To be very amused at some of the beliefs held by supporters of grammar schools?

[BertrandRussell]

Here are a few I have culled from the plethora of threads over the last few days.

Learning to fail is an important part of learning to win. Secondary modern school children learn this valuable lesson by failing the 11+. Grammar school children learn it by watching the secondary modern school children fail the 11+.

There is no bullying in Grammar schools.

Grammar schools are full of gifted academics.

It is good for a middle ability child to be the top of their class- they find this empowering and motivating. It is bad for a high ability child to be top of their class, they find this boring and demotivating.

An A from a grammar school is better than an A from a comprehensive or secondary modern.

Children who fail the 11+ can get jobs in music, drama, art, sport or "working with people"

And, of course, the classic "Why on earth should a 10 year old who fails the 11+ feel any sense of failure?"

There are plenty more- feel free to add your favorites.

Ever tried actually reading the OP? It often helps you understand the thread!

Yep, I did read it. Parents are making their choices based on their own opinions, rightly or wrongly corresponding with others experiences.

Comps are full of semi-feral children
Academic children (especially those who play a musical instrument) will be 'eaten alive' in a comp
The only good comps are 'leafy' with a house-price catchment
High ability children must be removed from bad behaviour, into a grammar, middle / low ability children will be fine left in the semi-feral den
Teachers in comps do not have the ability or experience to deliver challenging education to grammar ability or top set children
Teachers / Head teachers for new comps will come from ...somewhere else. Not from the training grounds of comps, where the over-riding majority of teachers teach.
Top set children in a comp, in a grammar-free are, are merely 'averagely bright' and not suitable company for the very very bright. However, if they are removed to a different site, they will become suitable peers.

"The fact their children attend must mean the parent supports he school and its ethos."

Add that to the myths! Plenty of MNers have said their kids are in grammar because the alternative is a high shool without the top sets and they would prefer a good comprehensive system

YANBU OP

No bullying in grammars schools? Someone completely removed the brakes from DS's bike. The school blamed local yobs. I expect that at the local comp they would have only had the brains to cut the wire. The whole system is awful, I had no idea grammar schools still existed until I moved to this county.

Sandyholme, the point about secondary moderns is that, whatever we call them, they are an inevitable part of a selective system. Where there are grammars, there can't be comprehensives.

Can I add some more false beliefs?

There is no disruption at grammars, only nice children go.

It's just coincidence there are few children on FSM.

Teachers in grammars are superior to those in the local comp/SM/high school.

The results are better.

To be fair, most of those opinions are spouted by just one particularly over invested poster. And most of what she types is complete fantasy anyway so I wouldn't sweat it.

Sadly, lumpy that's not true. I've actually avoided her!