Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder if there are supporters of grammar schools who didn't go to grammar schools themselves

849 replies

WildebeestH · 24/05/2017 14:57

Just that really. The only friends I have who support grammar schools went to grammar schools themselves. I'm intrigued to know if there are many people who support them having not been to a grammar (or other selective) school and if so why?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 10:34

Grammar or not, the entire school system is screwed.

Everyone agrees, grammar heads included, that what is needed right now is more funding. Not more grammars.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2017 10:42

"I do think they make the system worse for those who do not get into the grammar."

And crucially, do not make things better for those who do get into the grammar......

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 10:48

I've just found this graph from this news story about the Tory lies about grammars in their manifesto www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40043891

It appears that non-selective schools in areas with a high number of grammars are not similarly overburdened with affluent kids and have the same proportion of disadvantaged kids as the rest of the country.

So that puts paid to the argument that grammars are stuffed with the wealthy because they are in wealthy areas.

To wonder if there are supporters of grammar schools who didn't go to grammar schools themselves
AGnu · 30/05/2017 11:51

I'm tentatively supportive of selective education, as long as splitting children according to ability means that they're all taught in a way that enables them to achieve, whether that's academically, artistically, etc.

I went to the best state school for miles around. We were reminded of this frequently. The culture was very much "make everyone get at least a C" but nothing was done to support those who were capable of much more. If you didn't have an innate ability to learn but were intelligent enough to be in the top set you were branded as "not trying hard enough" in reports, but ignored the rest of the time. None of the teachers knew me, most of them referred to me as "Sibling's sister", "the one who sits next to DFriend", or simply by the name of someone who looked vaguely like me but was much more popular. I'd have given anything to go to a grammar where achieving the highest grade possible was actively encouraged & teachers noticed if you were depressed, bullied, not as high achieving as you used to be or autistic, & actually did something more about it than telling you they can't make people be friends with you & that you should "try harder" without explaining what that actually meant or how to do it...

Headofthehive55 · 30/05/2017 11:58

But wouldn't you expect that?
I think it shows that more educated parents (and thus their children are more able) are generally more wealthy.

MaisyPops · 30/05/2017 12:01

I'd have given anything to go to a grammar where achieving the highest grade possible was actively encouraged & teachers noticed if you were depressed, bullied, not as high achieving as you used to be or autistic, & actually did something more about it than telling you they can't make people be friends with you & that you should "try harder" without explaining what that actually meant or how to do it...

Going to grammar is selection by ability.

It doesn't tell you anytging else about a school's pastoral system.

Got a bit of a halo effect / rose glasses going on.

Most schools do all the things you've mentioned whether they are private, comprehensive or grammar.

Eolian · 30/05/2017 12:02

as long as splitting children according to ability means that they're all taught in a way that enables them to achieve, whether that's academically, artistically, etc.

And is there anything that really encourages you to believe that would be the case? Do you really honestly think that creaming off the highest ability kids will magically enable the remaining secondary modern kids to fulfil their potential? How?

Removing the most badly behaved and disruptive kids to another school, that would certainly have a good effect. But removing the higher-achieving, aspirational ones (along with their supportive families)?

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 12:03

Schools that only make kids get a C certainly won't be the best schools around under the progress 8 measure.

If you want schools to have the resources to support kids with SEN or mental health problems then fgs don't vote Tory. Their funding cuts are stripping these resources away from schools. The latest news that it is now much harder to get funding for SEN, and that a cap will be put on autism diagnoses just show what schools are up against.

GreenGinger2 · 30/05/2017 12:03

How?

They're not stuffed with the wealthy, even your demographic shows that. The wealthy are the top 10-20%, there are plenty of kids in them from other sectors.
The SE has the highest number of children in grammars and the highest incomes, it will skew results on a national level.

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 12:04

How do you explain kids from wealthier families being more likely than kids from disadvantaged families to get into a grammar with the same KS2 SATs results?

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2017 12:06

Why are you ignoring the figures I am giving you for pupil premium children in secondary modern schools in the South East?

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 12:12

The SE has the highest number of children in grammars and the highest incomes, it will skew results on a national level.

The graph I just posted wasn't on a national level. It was comparing grammars in grammar areas with non-grammars in grammar areas.
Why are non-grammars in grammar areas only 30% more affluent families while grammars in grammar areas are over 50% more affluent? Why are there loads of poor kids in non-grammars in grammar areas but not in the grammars?

GreenGinger2 · 30/05/2017 12:17

But they are there so it clearly is far from impossible. Hopefully with measures that gap will reduce even more. What is being done to reduce the top 20% of wealthy families having a stronghold in the best comps?

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 12:21

It's incredible, Green faced with clear evidence that top comps take way more poor kids than grammars and you still think grammars are the solution to 'rich people taking all the places in the best schools'. Confused

Grammars are a broken system in terms of social mobility. You can't polish a turd, however hard you try.

HoobleDooble · 30/05/2017 12:25

I support them because I was supposed to be going to one, then it became a Comprehensive just before I took my 11+ (which I passed easily), and my parents couldn't be bothered to look into transport etc. to allow me to go to the next nearest one. My DF beat the odds regarding his background to go to one, whereas my (incredibly well read and intelligent) DM was forced by her mum to leave school at 14.

There's no guarantee that my DS would even meet the criteria necessary to get into one, but I definitely feel that I would have achieved more if I'd been in a different school environment. Instead I soon got in with a gang who thought climbing out over the school wall and smoking in the loos where great plans, missed a lot of lessons, and scraped through my GCSEs with grade Cs

GreenGinger2 · 30/05/2017 12:31

I don't say grammars should be the answer to all the ills of social mobility you seem to do that as regards comps. Just pointing out that comps have many turf like qualities of their own which are continuously glossed over. The fact remains that after sorting out a desire to even attend a grammar in many areas attending one is more of a possibility than attending a top comp. Finding an extra 50k for property is an impossibility, boning up on a bit of exam technique isn't.

Headofthehive55 · 30/05/2017 12:42

Although achievement is part nurture, it is also very much nature.
Even in comps and private schools, achievements can follow their parents - perhaps more so than we wish to admit. Even accounting for wealth. I don't have evidence, just what I've seen, but I was struck by the similarities of my generation and the following one - almost irrespective type of school attended.

noblegiraffe · 30/05/2017 12:43

attending one is more of a possibility than attending a top comp

The figures seem to be against you there. Significantly.

cantkeepawayforever · 30/05/2017 12:44

Finding an extra 50k for property is an impossibility, boning up on a bit of exam technique isn't.

Unless

  • You attend a poor primary school
  • You come from a family which can't afford tutoring and workbooks
  • Your parents don't speak English / don't know anything about exam technique

Whereas children in that position who have always lived in catchment can go to the local brilliant comp - the issue of buying a house is only applicable for those who want to buy a place that belongs to a local child already living in the area.

cantkeepawayforever · 30/05/2017 12:46

I think what Green means is that she couldn't afford to buy a place in one of her target comprehensives by moving late in the primary years [and thus displacing a local child close to the edge of catchment], but she could buy workbooks and tutoring and the bus fare to a grammar school.

It doesn't mean that everyone can.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2017 12:47

Greenginger- those figures I quoted about pupil premium children in secondqry moderns here in the "prosperous" South East-any comments? I can quickly look up the figures for the nearest grammar school to each as well if you like. The grammars and the secondary moderns are in each case less than 2 miles apart. So very similar catchments.

cantkeepawayforever · 30/05/2017 12:50

I have already posted in this thread about the contrast between %PP attending the leafiest of leafy comps and those attending the nearest grammars (the grammars serve a wider area, including much more deprived wards, but are available to those living in the catchment of the leafy comp).

Up to 5-6x as many PP children attend even this strikingly leafy comp as attend the grammars.

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2017 12:51

"Even in comps and private schools, achievements can follow their parents - perhaps more so than we wish to admit."

Of course it does. That's why privileged (I said it again!) middle class children don't need to be airlifted to grammar schools.

As I said before, the kids who would probably benefit most from being airlifted out would be the bottom 25%, not the top.

Badbadbunny · 30/05/2017 12:53

can go to the local brilliant comp

Which is fine if you have a "brilliant" comp!!!! What about those that don't???

Whether grammars are appropriate will depend on the area. If you have a town with just 2 secondary schools, then you'll clearly have problems if one is a grammar and the other is a comp - it'll be back to the old days of success/failure at 11+.

However, if you're in an area like ours, where the kids from our primary are split over 10 different secondaries, then if 1 or 2 of those secondaries are grammars, I just don't see that it makes the other 8 old fashioned "sec mods" as some on here would have you believe. In fact, 3 of those 8 are "exceptional" comps, 2 are faith schools, 1 is a language specialist, 1 a sports college, 1 a maths/IT specialist. The grammars are just part of the choice offered parents in our area. Having the grammars in the mix has to be a good thing as it broadens choice. The 11+ isn't compulsory, parents can make the choice whether to go down that route or not. Having the grammars hasn't made the other comps into failures at all. The 2 "failing" comps have brought it upon themselves due to poor teaching/discipline and are suffering falling numbers. Mostly because the parents close to them are bussing their kids over the county border to 2 other comps which are outstanding - the buses literally picking up outside and passing the 2 failing comps. It's not the grammars that are causing them to be failure schools - some parents have the gumption to move their kids to better schools - others can't be arsed!

BertrandRussell · 30/05/2017 12:54

Can someone name a strikingly leafy comprehensive school? Then we can have a look at its L/M/H attainers and PP.

Greenginger-can you name one