Priority admissions to grammar for free school meals

[polycomfort]

I'm pretty much not a person to start hand-wringing over low income families getting breaks. Happy for people less fortunate to get the odd leg up. Fine.

But I'm really angry to have just read that the local grammar school has just started giving priority admission to children claiming free school meals. I understand they get an extra £900 per child so I get that there is probably a financial benefit for the schools themselves. But I've been practicing with my daughter every evening (can't afford a tutor) using books I've bought cheap on Amazon and was thinking she might be just about good to go after lots of effort from both of us and now I'm just thinking what's the point? There are 20 applications per space as it is, and now just because I'm not poor she has even less of a chance. We don't have a high income but I work full time and so she doesn't get free school meals. For my efforts I may end up having to send my really rather bright daughter to the crappy (and it is crap) local comp even though she may be brighter than a child whose parent doesn't bust a gut to work every day of the week.

I don't think it's okay for grammar schools to be crammed full of wealthy kids who could go to private school, but couldn't they do a household income cut off rather than using a free school meal as the criteria? Then all the kids who can't afford to go to private school could be assessed for grammar school. I don't see why kids from the middle income should be penalised.

"ecause otherwise they might meet a FSM child in the lunch queue and catch oik

You know, I had friends at school who were told to keep away from me, probably thought I or my family were Oik's and I find this comment highly offensive. ^"

Yes, I do too. But it is the only possible explanation for supporting the selective system.

Trafford has a couple of outstanding secondary schools which don't seem at all negatively affected by the nearby grammars 'creaming off' the brightest children. Wellington school anyone?
It isn't as simple as saying that grammars take the brightest and secondaries don't have much left to work with.

Don't be silly, Hayluyt. You know it's because Grammars attract engaged parents, clever DC and have a cast iron Behaviour Policy to weed out the ones who just want to arse about. It's unfortunate that in an 11+ area that leads to substandard schools with second rate reputations, but parents don't scramble for Grammars to avoid 'oiks'. That's ridiculously simplified.

I have mentioned 'Wellington' school numerous times, as an example of an outstanding school achieving 74% GCSE Eng/Maths many times. In fact most of the secondary schools in Trafford are excellent despite the fact 40% go to grammar schools this far in excess of the 25/75% model that causes great discussion on here.

Haklyut - you're calling me naive yet you are shocked that corporate firms judge applicants based on where they were schooled??

But they have enough respect and class not to do it on the street, or outside their school and that's life isn't it

Actually I would put this down to a head who gives a shit or not. A head who allowes pupils to openly spark up, is a head who cant do his/her job and is not instilling pride in the school. Of course Dc from all schools smoke the difference is the head, no one is going to pay for dc to go to a school with pupils openly smoking.

And GCSEs? You mean results? 38 % with 5 A-C grades

And yes, a school with pupils sparking up at the school gates, I would never have a child of mine going too.

So these children who are very poor but who have the ability despite no input or care from parents... Do you really think they're going to apply for the grammar school?

No. They won't.

The ones who are very poor but their parents care like I do, will practice, and apply. And they will stand a better chance because they are poor.

Sorry but you're wrong on this one. My parents applied for a scholarship for me to go to a private school. I had no preparation or practise. I'd never been on holiday. Never been to a museum. Never been to the theatre or an art gallery. The only time I'd been away from the council estate in Liverpool I grew up on was the occasional day out to Blackpool. My school reading books always stayed in my bag until they went back to school and holiday projects were never done. They never read my report cards although my mum always went to parents evening. Why did they apply, because my headmaster told them they had to. I very much doubt that I was the only child in this position.

Your DD could be part of that 38%, poly. That's if she doesn't get in the Grammar, which isn't a done deal yet.

Hedgehog that's great but I would suspect the minority

Poly, what do you suggest for parents who 'care' but whose children are 'less bright' than yours? Is the crappy school OK for them?

Titchy - I'm not inconfident in my child's ability. I'm very realistic about the temptation of following the crowd and peer pressure

Arse - no not at all. No child should go to a crap school. But there aren't good schools for all so I think the best hope we have is helping those with the best potential actually achieve it.

Itsallkickimgoff I hope she would be part of that 38%. But there would be a lot less peer pressure and expectation for her to be, than were she at the grammar

But it is the only possible explanation for supporting the selective system

Oh purleease, your so far of the mark. Its ridiculous.

hedge every single head in the whole country should be doing this! this is the heads job. helping each child get the education thats right for them

Smokepole- as I have said before, Wellington school has very low FSM, only 6% low attainers and 33% high attainers. Of course it does well.

I would be interested to know how it fiddles its admissions, and where Trafford's other low attainers go.

You mean, those with the pushiest parents - like you?

I think it comes down to trust, can we trust our local schools to help our children achieve their potential? Many of them fall very short of the mark.

So do I want my bright child in a school I trust, YES, or a school I do not trust, NO.

I do see where you're coming from, poly, honestly, but again, so might the parents of a child on FSM. They'll be no different than you in their hopes and aspirations for their DC. If the parental support isn't there when the child gets to the Grammar then they'll probably have to leave if standards slip.

" I hope she would be part of that 38%. But there would be a lot less peer pressure and expectation for her to be, than were she at the grammar"

Don't worry,nd he'll be safe in the top set. And anyway, there are plenty of kids who wqnt to do well, even if you wouldn't rate their "well".

How do the high attainers do?

www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/schools-are-failing-brightest-pupils-more-than-40-of-comprehensive-schools-are-not-challenging-the-most-able-ofsted-warns-8656266.html

A survey of non-selective state secondary schools by education standards watchdog Ofsted found that more than 40 per cent were failing to help the most able pupils achieve their potential.

Almost two-thirds (65,000) of those who achieved top grades (level five) in English and maths national curriculum tests at 11 failed to go on and get the A or A grade at GCSE in the subjects that was expected of them*.

Thread moving fast so wanted to copy this again ^ in case anyone missed it and plenty more articles on subject.

Those with the best potential actually achieve it

Are you not arguing against that with your PoV though op? Your child is not likely to be as academically strong as say a child who without any parental support or any tutoring has passed an 11+ so by definition the other child has better potential. The problem is the inequality in the children's home lives be they rich and tutored or those without the parental support you give your child.

But those children of parents who care, who do practice papers with them and support their education.. But who are poor. Why should they get a better chance than the exact same child, exact same parent, but who is not poor?