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.

"Do you think your children are deserving of a better education than mine because you are poorer?"

Your child will get the same education as the grammar school child. You are showing that you are committed to your child's education already. Your child will do well anywhere if they're bright and have the support at home. They will do well. Pass their exams and be just fine.

However, if a child doesn't have that same support at home, for whatever reason, they will fail in a failing school. So actually they do stand a better chance of achieving if they go to the Grammar School.

Your Precious Baby will do well wherever they go.

anothernumberone - I know she may not get a space, that's why I'm even more annoyed that her chances are now further reduced by something that is really out of our control. Unless i leave my job or reduce my hours.

"The highest early achievers from deprived backgrounds are overtaken by lower achieving children from advantaged backgrounds by age seven. The gap widens further during secondary education and persists into higher education. The likelihood of a pupil eligible for FSM achieving five or more GCSEs at A*-C including English and mathematics is less than one third of a non-FSM pupil. A pupil from a non-deprived background is more than twice as likely to go on to study at university as their deprived peer."

And it is important to note that the lack of qualifications / higher education exists even for Pupil Premium pupils who are assessed as being very bright at primary school. It isn't about poor children having lower starting points. It is a fact that amongst children of equal ability, those who are from deprived backgrounds will do less well (statistically).

Thank you tiggytape for that info.

Even a few will bump the 'just about good enough' children off the bottom of the list, which is what OP seems pissed off about. It must be hard to have DC who try their best and still aren't good enough to get in, but really, it's not the fault of any cohort whose results are better, whatever their background.

Yep binary thSt about sums it up.

This is not addressed directly at the OPs problem, but more at the points about the crap alternatives. I think this is the problem with grammar school areas to be honest. Where grammar schools exist, they sweep up the very bright (or well-tutored) children. Children of well-off parents who fail the entrance exam get sent to private schools (by and large) so the local comprehensives get the less well off children who failed the GS exam. As the GSs have creamed off the "best" students, they become de facto secondary moderns with all the problems of low expectations etc that that brings.

Obviously this is a massive exaggeration, as not all children are entered for GSs in the first place, bright or otherwise, and many children mature academically later than 10/11 of course, but it does tend to create a problem of perception in relation to the local comprehensive schools being for 11 plus "failures", and perception sadly often becomes a reality.

Surely if she is that bright then she will pass the 11 plus and get in without a problem? Not necessarily. There is a cut off point which they have to achieve to be considered, and then the children who all achieve something above the cut off point will be put in to an order. The order will most likely be the very, very wealthy children who have either been to private primary school and/ or had an expensive tutor, followed by the children of equal or lesser intellect to my DD who get free school meals.

Followed my my DD and those in her situation.

Tiggy - Thanks. I'd misunderstood what the OP was saying and thought that the children didn't even have to quite reach the pass mark, which was part of the furore in Northern Ireland. I think the one in my link let you be a few marks below. I didn't realise that a slightly different version was coming in here either (not really a grammar school area and my oldest is still KS1!)

Every single thing about your posts illustrates why grammar schools should not exist.

So you want a system that stops rich children whose parents could afford private school having a monopoly on places, through social privilege? Fine. I agree with you.

And I also agree with you that poor children should not gain a place through social engineering and positive discrimination at the expense you your child.

But you can't have both. If you refuse to make allowances for the poor kids then you have agree to judge purely on results alone, not weighted or handicapped for social advantage or disadvantage etc.

So if you judge on results alone you also have to let the rich kids in, because whether we like it or not, their parents are doing what you are doing each evening, which is supporting and coaching their children through the 11 plus, whether personally or with the help of a tutor, it's irrelevant really - the child is not doing it alone and under his/her own steam. So why should they be less entitled to that place than your child?

If grammar schools were abolished the standard of comps would rise and all children could be more than adequately catered for in the state comp system with proper streaming. Those who didn't like it could still opt to go private, just as many do even with the grammar system.

How do you know that this child from that household isn't brighter than your Precious Baby? If they are brighter that isn't my issue, is it? I've said all along that the brightest kids should be there - I don't think it's fair that a less bright child gets a space simply because their child gets FSM.

How can you say they are of 'lesser intellect' if they achieve above a cut off point?

How can they be of lesser intellect if they achieve the same pass mark?

Polter's pic expresses my thoughts on this exactly.

I think they're doing you a favour. If you're practising with your daughter every night to get her up to the standard needed to get in then she'll be out of her depth if she is lucky enough to get a place.

I actually think the passive aggressive and quite unecessary use of "precious baby" is really childish and irrelevant to this discussion.

Totally agree with Crossfit. Dividing children into sheep and goats at age 11 is inherently unfair, no matter how much tinkering is done

I don't think it's fair that a less bright child gets a space simply because their child gets FSM.

They still need to do the exam....yes?
You could also argue that the very wealthy children from prep school/private tutors is also unfair because they have been coached for the exam... they are not necessarily bright...but I don't hear you complaining about them.

This is not addressed directly at the OPs problem, but more at the points about the crap alternatives. I think this is the problem with grammar school areas to be honest. Where grammar schools exist, they sweep up the very bright (or well-tutored) children. Children of well-off parents who fail the entrance exam get sent to private schools (by and large) so the local comprehensives get the less well off children who failed the GS exam. As the GSs have creamed off the "best" students, they become de facto secondary moderns with all the problems of low expectations etc that that brings.

you missed the children who didn't get in but because the other local school is crap get popped on a bus to a better school 20 miles away. Leaving the really demotivated/ unsupported kids behind.

If they have the same pass mark, then using FSM to decide who gets a place is no less fair on your child than using distance from school or sibling connections.

How is this actually worded on the admissions criteria OP?

"The order will most likely be the very, very wealthy children who have either been to private primary school and/ or had an expensive tutor, followed by the children of equal or lesser intellect to my DD who get free school meals" Er, no. That would be contradictory - its either on results order - in which case impossible to discriminate positively for FSM or kids who pass who qualify for FSM, then other criteria.

If oversubscribed is it not is more likely to be:
Those who pass who have statemented SEN
Those who pass who ware or have been looked after
Those who pass who have FSM
Those who pass who fit any daft, antiquated and unfair religious criteria that the school have
Distance from school
Tie-breaker on results?

I totally empathise with your frustration at how difficult it seems to get your kids into the school of your choice (it's a joke where we live) but honestly anything that tries to correct the historic unfairness has to be a good thing.

Good luck to your DD.

is it possible to work and get FSM? where I live we don't qualify despite having low income because we receive some WTC-(doesn't matter how much)

Do you think your children are deserving of a better education than mine because you are poorer?

Well, I'm guessing that I could be richer than you and I think giving a child on FSM priority access to a grammar school place is a great idea. Just because I can afford a tutor and therefore will give my child an unfair advantage over those whose parents are poorer than me, doesn't mean I don't believe in social justice.