'You don't like grammar schools because your DC weren't clever enough to get into one'

[Tannertenner]

How would you react if this was said to you in a 'discussion' about the rights and wrongs of grammar schools?

If it is the opinion of someone whose opinion I normally value and broadly respect, I'd have a think about it and self reflect as to whether that could be the case. If it's some randomer on mumsnet, I couldn't care less.

Grammars are here to stay along with faith schools etc. Being ideologically opposed to them means nowt. Most of the country can't even access them. If you are in area with them, you've got to negotiate that.

The problem is many parent's who's dc aren't at grammar school feel entitled to be incredibly rude to parent's of dc who do go, belittling grammar school, the dc who go there etc. Fair enough if you don't want to send your dc there but keep your opinions to yourself and respect the choice of others. This can ultimately lead to backlash from parent's who's dc are at grammar who finally retaliate as they are sick of petty out downs/passive aggressive comments.

I get really huffy and would tell them all about my brainy DC who went to the local comp by choice. The local grammar is close by in the next county.

I can’t stand grammar schools or religious schools. The are divisive.

All schools in the uk should be non-selective and steps should be taken to ensure that all schools can cater for all its students.

The thing is that's never going to happen. We will always have faith schools. If we tried to get rid, we'd need billions to buy the land and buildings required to educate the pillions of children in them. Not ever going to happen. Find a cause to fight that stands a chance of winning.

I was very successful academically. I went to an average comp in a non selective area. I can't say for certain I would have passed the 11plus and if I hadn't I do feel it would have limited my educational prospects and achievements.

I feel quite insulted by the comment. It is from someone very close to me.

It feels like they are saying that my kids are stupid, which they're not. I view that as a personal insult. But irrespective of their intelligence how is it right that there is a 2 tier education system?

The response to that was 'because life isn't fair'

I think kids do just fine in a decent comp. The grammar school system is based on fear of your little darlings having to associate with the plebs. Even worse now because so many can't afford private education.

I don't think any system that defines a child to have 'failed' at eleven years old is one that should be viable in 2018.

The selection process is brutal, it is unfair because of wealthy parents can afford the extra tutoring that is required to pass, it is almost impossible for a bright child without a supportive home life to pass. It is unfit for purpose.

The large majority of children that do not pass carry that failure with them into the next school, and unless they are highly motivated or have highly motivated parents that are all over their self esteem and they are likely to be damaged by the experience. I do not think damaging our children is anything any of us should ever want.

The grammar school 'experience' should be available to all. The latin, public speaking, extra maths, the whole thing to every child.

I’d probably agree with them.

At the grammar kids get amazing facilities, can do 3 foreign languages, Latin, lots of extra curricular, after school clubs, debate teams, public speaking etc

This isn't the case in my experience, our local grammars are desperately under funded & the amount per pupil is lower than the secondary moderns. I reckon this is one reason the Tories like them, it is cheaper.

Anyway, that wasn't really the point of your post.

I went to grammar at DS is currently at grammar but I still don't agree with them, we went because they exist in the area we live in. Surely the right answer is for fab comprehensives to exist where everyone can be in the right group for every subject, you can have strong and weak subjects & find the right level for everything. And kids didn't need to travel by bus/train for hours a day.

I would be offended if someone said to me what was said to you. But many grammar parents are very defensive because they are terrified that if it changed, their children would get worse exam results.

But education is always going to be a tiered system, someone will always be "top of the class". Whether that class is across town or the one your children are in, education (the present set up anyway) is competitive.

When I went to grammar school, 11+ obligatory. Everyone took it, but only a percentage passed, so large numbers of children were deemed to be ‘failures’ at the age of 10. But there were other opportunities at age 13 and there were technical courses and meaningful apprenticeships, so there were chances for success rather than a purely academic route.

Whilst I agree that labelling people so early can be hurtful and/or harmful, life is full of failures (and some successes). Look at the number of threads about people rejected for jobs, unable to get interviews, feeling lonely and so on. I went to a grammar school and I am grateful that I did. It gave me the chance to expand my horizons and to consider the wider world and it’s possibilities. I may have stayed in my home town had I not had the chances that grammar school gave me.

What we should have, is an education system that has options for different abilities, practical, academic, needing specialist specific input. But that costs far more expensive than the £50 planned for grammars. The squeeze on school budgets in general is something we should be concerned about and the recruitment and retention of quality teaching staff.

Thinking about it, it's a fairly obvious comment for a grammar school parent to make though.

The grammar school parent simply cannot conceive that some one would turn down an educational advantage because of their egalitarian principles, probably because they themselves have no such principles.

I never understand why people say that. I went to one and hated it, but recognised it was the right environment for my children who are thriving at theirs. Horses for courses really. But I would never dream of saying someone's child isnt capable of getting into one!

I should say this person doesn't have children.

I live in a selective area. My DC didn't pass the exam. The only kids in their schools who did had been tutored heavily from y3.

Grammars get amazing results on tiny budgets. They also supply subjects comps don't, like Latin and Classics. Perhaps instead of dragging everyone down to a shit base level we raise schools up to be like the grammars who function on shoestring budgets yet consistently get the best results.

Fwiw I'm pro super selective but anti general selective systems

You’re showing double standards aren’t you. Your children sat the exams and didn’t pass, but you ‘don’t like grammars’. If they had passed no doubt you would!

Oh and the exams (at least here) are not IQ Tests they're like SATS exams with an English and a Maths element. If your child is a high achiever they won't need coaching through it.

The thing is that's never going to happen. We will always have faith schools. If we tried to get rid, we'd need billions to buy the land and buildings required to educate the pillions of children in them. Not ever going to happen.

Faith schools used to have to provide 50% funding, now it is only 10%, maybe we can't get rid of them all over night but they should not be funded to the extent they are.

I live in NI where grammar schools are very much a thing - almost 50% of secondary school pupils attend them. I went to one, and my DS will be attending next year. There is a lot of opposition to them, but most parents are in favour, and unfortunately comments such as those in the OP title are made quite a lot. Personally I’m not in favour of them per se, but as there is a massive divide here in terms of quality between grammar and high schools (in most areas, not all), even those opposed to them will often try to get their kids in.

I didn't know how great the disparity was between grammar and non grammar.

I went to an average comp. No grammars in my area. I thought all state schools were roughly the same. It was only after we moved to a grammar area that I realised how great the disparity is, and how unfair it is. That was before my DC had to sit the exam ( it is compulsory here so no choice not to sit it). I had formed the view that grammars were hugely unfair before my DC took the exam. So I didn't change my mind just because they didn't pass. And in any event they couldn't have passed because they weren't tutored non stop.

My MIL says "Children that are tutored are cheats!"

She also believes those that revise are cheats. I think she thinks that children should only be tested on the knowledge they are born with!

Posted to soon. Nothing wrong with being tutored if that is what the parents/children want. Academic learning is like any other subject, you do it extra curricular-ly if you want to. My DC sing and play instruments and always have since before school. When one was in a show (TV, paid) it seemed to be no problem with other parents, I thought it would be, parents can be a bit judging!) Now exam time is approaching, I get the "It's all right for them, they were tutored, they have an advantage!"

A friend's son is a maths whizz, seriously talented. He goes to all sorts of advanced maths and engineering classes. It's fun for him. It's his hobby!

Thank goodness there's not a swimming GCSE. My children have had swimming lessons all their lives also!

*too

I have some sympathy with your MILs views extrapianolessons.
Grammar schools were meant to be a way to lesson the gap so genuinely bright DCs whose parents couldn't afford private school were able to reach the full potential of their abilities.

Both DH and SIL were born into a poor family - they lived in a rough estate and had parents that had no interest in their education. As they were bright they got into grammar and as a result moved up in life. If they hadn't had that chance they would never have ended up with the jobs and lives that they did.

The trouble is that people have cottoned on to the fact that it's a way to get a good education for free and now due to tutoring and house prices in the right area, it tends to be more upwardly mobile middle class parents whose DCs go them and once again those on the lower end of the scale miss out on an amazing opportunity.