because they're the brightest locally, it doesn't necessarily follow that they're the most well behaved. Or indeed the most motivated. Many will be of course but one of the biggest issues with state education is how less academic but well behaved, well motivated kids fail to reach their potential because they are often placed in a class with a bunch of kids whose behaviour is poor for a variety of reasons.

Hakluyt

I thin you will find (2003 data) that wholly selective areas significantly out performed wholly comprehensive areas and whooly comprehensive areas under-perform the national average - source

I think a lot of people imagine comprehensives are mixed ability all the way. Everywhere I have worked has "set" for many subjects (too many in my opinion).

I think 12 is too small for a class personally! Certainly at junior secondary level. Though 30 is too big

Bright children do well at good comprehensives but stats show they often do better in a selective system. Less able children do better in a good comprehensive than they do at a comp with a local grammar school which creams off the most able.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31715022

And honestly?? My older two are both very able and I know full well that they would do very well at our local leafy comp. In many ways it is more important for dd2 to be privately educated as I think it's the large band of middling children that can be impacted the greatest by the nuances of their education.

Smokepole there is certainly poor behaviour from disenfranchised children. There is also poor behaviour from over entitled children. I really haven't experienced one being worse than the other.