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?

Not all grammar schools set. None of the ones I know do except some in Maths.

And grammar schools are just as keen on getting the grades as any other sort of school.

And there are plenty of subjects. Why would you want his whole education to focus around his Maths? Why not just "park" the Maths and concentrate on everything else?

var12 what exactly do you think your DC will be doing in maths during yrs 7 & 8 in a grammar school that will be significantly different from what they would be doing in a comp?

I'm also sure you are aware that some Grammar schools run a 3 year GCSE course. Do you think this would work best for your DC?

Whoever said anything about basing his entire education around maths?! you asked where eh was on the bell curve and I said it depends which subject but its top 1% for maths, top 5-10-15% for the rest. Just for clarification, maths has been the most extreme example, but DS has been far from challenged in History, Geography, French, Science, etc., etc.

Of course, schools would want to make exam performance their first priority but what about the students for whom good exam performance isn't really a challenge? That's the wasted potential that I think Michael Wishaw meant.

I can't see any benefit to a 3 year GCSE course for the most able. True it would get them away from KS3 stuff earlier, but dragging out an 18 month course over 3 years would just be boring.

Well if it's not engaging the top 15% then something is wrong. What do you want them to be doing?

How is it a waste of potential?

What do you want to happen?

Do you want your DS to do more GCSEs? Do you want them to start their A levels early? To go to university early?

I guess what grammars do depends on the quality of the grammars. I believe that in Kent there are various grades of grammars - e.g. isn't the Judd a lot harder to get into than some of the others?

If its just about passing exams, with no room for anything else once that's been done, then, yes, children like DS may as well sit bored in a comprehensive class as do the same at a grammar (unless they compensate with requiring more subjects to be studied?)

I'll tell you how its a waste of potential if you tell me what potential is.

My ds isn't anything like top 1% but he is very able for his school.

So when he writes a history essay, for example, he tends to go further into the topic, he reads more, and reasearches more widely than the others.

Yes, DS studied more GCSEs at a grammar than DD does at a comp.

I don't think the point of a GCSE lesson is to take kids beyond the curriculum. Schools should have extra curricular activities for that.

Potential is the extent to which a person is capable of participating in all facets of life in the future.

My Ds - just starting year 10 - has never been asked to write a history essay. I don't think he's ever had to write an essay, ever. TBH I wish he would have to do them as structuring essays is a skill in itself and I think he'd struggle at first.
Instead of essays, he gets handed worksheets that the teachers print off the internet and there are boxes in which to fill in answers. Maybe it will all change for GCSE, I don't know.

DD is very skilled in, and has a great deal of knowledge about drama and novels. I'm sure she knows more than her teacher in some areas.

But the point of a GCSE English literature lesson is to teach what is required for the course.

DD has been writing history lessons since year seven, as an average student at an average comp in a grammar area. She has also had to write essays for many other subjects.

Sorry, history essays not lessons!

almondpudding - well in that case, mastering GCSE content such that you an get an A* or a 9 is a particularly narrow objective since what is excluded is much greater than what is included. So, not fulfilling potential with respect to an individual subject would mean gaining knowledge and developing insight into as much of the subject as possible, and not meeting your potential would mean not doing as much of that as you could if not curtailed.

var12 Sat 17-Sep-16 14:49:53 I guess what grammars do depends on the quality of the grammars.

You might want to take a look at this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/secondary/2617014-3-year-GCSEs-talk-to-me-about-your-DCs-experiences

Var, I'm still not understanding what it is you want.

Do you feel that following the GCSE curriculum will limit your son, and he should go through it more quickly and move on to other things?

Is he being offered the additional Maths GCSE? Or to start A level maths in year 11? Those are both on offer at DD's school.

I think the national curriculum has limited my son. I'm told the GCSE maths one will too, but no one has said anything about the others, and I have not asked.
So, what i'd like is that whatever school children like my DS go to, the school prioritises a good GCSE pass and then, if and when there is time left over, it does something else, just for the sake of interest. How it does it and what it does is much less important than doing soemthing other than taking a child with a high ability to learn and making them dislike school because it becomes synonymous with boredom and repetition. (Yes, i know some repetition is good, but the emphasis is on the "some".)

Is he being offered the additional Maths GCSE? Or to start A level maths in year 11? Those are both on offer at DD's school.

No, the school offer neither. The HT says "we are not an exam factory".

Well yes, the national curriculum and the whole churning out of exam results probably limits everyone's kids.

But that is the nature of state education, including grammar schools.

That's why people home educate or send kids to Montessori.

var12 Sat 17-Sep-16 14:49:53 Judd a lot harder to get into than some of the others?

Whether a super selective Grammar would be more suitable for your DC would depend on what it is your are looking for. I also suspect that some super selectives are not going to consider early entry to A levels given the contents of the following thread:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=42996

Not that I've given this much thought, since it isn't an option anyway, but I would prefer, for their sakes, that DS1 and Ds2 did not do GCSEs and A Levels early. The reasons are:

1. What happens next? Going to university early isn't a good idea at all IMO. Nor is starting a university course in something you are good at, but you haven't thought about it for a year or two.

1. Social stuff - DS may be very able but he's a 14 year old boy, just like any other. He and I both want him to grow up, experiencing all the usual moments with his peer group. I wouldn't want to deprive him of the chance to develop and experience things in the company of other boys (and girls) who are at the same stage of development.

So you don't want them to have early entry, or do anything that might remove them from their peers?

Essentially your looking for something that doesn't exist, even in a lot of grammars the stretch and challenge is early entry.

Surely a fair amount of the stretching should come from the kids themselves, you could point them in the right direction but they have to take ownership of it. Otherwise you get the stretch without the challenge

No, I'd never send my DC to a grammar school. Not even if we had one literally on our doorstep and we had an unlimited amount of funds.