"I could never send my dcs to grammar school....

[winkywinkola]

...because I think it's unfair on all those children who can't get in because they couldn't afford tutoring for 11+. But I will send them to prep and boarding school."

I was a bit perplexed to hear this from a mum at the school gate. Aibu?

Academic dc

Hm, don't need expensive tutoring for 11+, you can print practice papers off the web and talk your dcs through it yourself! Worked for me and my little sister

Yes, of course there are highly academic children at comprehensives...just not very many of them.

The vast majority of our schools are comprehensives, so if they were full of academic children we wouldn't be trailing so far behind in world league tables for literacy and numeracy.

Why aren't results from wholly selective LEAs significantly better than the results in wholly comprehensive LEAs?

Depends what you would call significant?

Have you actually signed an agreement that says they can chuck your DC out if you don't pay??? Surely they can't do that!

When a place is confirmed there is a behaviour contract (which both parent and pupil have to sign), fees contract as well as the usual photo/internet consent etc. As I said it does state that anyone having difficulty should contact the bursar and a reduction can be arranged at discretion. Despite being low income at present I am happy to pay the fees as I believe it is worth it, particularly for the sport that my ds is very passionate about. I am happy to contribute to ensure the "extras" that I most certainly would have enjoyed in my SM.

Yes, of course there are highly academic children at comprehensives...just not very many of them.

Where are they then? Most counties don't have grammar schools. And while private schools often have entry criteria, being able to afford it at all is not a mark of being highly academic.

Dolkapots- is this a state school in the UK?

Bertrand yes state schools.

The schools must be 'voluntary' grammar schools in Northern Ireland which ask for a contribution of up to £700 per pupil per year!

However, i would have that would be waived, if your income was below a certain level......

thought.

2015 gcse league tables

A level tables where the top 5 schools are all grammars

Yes, I thought Ireland too. Is that right, dolkapots?

Must be NI.
MaQueen, statistically significant, I presume.

Grammar schools are a bit...

Ooh I get to pick the biggest fruit in the basket.... Then
Na na na na .. I Got the biggest fruit. I'm better than you. Na na na na

Don't have a problem with grammar school but for heavens sake they are necessarily Not Better schools. They just have less to worry about so can focus on the education and not sen or bad bahaviour.

Also it may have been possible even 10 years ago to get into grammar without tutoring. Those days are over.

DS gets the highest CAT scores in his school but fails all tests. Lol. Its fun. However we would not even try grammar. It would be a joke and far to stressful for everyone.
So there are some highly intelligent children in other state secondaries. They just find their way a bit later.

Surely it's better to look at LEA results rather than individual schools. We're in Trafford with a state grammar system (with catchment areas) and usually are close to the top. So DC in secondary mods also do well compared to the rest of the country.

You'd really expect the results for individual grammar schools to be good as a % as they select on academic ability. They have already picked those most likely to do well and have fewer 'switched off' pupils in the mix. That's the reason my DC wanted to go, not because they expected the teaching to be any better. We looked at OFSTED reports beforehand and the local secondary mod scored better for quality of teaching than one of the grammars (I forget which). But they did want to be in a classroom full of DC that actually wanted to learn.

It would be a joke and far to stressful for everyone.
So there are some highly intelligent children in other state secondaries. They just find their way a bit later.

This exactly. From a personal standpoint, I am pretty sure my 10 year old will pass the tests, I am less sure that she will thrive in an academically pushy environment.

She wants to do the tests, all her friends are doing them, DH wants her to do the tests, I am on firmly the fence.

I think that she would probably have a much nicer time somewhere else, and I say that as a former GS girl.

The reason it's got how it has is because labour made a half arsed attempt to abolish them. If they had left well enough alone then it would have been ok.

"So there are some highly intelligent children in other state secondaries. They just find their way a bit later"

What does this mean? Most LEAs do not have grammar schools. So the kids who would have gone to a grammar school in a selective LEA go to form the top sets of comprehensive schools. No "finding their way later" about it!

I took that to mean they are not pushed full steam academically in the early secondary years Bertrand.

Only 5% of secondary schools are state grammars. They might operate differently but they definitely do not have a monopoly on bright kids despite what MaQueen thinks.

Confucious,

the point about grammar counties / authorities vs those without grammars is that you have to look at the outcomes for ALL children.

Yes, if you take in the top 5% (or less) as superselective grammars do, then you will get good results - so the individual grammar schools get very good results.

a) that doesn't make them good schools - they often have relatively poor value added: they take in selected, bright children, who, unsurprisingly, do well at GCSE and A-level, but the 'progress' is only what you would expect.

b) if you look at the whole county / area and compare all results of all children within that area, essentially the OVERALL results are the same for grammar and non-grammar counties with similar demographics. If the grammar system was genuinely better, you would expect the supposed 'improvement' for the bright children to mean that overall results were better, but this is not the case.

I seem to remember that the precise results depend on particular subgroups - I seem to remember very able children do very slightly better in grammar counties, but this is offset by the fact that middle ability children do worse, but i would have to re-read the study.

I live in a partially-selective county, but even so, local comprehensives have up to 40% of what MaQueen might refer to as 'bright children' - those who got level 5+ in SATs at the end of primary.

The value added by the comprehensive to these children is almost (to a 3 in 1000 level of accuracy) exactly the same as for the 'bright children' attending the local superselective.

Ok I see what you are saying however at my dc school they have people regularly playing in County and national sports teams, musicians who play in County and national orchestras and bands aswell as ones who attend the conservatoires Saturday schools...the list goes on. We chose the school not because of the academic side but because they turn out well rounded individuals. It's not all about oxbridge and medical school it's about what is right for that child at that time.

One Child for instance swims competitively so they have tailored their curriculum so they can attend training and meets and still get an education.

That is what separates it from the local comps

Confucious, my Yr 5 DD plays in a county orchestra and attends a Saturday music school from our local village primary.

She swims as well and recently had a day off for an event, from our local village primary.

"That is what separates it from the local comps"

Really? Our local secondary modern [waits for mumsnetters to draw their skirts aside] manages to accommodate a child who competes internationally. At roller dancing, so not really a grammar school persuit, but still........