"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?

[Kennington]

Lots of people have this attitude. Fair enough. In my opinion it is cultural.
I don't agree with children finding their own level. A little pushing helpsost kids. Most of us are mediocre therefore it is the little things that make the difference like parental help and input. One doesn't need to tutor but exam practise - which can be done by parents, helps with exam technique and confidence.

[BertrandRussell]

"still think that if a kid is bright enough to pass the 11+ then they'll pass it, as long as they've had at least some preparation"

But it's never a matter of just passing. Only a certain number can pass. So the pass mark varies from year to year. So it is entirely possible for a child who is tutored to do better than a brighter child who isn't.

[dolkapots]

No idea if it is policy per se but it just doesn't happen. When I look at ds' (very sport driven grammar) school's annual report about £30k is spent annually on coaches ferrying them around to matches and training. Secondary moderns do not have this sort of money (the one I went to had a voluntary school fund of £5 per annum which most did not pay) There is an overall assumption or "air" that that the SM's are about crowd control and actually getting pupils in through the door rather than an expectation of achievement.

[BertrandRussell]

"One doesn't need to tutor but exam practise - which can be done by parents, helps with exam technique and confidence."

Well, it can be done by parents who have the time, ability, confidence and inclination.........

[BertrandRussell]

"There is an overall assumption or "air" that that the SM's are about crowd control and actually getting pupils in through the door rather than an expectation of achievement."

How do OFSTED feel about that?

[MunchCrunch01]

it's a broader problem than grammars and/or private - even if you take those away, you'll still find the schools that have catchments in the nicer areas will tend to get better results and then the property around those schools is more expensive. If you really wanted to stop parents selecting schools on the basis of perceived quality, you'd need to continually update catchments to draw from a cross-section of the income distribution. Tricky, uncertain and certainly vote losing.

[dolkapots]

Well of course OFSTED don't say that directly, but dress it up in other ways. "X school's overall attendance rate has increased to xyz which is X% better than other schools with a comparable FSM's category".

[BertrandRussell]

Absolutely. In My Glorious Reign, selection will be by lottery.

[BertrandRussell]

"X school's overall attendance rate has increased to xyz which is X% better than other schools with a comparable FSM's category".

Can't see a problem with that. But a school which has no expectation of achievement could not possibly get an even reasonable OFSTED.

[TheCountessofFitzdotterel]

'"There is an overall assumption or "air" that that the SM's are about crowd control and actually getting pupils in through the door rather than an expectation of achievement."

How do OFSTED feel about that?'

That was how it felt, and what parents reported, about the comprehensive we moved house to get away from, but you wouldn't have picked it up from the OFSTEDs. Given how many schools have been like that for decades I don't think OFSTED is doing an awfully good job in some areas.

[BertrandRussell]

But if a school doesn't get the grades it can't get a good OFSTED. By definition...........

[TheCountessofFitzdotterel]

No, but as a parent you're trying to tell the schools with not so brilliant OFSTEDs that are actually pretty good places to go, from those that are not.
DCs' old primary didn't do well for years because the head didn't care about paperwork and policies, their current primary is well run but falls down because it gets poor attendance and bad SATS results, but both are actually decent schools with terrific staff.

[dolkapots]

Perhaps that was not a good example Bertrand, but under the overall achievement category I'm not sure that attendance should be the main achievement?

I went to a (good!) SM for 4 years and then onto a grammar for the final 3. The contrast was stark. I remember teachers in the SM appealing to disruptive pupils to not distract those who wanted to work. It was accepted that they were disruptive and acknowledged that they didn't want to do any work, which was acceptable with the priviso that they didn't distract others. In three years I never witnessed a single disruptive incident in the grammar, but I very much know that it would have been taken very seriously.

I also remember smoking during lunch tim es being common place in the SM. The teachers and even HT would do a rota of "smoke duty" where they would run between the portacabins chasing girls who were smoking. The teachers found this cat and mouse game very amusing. I thought this was a norm in every school. I remember on my first day at the grammar asking about where the girls smoked and they were astounded that this would happen on school grounds.

[BertrandRussell]

Absolutely- of course there are schools with good ofsteds that are crap to go to and vice versa. I'm just making the point that if a school really does think crowd control is an achievement it's not going to get a good ofsted. Because levels of progress are key. Which, incidentally is sometimes a real heffalump trap for secondary moderns.

[BertrandRussell]

"overall achievement category I'm not sure that attendance should be the main achievement? "
No it shouldn't. Unless there has been a significant increase in attendance. That's a huge marker of improvement generally.

[dolkapots]

When I said an overall air of crowd control I don't mean the HT stood up at the open day and said this. Of course he spoke about how proud he was at what the school achieved, the band played a wee tune, the choir sang, the higher achievers spoke. But in the classroom the attitudes of the staff spoke volumes. There was no push, no academic expectations. I remember on careers day the adviser trying to steer me away from A levels towards a GNVQ as A levels were "difficult", despite me being one of the high achievers (I moved and did 3 science A levels) The grammar on the other hand expected that everyone did their best and anything short of that would have been addressed.

[MaQueen]

IME, generally parents make virtuous sounding statements about 'why they wouldn't send their child to grammar school' when they're pretty sure their child isn't going to pass the 11+.

They're trying to make a righteous sounding virtue, out of what is actually a disappointing necessity. Fair enough...but I don't buy it.

Around here I don't know of a child that didn't have some form of tutoring for the 11+ if they were going to sit the exam. Tutoring doesn't magically increase IQ, it just reached you technique, timing and familiarity with the questions.

So an average ability child, who is tutored, isn't going to score as highly as a high ability child who is also tutored. So, ultimately the highest ability children are still the ones who get in.

[GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER]

I have a neighbour - now very elderly - who years ago was positively shocked at the mere idea of our sending our dds to the local excellent and very sought- after grammar.
She said, 'Oh, I could NEVER have sent C (her dd) to a COUNCIL school!'

She will never shop at Asda either, although it's easily the closest - far too common. Waitrose only, thank you.
In spite of this side of her, though, she's actually a very nice person, believe it or not...

[CatherineDeB]

Not really MaQueen.

What about the children who start tutoring in Year 2 or 3 (maybe at an independent school) - average ability but taught to pass the test, vs, very bright child from a deprived background with little parental input/interest who hasn't seen a test paper before and hasn't had any time invested in him.

I bet the tutored child would win.

To put this into context, I have a degree and three post grad qualifications and the answers to the Bond ten minute tests are not always obvious to me, or DH who is more academic than I am.

[CatherineDeB]

Last point made because I do think you have to do the tests to be able to see the patterns quickly, if at all.

[dolkapots]

^The Bond 11+ NVR tests are horrendous at times. My mathematician husband has been perplexed at times! I agree that it is not just the case of any parent buying the tests and going through them, you need to have a basic idea at how to do them yourself before teaching your child how to work it out. In saying that though my ds is now in year 10 and does CAT tests every year in school and says he has never come across anything as difficult as the Bond ones.

[CatherineDeB]

Dolka, my first degree was maths, DH has a Physics Msc and even he has had to look up the odd answer.

[Aeroflotgirl]

Of course there should be grammar schools for those who are highly academic, just as there are special schools for children who have special needs, they both have needs that are very different. I say this of a mum of a dd who is 9 ASD learning difficulties, speech and language delay and developmental delays, who goes to a SS.

No, not all kids who go to grammar are tutored, my friends dd got into grammar school, on her own merits, she just practised past papers, and my friend is not pushy at all, just leaves kids to develop at their own pace. I feel its best not to tutor for grammar school, and to allow kids to get in on their own merits.

[Sprink]

When I look at ds' (very sport driven grammar) school's annual report about £30k is spent annually on coaches ferrying them around to matches and training. Secondary moderns do not have this sort of money

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought the only difference between Grammars and Secondary Moderns was academic selection*. Are not both types equally state-funded?

*and uniform cost, apparently

[Aeroflotgirl]

Grammars are state funded, my friend is paying for her dd uniform.