To send dd to an "inadequate" secondary school which has a nice feel and better progress 8 than the grammar

[Liz79]

Dd is in year 5 and open evenings have started. We have only been to 2 so far. The inadequate school was a much better show than the grammar school, it was calmer and better organised. Each family was allocated a pupil to be their tour guide, the staff were more articulate and willing to speak to us, last year's progress 8 was the best in the area. The % getting GCSE Maths and English was inline with the national average and better/similar to other local schools (except the grammar which got 94% compared to the England average of 43%). They are moving to a new build in 2020 which will be a 5 minute walk away. The grammar is 20 minutes by train, the evening felt chaotic, staff weren't very engaging. It has an outstanding Ofsted report, still has a +ve progress 8 but lower than the inadequate one. There are still a couple of others to see as well. I am also shocked by how many GCSEs kids have to do: English language and literature, maths, double or triple science, ICT, RE... that's 7/8 before you've made a choice. Aaarrrgghh it's all too hard.

Ripon for example. In facts some years it is more than 50%.

My kids go to Ripon Grammar so I know quite a bit about it and I think you are getting confused
Cut off is at 28% of cohort eligible to take 11+ in catchment . But because Ripon is a small place 28% of eligible children is less than the number of places available.So then the remaining places are offered to out of catchmentr children who have exceeded the cut off mark nearest first. Places are not offered to those who fail (unless they win an appeal because of extenuating circum,stances)

I think you are getting confused

I am not. If you then look at those who select faith, so go to St Aidans or St John Fisher and those who want small so go to Nidderdale and those who want independent and go all over, then 50% can go to the grammar school in some cohorts

Also, not all 11 plus have the same pass mark or do the same tests, so the Ripon pass standard may be much lower than Kent , for example.

they're called "secondary" for a reason, you know!

because they follow on from “primary” education, presumably, not because they offer a “secondary” standard of education

I think you are getting confused

To add, the LA determines how many Year 6 pupils there are, but they don't know accurately as some don't attend school in N Yorks or attend an independent school etc etc.

Even if it it an accurate 28%, and I know the LA has looked at it many times over the years and tried to accurately calculate it, that is exceptionally high for a grammar.

If you then look at those who select faith, so go to St Aidans or St John Fisher and those who want small so go to Nidderdale and those who want independent and go all over, then 50% can go to the grammar school in some cohorts

You are fiddling with statistics you do not understand, and coming up with nonsense.

The cut off is always set at the score the top 28% of Ripon year 6s score above.
Now that there is the possibility to opt out, most low achievers don't bother sitting.
Ripon Grammar school was the highest achieving state school in the whole of the north of England last year beating Lancaster Grammar, Ermysteds and others.

We have decided grammar is 1st choice, if she's offered a place, which isn't a foregone conclusion by any means. The issue then is what order to put the other 3 in, 2 of which she would definitely be offered a place at.

"Even if it it an accurate 28%, and I know the LA has looked at it many times over the years and tried to accurately calculate it, that is exceptionally high for a grammar."
No it isn't. Kent is the biggest wholly selective authority in the country and 23/24% go to grammar schools there.

**Not all grammar schools are equal.

I'd agree with this. I went to a pretty mediocre grammar school in the 2000s. The results were decent because they selected their intake and then booted girls out if they weren't likely to make the grade. However, quite a bit of the teaching wasn't fit for purpose. I had an A-level English literature teacher who didn't understand the concept of a simile and explained irony as "when something unexpected happens". The culture was quite anti-academic and we were discouraged from applying to Oxbridge or other top universities in case we didn't get in. I only had one work experience placement (in a pre-school) which I had to arrange myself. My brother's grammar was even worse, to the point where he nearly failed one subject because his teacher forgot to teach a chunk of the syllabus.

On the other hand, I know people who went to very good grammars and got a lot out of it. I'm just no longer convinced that selection guarantees excellence.

I think you'vw made the right choice OP.
A school like you describe which has dropped from requires improvement to inadequate and has a long history of being a poor school is unlikely to offer your child thr best deal.

I'm anti-grammars on a personal level, but if in your situation I would want my child in a grammar.

I think mine could have made some good connections at the local grammar school. With drug dealers

everyone did ECDL
That would put me off, big time.

Good call, Op.

I would make the same choice, not because it’s a grammar per se but because the other school is ‘inadequate’.

Visit the other schools and out them all in the exact order you prefer them.