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?

Sorry var12 I haven't read the full thread so not sure what you mean. I agree with your statement but not sure how it's relevant to my post? (probably slow functioning brain due to sleep deprivation...!)

Maybe I misunderstood Ellsteeth*. I thought you meant that you wanted other people's high ability children to go to comprehensives but your own to go to grammars.

No way var12 not at all!! I just meant that I would choose the most suitable school for my child whether it be grammar, private, comp whatever, despite my belief that selective education is unfair. In an ideal world all children would be educated together and get a fair crack of the whip, but if I can afford private or my child gets into a grammar school I would send them, while acknowledging that these schools may create inequality.

Dontyoulovecalpol, in your answer you imply that non-grammar schools are not very good. This shouldn't be the case and this is a separate problem, but it shouldn't be solved at the expense of the few academically outstanding children who get bored and frustrated unless they can learn at their own pace.

(and often bullied too, for being too clever)

Being non-academic narrows your options a little, but if you start focusing on your chosen path early, you can achieve great things in life too.

What great things do you have in mind?

Drama, art, sports, music, working with people, most jobs really.

Also universities take 50% of the population, so with hard work and real dedication you can get a degree and use that to get a job. Most of the really successful people are quite intelligent, but what puts them in charge of their often more intelligent team members is their personality, ability to play office politics and their determination.

"Drama, art, sports, music, working with people, most jobs really."

Oh,purhlease!

How many people make a living from drama, art, sport or music? What sort of "working with people"?

Spotofweather what I'm asking is what is the actual purpose of needing to make academically gifted children even smarter/ better developed. Why so much focus on children who are winning anyway?

Spotofweather. . As the 11 plus has been proved not to be an indicator of academic ability or potential but more a test of socio economics we wouldn't be getting those of he best academic abilities. More about bunch of highly tutored Tim nice but dims.

If they qualify, yes. If not, you have local comp. Why is this even an issue?

Dontyoulovecalpol - because often they aren't wining anyway. They could do well if allowed to get on with things, but they often don't due to the current setup. Think bullying and mental health problems

Oh right so bright children's bullying and mental health problems need a special school just for them

smallfox2002 - the issue relates to those who just scrape in due to lots of tutoring versus those who just miss out on a place due to no tutoring. Its not tim nice but dim, its Tim not quite bright enough to get there under his ow steam displacing Topsy who would've got there had it not been for Tim taking her place.

I wish I could say no. I am a teacher and fairly left wing on most issues. However, it's no accident that we live minutes away from an outstanding rated school. If I were offered a place at a grammar for either child, I can't in all honesty say I wouldn't want it. Flame away but I am that hypocritical.

no bright children need to be educated, not placed in a holding pattern. failure to do so results in problems. Not every child is effected, but a significant minority are.

Its not as if the school places would be created out of thin air either. The state must provide these children with a school place one way or another. But I think you know that.

Var. . But private school children can and are as likely to do it.

Unfortunately this appears to be the attitude in some (note I say SOME) state schools - focus on the less able children and leave the more able ones to get on with it. Of course that means the brighter kids often aren't stretched and don't achieve what they are capable of. Totally wrong and totally unfair in my opinion.

"Spotofweather what I'm asking is what is the actual purpose of needing to make academically gifted children even smarter/ better developed. Why so much focus on children who are winning anyway?"

What an absolutely ridiculous statement! I hope you aren't a teacher! (at least not a teacher with bright children in their class anyway...)

My DS3 took the 11 plus and passed for the next town (8 miles) all boys' grammar. But we put the two local good comprehensives first and second choice and the grammar 3rd as a safety net to avoid the nearby sink comp. He was guaranteed a place at the grammar but we really wanted a good comprehensive school, as I believe that academic success isn't the be all and end all of making him a rounded person and the comprehensives would offer more of a diverse mix of people to befriend.

DS3 is thriving there and I expect he'll do well. His brother, my DS1, went there from Y7 - Y11 and his confidence just grew and grew. From being fairly average in primary, he was happy to be in first or second set for everything and has just gained 3 A* at A level and is off to Warwick University.

The same school was extremely inclusive and really looked after my DS2 who has ASD. He managed to get 9 GCSEs including some As and Bs and is now at college.

Neither of them would ever have passed the 11+. Grammar schools are just elitist in my opinion. I would not have been happy with my 3 DSs being treated so differently, it would be like sending some private and some to the comp.

I'm not completely altruistic, I would have reluctantly sent DS3 to the grammar rather than the poorly performing comprehensive. What I believe we need in this country is more good and outstanding comprehensives. More grammar schools mean the opposite is likely.

"What I believe we need in this country is more good and outstanding comprehensives. More grammar schools mean the opposite is likely."

To the poster earlier on who couldn't even grasp why this was an issue... ^^this.

"Why focus so much on children who are already winning, anyway?"

This sort of attitude is exactly why I wanted my DDs at a grammar.

At a comp it would be very likely they would be identified as (pretty much) straight A pupils so, you know, hey...they'll be just fine, no need of much support or 'focus'. Instead, we'll concentrate all our 'focus' on struggling pupils, and push them up from a D to that all important C...

Sod that.

DD2 is in the top 1% for mathematical ability, she deserves just as much 'focus' as anyone else.

Hear, hear MaQueen

Agree with MaQueen.
I am fine with my dcs being at a comprehensive as long as the teachers DON'T have that attitude but sadly there are plenty who do.