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?

We live in Paris. We send/have sent our DC to selective schools, though both DSS1 and DSS2 started out in the local state schools. DD went to a private bilingual school from 2-11. All three DC will/have finish(ed) their education in a selective Catholic school (we are not Catholic).

DSS1 and DD are both totally unsuited to comprehensive education. DSS2 is more rough-and-tumble and could cope psychologically with an environment that doesn't let him reach his full potential. But why would we choose to do this when better choices are available?

Roomba your experience is very similar to my own at comprehensive school in the 90s - coasting, bored, in constant fear of a teacher praising your work as that would have given the bullies more fuel to torment you. I just wanted DD to go to a school where it is OK to do well. The grammar school isn't the only school in our area where this is the case but it is the most convenient. The decision was also made easier as it is a mixed sex school. I would have struggled if it was single sex - don't know what our decision would have been if that were the case.

Yes I would, and probably will send my children to grammar schools. There are several in my area, each with different entry criteria (so some easier to get into than others).

A recent YouGov poll showed that 60% of Brits are in favour of grammar schools.

While I have some issues with the grammar school system - I wish children could be tested at 14, rather than 11,for instance - I don't think the state system has really worked in England. It's selection by house price, and social segregation has been entrenched with the richest attending either private school or 'good' comps in areas that with high house prices.

Here in Northern Ireland, which has a selective system, there is no need for private schools. It's not perfect but we must be doing something right as we get the highest GCSE and A level grades in the UK every single year.

Are you suggesting the whole system was completely fixed?!

What Dinosaur said. It wasn't just about getting a mark that meant you passed or failed the ht put his twopence worth in.

Having been round a couple of grammars the general disdain they felt for certain subjects and the amount of homework they delighted in telling us they gave was ridiculous. The comprehensives on the other hand seemed to tune in to that not everyone wanted to work in an office and offered subjects that offered viable alternatives.

Oliversmumsarmy I don't think that what happened at your primary school nearly 50 years ago can be applied to today so not really relevant. In areas which have grammar schools today, pupils are only selected on the basis of their marks and the cut off for getting in is published.

Isn't a lot of the Northern Ireland education system segregated by religion. And ~ 2/3 who go to the NI grammars? Very different from what happened historically in England. How much flexibility is there now to switch between the 2 pathways?

A story stuck with me (I confess I may misremember parts): it was a (northern Irish) kid who did well at school. Then his dad died & in wake of that the kid failed the NI version of 11+. He never engaged with school after that, left with no or minimal qualifications in the 1960s. While working in a psychiatric unit, someone spotted how bright he was & encouraged him to get some basic qualifications. He slowly built on those, eventually went to Uni, went on to get a PhD, became a consultant on the tv show Robot Wars.

I've heard a few other stories like that, about people who failed the 11+ because of a single shock event in their lives/their family. Tortured pathways back to achieving their potential. It's wrong to sort kids on basis of a single test.

Yes,if he ds was bright enough to attend one,absolutely. I went to a grammar school.

I am not saying that is probably how the 11+ started but you can see how the spirit in trying to make sure certain pupils were not overlooked developed a system that could be skewed.

Don't forget as a female taking the 11+ you were disadvantaged as the boys were given extra marks just because they were boys.

Certainly the old 11+ system was manipulated by heads.

My father came from a very impoverished, wc part of Manchester and was skivving off fishing on the day of the 11+. He was extremely lucky that his Head recognised his potential and off he went to Grammar School.

Changed his life, obvs. But very much the exception that proves the rule.

My father came from a very impoverished, wc part of Manchester and was skivving off fishing on the day of the 11+. He was extremely lucky that his Head recognised his potential and off he went to Grammar School.

I don't think that happened everywhere though. My father didn't do the 11+ when he was supposed to due to an accident. The grammar school didn't just let him in anyway though. He stayed at his primary until he had recovered and then took the test. They weren't going to take the headteachers word for it. That was in the 50s.

Yes.
No.
There are lots of grammar schools in Northern Ireland (two in my nearest town).
Caitriona Ruane scrapped the 11+ but the grammar schools simply replaced it with different entrance tests and carried on.

In the olden days the system was definitely manipulated- for good, like Christina's DF and bad like Oliver's friend.
Systems are generally more transparent nowadays, but that can also lead to inequalities. In Sydney the grammar schools are predominately 90% Asian (confusingly the grammar schools are private)
Any system can only be as fair as the society is serves.

Sorry the selective state schools in Sydney are called High schools, the grammar schools are selective and private.

Absolutely, if it's the right school for my child. Which means one which stretches the most able, has excellent pastoral care, has lots of opportunities for extra-curricular stuff, isn't a ridiculous journey etc.

In Perth the grammars are public in the same way as the uk is and the private schools are fully of thick white rich kids - much like the uk too

I'd send my children to whatever school of the options available that I and they thought would suit them best. Including grammar, private (if we can afford) and single sex ones, none of which I entirely agree with in principle. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrite, but I don't think you can just stamp your feet and say well there should be a brilliant comprehensive school that will offer X y and z opportunities, and send them to that school regardless of whether it actually does what you need.

It's a no from me. I went to public school then grammar for a levels...my kids will go to neither sort.

I took the grammar test as did everyone in my school year (in the olden days where everyone did it, not like now when it really is down to parental drive and affordability) but went to the local comp. I did very well academically, however most of my peers were utterly failed by it, not getting even basic qualifications to take them on to further study. There was also a low level of aggression and fear in the school which made my school days deeply unpleasant. Being clever wasn't something looked on favorably at all. Swotty children, children that liked learning, more sensitive children all fared really badly in this environment and were bullied. The quality of teaching was actually quite good.

I hope no schools are like that now! My aim is to send my children to schools that aren't like that.

Publicly funded selective schools do not sit at all well with me, I think if you want your child to go to a selective school, you pay to go private. I am very glad that there are no grammars in this area and that my DC go to their catchment schools. Segregating children at 11 and telling some that they aren't good enough and never will be is revolting.

I have always been against grammar schools because they can ruin the education of the majority who would end up in secondary moderns, with possibly little incentive to do well due to peer pressure.

A well set truly comprehensive school with opportunities to easily change sets each year is surely the best option for all children. Not streamed, which means the same stream for every subject, which puts those with spiky profiles in the wrong stream. i.e. Child excelling in maths but struggling in English, what stream to put them in. No, setting by individual subject is much better.

My DS3 is top set for maths and science, middle set for English, bottom set for games. He actually enjoys games now!

I think there may be an argument for a small minority to go to a super selective grammar, if only 2% or so, because that top 2% could be seen as having SEN very different from the other DC and it wouldn't have much effect on the comprehensive schools.

However, grammar systems where the top 40% or so are removed at 11yo just destroy the opportunities for the other 60%.

Any child can get bored in school, but its only the bright ones who get bored because there's nothing for them to do. The system is all geared to following the national curriculum and passing gcses, which is all fine, but what if you are capable of (in fact "need") to do more / learn more?

If grammars are only about passing gcses, then there's no point in changing the system

um, the not-as-bright ones get bored because there's nothing for them to do, too.

Imagine you can't figure out what's going on & from experience you know you'll probably find it painful to try to understand plus you still won't master the material. You might stop trying & then become very very bored at school.

*I think I said wrong thing earlier, I should have said setting instead of streaming. Problem with those words is they have no obvious relationship to how they're used.

"The system is all geared to following the national curriculum and passing gcses, which is all fine, but what if you are capable of (in fact "need") to do more / learn more? "

I think you'll find grammar schools are pretty focussed on the national curriculum and passing GCSEs too..............

Yes. My DS goes to our local super selective, suits him well.

Not the one my dc attend. Their main focus is on "rounding out" the child and encouraging extra curricular activities the grades are secondary. This approach gets them a huge percentage (over 97%) A* GCSE grades.