"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?

FGS. Shouldn't parents be helping their children at home !

I have no interest in what ofsted think, other than being highly amused by reading their wildly innaccurate findings in the case of some schools where I know the reality. I don't even judge on results, unless comparing like for like.

fresh I don't mean all comprehensives are like that. But in too many areas they do work like that because of catchment. We're semi rural, so don't have the population density to ensure a mix, but neither is it the case that the population is so small all dc go to one school. If you live here, it is very much the case that you get a secondary modern in all but name, or a decent genuine comp based on your postcode. There are a very small number who live in the catchment for the 'wrong' school, but otherwise its pretty clear cut You can broaden your choices by taking up religion, but the competition is such you'd need the sort of job and homelife that allows for at least weekly church attendance, so again it's selective.

"Being deprived does not stop or begin at £16K PA income and therefore FSM should not be used as definitive evidence in assessing a schools cohort."

Why not? If the test is completely fair, the number of FSM children in grammar schools would be roughly the same as the catchment. It isn't.

In our town one school has 37% FSM, the other 0%. No prizes for guessing which is which. The schools are about a mile apart, and most children at both come from the same 10 or so primary schools.

Bertrand I don't agree with you, it's helping not tutoring. Otherwise it's like asking someone to review a book without them having read the book in the first place.

Helping/Tutoring- it's all stuff that well supported children get, and children whose parents can't or won't do it don't.

But it's amazing how many children who are supposedly not tutored get lots of "help"

I'd be interested in knowing the actual figures for dc above fsm cut off, but in homes with incomes under eg £30k. Whether the numbers in grammar areas are reasonably shared between grammars and sms. And what the long term outcomes are for dc in that bracket, in both fully selective areas and fully comprehensive areas.

Bertrand it is a daft suggestion to suggest that grammar schools should have the same FSM as non selective schools !.

This is because unfortunately (not a political point but true) parents who are in regular full time employment children are 'usually' more able academically , than those parents who are not in full time employment.

Getting your child a couple of books and marking them is totally different to paying for a tutor. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

and yes Sandy you're right. There will never be the same amount of FSM children at both schools.

Not the same, possibly. But 37% to 0%?

My ds is going to our local and only GS. He has had a tutor since Year 4. I don't have My d resources to sit one to one with him myself for an hour a week so I outsource. He didn't have a tutor to prepare specifically for the 11+ but he did do specific prep in the build up. It would have been madness not too. We will give all our DC the opportunity of a tutor. It really helped my ds with his confidence. If there were things he didn't quite understand in the classroom then he was able to explore them more thoroughly with his tutor.
We live in a rural area. We have one local comp which is under subscribed because local people are desperate for their children not to go there. The brightest are creamed off by the Grammar school although they have introduced catchment this year (which we are not in). My ds is going to the right school for him. Whilst I am sure he would have been fine at the local comp I am not sure he would have thrived.

Good for you bearded that's what it's all about, wanting your child to thrive.

at a tutor from year 4!!

Omg.

It's a whole new world, isn't it, Mango! There's a terrifying website called 11+forums where year 4 would be considered far too late to start tutoring........

I live in a parallel universe.

Fact.

Bertrand. You seem to be on top of the stats and % children on FSM in various settings. What I would like to know is their relative success in different school systems. If you compare FSM DC in wholly comp LEA areas to those in super-selective areas, and to those in areas like here in Trafford where there are catchment-area Grammars. Do those FSM DC do better in general wholly comprehensive areas? Has anyone even looked at it like that?

I constantly read on MN earnest discussions about whether you should pay for private education at primary level in order to get a grammar school place later or which year you should get a tutor. Naive people have come on and asked for recommendations for a good tutor as if anyone is going to give them one! If they have a great one they certainly don't want to share them around- some don't even admit to having one!
No one seems to ask themselves the question that if their child needs a tutor from yr 4 then are they suited to a selective school.
In my day at least the 11+ was a bit fairer in that you did a few practice papers and sat the exam. Nowadays money buys the place. I know that people come on and tell us that their child passed without tutoring but they seem to close their eyes to the fact that this is not the norm. If I lived in Kent I should certainly use a tutor, however bright my child, just to make sure that they had exam technique and were not missing out on the information given to those with the tutors. I wouldn't want them in a school with the best creamed off, euphemistically called 'the High School' as if they are not supposed to realise that doors are closed aged only 11yrs and they are not expected to get to Oxbridge or be a doctor or a vet etc and they are only 11yrs old!
All 11yr olds should be able to move up the sets if they improve- many do as they are late developers. My father was 15yrs when he decided to work at school. They should also be able to move down sets if they can't cope. Getting a grammar school place is the start and I know children who have been drilled to pass and then needed extra help.

this is really scary Advice for parents who want to get their child into a grammar school.
Very far from when I sat it in 1962 and you did some old papers and did your best in the day.

I think that most posters keep out of these threads because they simply don't have to worry about it. 90% of children go to comprehensive schools, their fate isn't decided on a day when half of them are still 10yrs old.
If Theresa May was serious in her first speech then she needs a great education for all and not to allow the favoured few to keep the best for themselves.
There is something wrong in a situation where children born into families with intelligent, loving, emotionally mature, supportive, well off parents give their children the best start in life, get the best primary schools and aged 10yrs get a secondary school that intends to prepare them for university and top careers while the disadvantaged get a poor start, the worst primary schools and not a hope of a grammar school place. If one has managed to do well on intelligence alone their place is likely to go to a child of lesser ability whose parent understood and manipulated the system.
How about the novel idea of excellent education for all?

Of course it is! Are you telling me that passing 11+ in Kent isn't big business?

Basically you can look at a baby and the parents and work out their life chances and be right in about 98% of cases. It is depressing.