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?

Ollycat - how did it come about that Bucks didn't take the comprehensive route? Wasn't it mandatory?

Interestingly most of the people I hear calling for the return of grammars know little about them - most people in Bucks would rather our children weren't selected aged 10! It's a silly system - it doesn't promote social mobility.

Var12 - no idea they just didn't! (I didn't grow up in Bucks - I went to a comp).

Don't get me wrong my children's school is amazing and people move from all over the country to try and get into it. It performs outstandingly - this year 70% A /A* etc etc.

But selection is not fair and not necessary and does not promote social mobility- a recent Guardian article says there are 3 children eligible for FSM in my children's school (although that is partly due to its location and catchment area).

Ollycat - it sounds like a case of the grass is always greener on the other side.
I went to a comprehensive and all was fine, but then I was normal bright. Ds1 is above normal intelligent, and when you are an outlier, the comprehensive system doesn't work. As a parent, you feel that the solution must surely exist in one of the paths you didn't have your son take. Since the majority of the issues seem to centre on a narrow curriculum and a slow pace, grammars seemed to be the solution.

But there you are, with a child in a grammar, ad you think your child would be better off in a comp??

Var12: what makes you think a grammar, introduced quickly, probably converted from a current academy, and staffed by...who?, teaching to the same GCSEs would be any different?
There would be a concentration of bright kids, for sure, but apart from a pressured competitive atmosphere in some super selectives, the teaching and curriculum in the selective schools I have had dealings with haven't been any different than in a well performing comp.

Grammars sometimes seem to be a kind of utopia, constructed in each person's head to address whatever problem that family is having with the schools they have.

Grammars are fast, competitive and challenging, have no bullying, no bad behaviour, will be a supportive atmosphere for quiet bookish children with violins, and will be staffed by philosophy dons and astronaut-physicists with endless time for extended discussion in wood panelled studies...

"The "unstretched" point frustrates me massively. The very brightest at GCSE can be stretched further, yes, but most schools don't have those sort of resources since the budget cuts. The pressure on schools means that allocation has been given to the border line students because if you don't get them over that line then the pressures become even worse. The twilight courses in extra languages, humanities etc that used to be offered for extra GCSEs have dwindled as funding falls and pressure on teachers escalates, as have some of the extra curricular opportunities that used to be offered in the STEM subjects. It just can't be done with the time and resources available.

Spending billions on yet another reorganisation of the system won't change this, it will simply exacerbate the problem for the many whilst insulating the few."

So what is the answer for bright children then? More scholarships and bursaries to private schools? Because the situation described above certainly sounds like it's failing the brightest kids to me. This is precisely what happens at my local primary, they focus on pulling up the less able students leaving the bright ones to their own devices. What a shame. Obviously the struggling students shouldn't be abandoned but someone has to advocate for the brightest students too.

Are you a teacher smallfox?

Var12: both my children are in a grammar - it's not that I think they would be better off in a comp - they are doing wonderfully and their school offers sooooo much BUT i do feel grammars are intrinsically unfair iyswim

So you'd pull them out and put them in a comp Ollycat, even if it compromised their education, because it's fairer to other kids?

I knew Kent had retained them somehow.
Birmingham has the Kind Edward schools. Liverpool has Bluecoats. Manchester might have some. But Bucks too?

Essex as well.

Of course I wouldn't remove them from somewhere they are happy. But I would be fine if their school became a comp. I chose their school for many reasons - many were nothing to do with it being a grammar. Our high attainers in the comp I work in do every bit as well as children in selective schools.

Do Ripon and Harrogate still have their grammar schools?

Your not failing the brightest kids if they are still getting the age appropriate educationumber, to a standard which gets you the highest grades available. There is no "failing" there.

If anything is failing the brightest kids it's the repeated budget cuts and continual changes to the system.

Also Var, if the teacher was describing the political spectrum and used that description of the liberal party, she would be accurate, it's why they were able to form a coalition after all.

Also.formed in 1988, so nearly 30 not 20 and still often referred to as the liberals

Smarty pants pedantism is only ok if you're right.

An ever increasing proportion of parents is prepared to pay in order to have their children educated in selective schools. Government policy is almost impotent to prevent this. Government can spend huge amounts of money reorganizing the school system but market forces always end up creating a school pecking order.

I'm in Bucks, in catchment for 4 different schools (1 of each single sex grammar, 1 co-ex grammar, 1 secondary modern and a comp over the county boundary which is actually our closest school, so it's quite possible I'll end up with kids in different places. So long as they are in the best school for them, it doesn't bother me.

Up thread, there was a parent explaining that she knew her older daughter was benefiting 'at the expense of' her younger sibling; but that she wasn't prepared to 'sacrifice' her the former for the latter.

I do not criticise her in the slightest. But bloody hell, I criticise a system that forces parents to think of their 'choices' in those terms.

When I say I am against selection, I am not arguing for the status quo. I am not suggesting it's ok to ignore the needs of the brightest (although I appreciate why, given the incredibly limited resources many schools have, and the expectations of them, they are forced to focus on young people who are struggling to meet increasingly tough and arbitrary standards in order for the school to be judged to be performing adequately).

I am saying that what is fair, sensible and eminently achievable is genuinely comprehensive education. And really, our government should be devoting its energies, the expertise it has to call upon (if only it would) and its funding, to pursuing that, rather than rushing back to a policy that has already been proven a failure, despite the narrow advantages it gives a very small number of individuals.

And it's not some woolly, utopian vision, either. I strongly believe that a genuinely comprehensive education is what my children are accessing at the moment. I'll let you know how it's going in a couple of years' time.

I would send my kids to whichever local school I thought best for them at the time.

I don't really agree with faith schools, but I do go to church, so my kids meet the admission code. When choosing secondary schools, the choice was an outstanding faith school within walking distance, a comp within walking distrance that "needs improvement", independent schools we would struggle to afford, or trying to get into a less local school. We chose the faith school.

I don't think grammar schools are a good idea either, but wouldn't be rushing to send my kids to the secondary modern out of protest.

multivac - even if independent schools, grammar schools, faith schools and all other types of selective education were outlawed and all DC were allocated places at their local state comprehensive, geographical selection would remain and, indeed, increase as the house price effect gained in impact.

I completely agree with multivac's post

There will always be outliers, at the top or bottom, no matter what the system. The argument against grammar schools has always been that we should have quality education for the majority and not pander to those who perceive themselves as outliers.

I think your son should've asked the question in class. It would've told the teacher a lot about his needs I imagine

Multivac's post is the same as my own position, fund schools properly so that they can do a good job.

I'm sure as your all experts on education you'll be aware of the funding issues, that have caused even highly selective schools to discontinue courses, make teachers redundant, scrap certain programs etc.

The Government's expression from 2010/2011 has been "more with less" and most schools have been doing their best with this.

Also, I'm again appalled about attitudes towards teachers on here.

smallfox2002 - the political spectrum is not linear. Nor is calling the lib dems the "liberal party" accurate. There was more to what she described than what I wrote - it was just a sample. And your "smartpants" comment is one of the three reasons why DS didn't speak up, the other two being how he would make himself different from his peers and pointing out mistakes like that would be plain rude.

Its fine to say spend more on education, but at the expense of which other service? Welfare? NHS? Defence?

Or would you prefer to just increase at an even faster rate than its already increasing? 8 years on from the crash and we still have a deficit.

As a teacher I certainly would, but only if my children were academically minded. I work at a good school (comp) with lovely staff and the majority of kids nice, although a historically deprived area. as a teacher I see that so much time is given to crowd control and demotivated kids, that the more able do miss out. This is despite differentiation of lessons, setting etc.

It would interest me to see if new grammar schools would be run the same way as comps, same level of Teacher administration and paperwork, or would there be more freedom?

It is vital that spending on education is not wasted: money needs to be allocated strategically to get the best return on investment. This might be at odds with some people's ideas of fairness.