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.

Stop forcing things on me that are nothing like what I've said Hak. It's pathetic.

If you want to engage with me it would help if you paid attention to what I've said, which includes where I've acknowledged that plenty of children on FSMs have good parents and don't need to have extra money targeted at them or have their progress monitored any more than other children with perfectly good parents.

I can see why grammar schools are doing this but I'm not at all convinced that it will help truly disadvantaged children, particularly as it applies to all children who have been on PP at some point in the last few years.

I live in an area of very selective grammar schools and the children I know who did the grammar school exams and were eligible to get in on lower grades were actually only on PP for a short period of time because their parents had split up or lost their jobs. They certainly weren't at a disadvantage academically at any point. One of the children who was eligible has actually chosen to go to a private school rather than a grammar. Although this situation obviously doesn't apply to the majority of PP children but I wouldn't be surprised if it applies to a high proportion of PP children that do the grammar school exams.

Summer borns in most 11 + regions benefit from standardisation which means their scores are graded against the other children of the same age. Standardisation means they might or might not benefit from a few extra standardised points but it also isn't impossible for the summer borns to score on average higher than the autum borns in a given year and therefore be disadvantaged by being younger (as they will lose a few standardised points).

Jee, standardising test scores (which happens for all children, not just summer borns) is different because it is based on the fact that some children taking the test will be almost a year younger than other children taking the test.

It is not a fact that every child on FSM is less advantaged than every child not on FSMs. That is a judgment made on very basic criteria, it is no where near as accurate as knowing what day a child was born on.

"Why did he need to be in a different building with different uniform and different teachers?

Are you really asking why the less academic child couldn't be taught in the grammar school rather than the other way around?"

No. The point is, why can't the grammar school and the secondary modern school be in the same building , have the same uniform and be called oh, I don't know, how about a "comprehensive school"?

"plenty of children on FSMs have good parents and don't need to have extra money targeted at them or have their progress monitored any more than other children with perfectly good parents"

If you are on FSM, it doesn't matter how good your parents are, you are still massively disadvantaged.

There is already specific provision for traveller children. How do you measure, and therefore ensure fairness, the relative disadvantage of other children who don't qualify for PP?

Mehitabel - we don't NEED grammar schools but some regions fought to keep them and so we still have 163 of them. Why shouldn't parents who want to use them not attempt to do so by entering their child for the 11+? It isn't the current cohort of parents fault that they exist.
By all means campaign to scrap all grammar schools and all other forms of state funded selection (gonads and god), but don't blame the parents who are simply exercising the choice that they have.
I am all for FSM children getting priority for places. I think the figures on children coming from prep schools is misleading as many coming to grammars from state primaries are also from wealthy middle class families and are not necessarily poorer than the prep kids. Anything that can be done to level what isn't an equal playing field has to be a good thing but in reality the FSM priority is just a tokenistic gesture.

You're right, it's not a fact that every child on FSM is disadvantaged. It IS a fact however that the vast majority of them are.

You don't withdraw a tool that helps redress an inequality just because a very small percentage of those affected aren't really disadvantaged by that inequality. At least if you're a compassionate human being you don't....

It's the same as withdrawing disability benefits for all just because a few are claiming when they shouldn't be.

Maybe you think that's ok?

I am asking why we need grammar schools

Because we want choice, not one size fits all? What suits one wont suit another?

If you are on FSM, it doesn't matter how good your parents are, you are still massively disadvantaged.

You are wrong about that. You really are, and it's odd that you can't see that significant disadvantage can't exist without being eligible for FSMs. Yes, there have been lots of studies about outcomes for FSM children compared to non FSM children, but you seem to be clinging on to that so tightly that you can't even begin to open your mind to anything else.

I wouldn't want to withdraw it titchy, I'd want to massively expand it so that it has some chance of successfully doing the job it was created to do.

There is already specific provision for traveller children.

Not in my area there isn't.

Does streaming go on in comps, or just secondary moderns?

You really are, and it's odd that you can't see that significant disadvantage can't exist without being eligible for FSMs

I know.

Our comp uses sets instead of streaming Beyond. Our grammar does the same.

I understand that it isn't currently possible to take account of all types of disadvantage. I do think it would be a good idea to use: has been on FSM for at least a year out of the last 3 years as the measure rather than PP entitlement though (due to it lasting six years).

You're right, it's not a fact that every child on FSM is disadvantaged. It IS a fact however that the vast majority of them are.

I don't know that that is true if you look solely at those on FSM who also do the grammar school exams. My children go to grammar schools and although a fair proportion at the school (more than the national average I think) have or have been on FSM, I don't think they have been at a disadvantage academically i.e. they went to good primary schools and did a lot of practice questions before the exam and their parents are certainly interested in their education.

"You are wrong about that. You really are, and it's odd that you can't see that significant disadvantage can't exist without being eligible for FSMs."

I can and do. What other measure do you think should be used? Iit would be great if we could think of another way of measuring disadvantage.

Marynary- what % of FSM children are at your children's grammar?

Streaming shouldn't really happen anywhere. Setting does happen in most secondqry modern and comprehnsive schools. And in many grammars, particularly for maths.

I don't think the focus should be on measuring it. Just give primary schools the funding and resources they need to be able to provide adequate intervention to every child that would benefit from it.

When a child genuinely needs extra support, it's not hard to find evidence to prove that.

Then, when overall standards have improved for all children, there won't be anything worth measuring between groups of children.

Yes, I know, I should dream on!

Marynary- what % of FSM children are at your children's grammar?

I don't know the percentage but the headmistress informed us the other day that it is above the national average.

I love the way people say 'does this happen in comprehensives' as if they are all the same!! They were put in sets in my DC's comp.

I can and do. What other measure do you think should be used? Iit would be great if we could think of another way of measuring disadvantage.

I don't think that there is another measure that could be used at the moment. However, I personally think it would be more helpful to target children in underachieving primary schools in areas of socioeconomic deprivation (lessons etc) and they also need to provide free or low cost transportation to the schools from those areas.

But in any event there is nothing wrong with parents who value education wanting their children educated with the children of other parents who share that value.*

Sure, if these children are educated with Mehitabel's 'non academic DS' who is hard-working, 'has an excellent work ethic', got 'Bs & Cs'. His parents 'share that value'. More importantly, this average-ability child shares that value.

The crime is that crap schools exist.

'The parenting of their intake' should not deprive any student of a decent education that makes the most of their ability - whatever the ability level.

It's not just crap parenting. Many sink schools have crap teachers, crap heads, crap resources ... when they need the most resources, to counter that 'disinterested parenting'.