to ask would you send your eldest Dc to a grammar school?

[var12]

Hypothetical question... if there were grammar schools in your area and your DC1 was offered a place, would you accept it?

I think you are getting confused with Hogwarts, sandy.

Exactly ells. My Dad grew up in a council house, but passed the 11+.

By the time he was 35 he had been so successful that he could have me privately educated.

And my dad's siblings did not pass the 11+. None of their children went to private school. None of them have successful careers. Thanks god for grammar school.

Grammar schools were the enablers of social mobility. Even labour politicians know that.

Thank god your cousins are all unsuccessful, Ells?

var - they demonstrably weren't, and aren't. The evidence shows that - past and current.

And what's more, as first generation private school pupils neither me or my sibling experienced any issues integrating into top public schools. Social mobility is possible.

Ells, anecdote is not the plural of data.

It worked for you, good! Your parents worked hard, but the Crowther report in 1959 showed that only 10% of the poorest went to grammar schools, this is lower now.

Its a very good example of survivor bias.

Today 20:26 multivac

Thank god your cousins are all unsuccessful, Ells?

No of course not multivac. Thank god my dad was and we got that head start. My point was that sociable mobility is (or was) possible. And to illustrate the benefit of that grammar school education.

So basically, people are still saying "I want grammar schools because I think they are best for my child. I don't actually care what happens to anyone else". Nobody is even prepared to engage with the idea that grammar schools provide marginal benefits for high achievers at the expense of middle and low achievers. Apart from a few vague remarks about the others getting jobs "with people" or in music, drama or sport.

Which is an extraordinarily short sighted approach, even from a point of view of complete unenlighteded self interest.

"Grammar schools were the enablers of social mobility. Even labour politicians know that."

That really is, forgive me, complete bollocks. They weren't. And aren't. There has been much more social mobility since the abolition of grammar schools.

"Ells, anecdote is not the plural of data.

It worked for you, good! Your parents worked hard, but the Crowther report in 1959 showed that only 10% of the poorest went to grammar schools, this is lower now.

Its a very good example of survivor bias"

But if 10% of the poorest went that shows that there was opportunity for social mobility no? Admittedly I do feel lucky. Obviously others worked hard and were clever and did not "succeed" as my dad did. This isn't fair but it is life unfortunately. Hence the reason my parents threw everything at our education and I do the same for my kids.

Grammar schools are not the enablers of social mobility, as previously stated the post war consensus and all that in entailed was far more important.

Yes Bertrand I think you'll find it's true that most people care first and foremost about their own kids.

Which Els, is why grammar schools were unpopular in the first place, so many children lost out.

You can't have a head start without putting everyone else in the race at a disadvantage. You can't thank a deity for your father's good fortune, without also acknowledging it's due to the same system that prevented his siblings from thriving in the same way that he did.

Because, as you point out, hard work and good intentions are very often not enough.

"Yes Bertrand I think you'll find it's true that most people care first and foremost about their own kids."

Of course they do. But in order to support grammar schools you have to care only about your own kids.

Bringing them back would be a massive step back for social mobility...how is that a good thing? By all means hark back to the glory days but to actively support bringing them back seems odd to me.

But the Crowther report also showed Els, that the grammar school selection was not really on innate ability but far more or socio economic condition and access to cultural capital.

I do agree in part with what you're saying multivac, but the system didn't "prevent" his siblings from doing as well as he did. They all started out in the same system. They weren't as clever or as hard working as him. In fact he had a rough time growing up in his family, rather than being encouraged he was teased within his own family for being a high achiever.

But the Crowther report also showed Els, that the grammar school selection was not really on innate ability but far more or socio economic condition and access to cultural capital.

BR I want the best education for my DDs and have worked damned hard to get it for them.

I don't have the time, energy or inclination to work that hard for anyone else's children.

Ells Teeth. Why is a Wycombe Abbey/Downe House type girl talking about the 'plebs' public schools in such glowing terms !

Its amazing how you adapted to public school, mind you i bet most of the parents were 'self made' RICH Scrap Metal dealers and Car Dealers !

The real 'posh' people were 'pleading' with the school to give them time to pay or asking 'Coutts' for an overdraft !

"Yes Bertrand I think you'll find it's true that most people care first and foremost about their own kids."

Of course they do. But in order to support grammar schools you have to care only about your own kids.

Els, the Crowther report also found that your chances of getting to a grammar school were not based on your ability, but far more on the cultural capital you had access to via your parents.

So no, not showing social mobility.