Grammar schools should make contextual offers?

[capitalshitem]

I have no personal stake in this at all as not in a grammar school area. I was watching a programme on tv the other day about grammar schools and a young girl from an immigrant family living in a tower block didn't get a place and she was less than 10% under the benchmark whilst a girl from a naice middle class family who had probably been tutored was a couple of points over and obviously got a place. Can't we assume that in the same circumstances they would both have achieved a similar result? Why can't grammar schools make contextual offers like some universities do?

Plenty of small comprehensives. Many large comprehensives divided into smaller units

Neither round here. Two excellent states actually so the people who attend certainly aren’t receiving a lesser education. They just didn’t suit DD - each one is in excess of 2500 pupils.

How do you know it didnt suit your daughter if she didn’t go there? The issue you raise is size not selection. What happens to those children who prefer a smaller school but didn’t pass 11plus? They are disadvantaged.

How do you know it didnt suit your daughter if she didn’t go there?

Because I know my daughter. What an odd question. We all pick the secondary school we believe suits our child before they go there!

"We all pick the secondary school we believe suits our child before they go there!"
Not if we live in selective areas we don't.......

Not if we live in selective areas we don't.......

I don’t live in a selective area. There’s one school next LA over that is selective. The rest are very good secondary schools. There are of course poor secondary schools in the LA, however none we are anywhere near catchment for. It’s an incredibly education rich area.

For secondary just to add. For primary it’s a different story.

In ye olden days the teachers, school would look at child's whole schooling and put dc forward and it was much more personal.
Now it's not. It's solely on exam.

They do that system in Germany. It works fine apparently. But I think the other school options are considered highly and the teachers are trusted to make the right judgment. It’s different anyway, teaching is very hard to get into (as it is in France) with competitive exams and a long training period. But far better conditions and levels of respect generally.

Outcomes for all children are better in areas without selective schools.

Northern Ireland has an almost entirely selective system and consistently is the highest performing region in the UK when it comes to A levels, not just in grammar schools but across all schools.

JacquesHammer my point is not knowing about your daughter but rather not knowing about the schools. All parents would like the opportunity of choosing the schools they felt were best for their children but unfortunately because you could choose something like 89% didn’t have the luxury.

Northern Ireland is not a true comparison and the attainment isn’t equal. www.equalityni.org/ECNI/media/ECNI/Publications/Delivering%20Equality/EducationInequality-SummaryReport.pdf

Traditional parenting by Catholic families and conservative non Catholics influences outcomes disproportionately.

Grammar schools benefit middle class families in nice areas who get the tutors in from 9 to get them into grammar where thwir kiddos can mix with other nice girls and boys.

Sadly, the impact of grammars on local schools means even parents who disagree with grammars ideologically find themselves players in the game trying to get the best education for their child.

I've been thinking about this thread. I now live in a grammar area, but grew up in a comp system area. In my (frankly too big) comprehensive school, children were streamed by ability from Christmas of year 7. There was a group of around 50 kids who were top set for every subject. These children were effectively educated separately from the rest of us (I was a solid set 2er, occasionally slipped to set 3, but generally held the 'B grade' standard).

In a grammar system, these and a handful of the boarderline set 1/set2 types would be removed from the school to go to the grammar.

Considering they weren't in class with me, how did I and everyone else lower down the set system benefit from them being educated separately, but in the same building?

Obviously the bumped up the school stats/league table place, but I can't see that there was an improvement in education fo the set 2 &3 kids to being in the same school as very bright children.

If my DCs don't pass the 11+, are their chances of a good education reduced by going to a school without the top 23% there?

Ordinary. The advantages of some streaming within an all ability school are manifold.
Children aren’t dismissed as failures at 11 based on one exam which others may have been tutored for.
Children can move up sets or be in high sets for different subjects.
Children learn to support less able peers.
Schools with high achievement tend to have sixth forms and encourage aspiration. Teachers knowledge of subject is to A level.
Resources are more fairly distributed between schools.
Your education option isn’t based on affluence.

If all children went into comprehensive schools the top achieving children would be there as peers and as positive role models. In a selective system children who do not pass 11 plus are obviously disadvantaged - particularly those who performed badly on one day, who weren’t tutored, who are borderline, who are late blossomers.

If all children went into comprehensive schools the top achieving children would be there as peers and as positive role models.

That seems purely theoretical. There’s nothing cool or influential about the top set kids (I was in the top set for maths, science and English and the only people who looked up to me were two goth girls who started stalking me after I started coming to school with cuts on my arms and generally acting out). Tbh the only person I know of who moved up sets was me (I was in bottom set for Welsh, with the advantage of doing second language paper instead of first, it was a welsh language school so only English, maths and science had English language options for classes, they right before my GCSE’s moved me to 4th set which meant I did the foundation paper for first language Welsh, which I completely and utterly bombed).

Never was it a thing for people not already in top set to see that as an aspiration or the people in the top set as role models rather than nerds to be mocked.

What Cherry said. Except she means setting not streaming.

You either get the grades or you don’t.

I have fairly rubbish coordination. Should I get a contextual offer for the GB olympic tennis team?

Indeed BertrandRussel, I do mean setting not streaming.

Chesterwife - who is higher achieving?

Child A Parents both high earners with postgraduate education. Private nursery taught French and encouraged early literacy. Parents had a Spanish nanny so children grew up with advanced linguistic skills. They went through prep and top public school with cases no larger than 6 at A level. Plenty of excellent wok experience through parents. Good extracurricular achievements too with grade 8 piano and flute. They achieved 3 As at A level.

ChidB has English as an additional language having moved to U.K. in year 8 as a refugee from Yemen. Lived in immigration centre for first 14 months with very limited education. Now living in a one bedroom flat with mother (who speaks no English) and two younger siblings. They do not have internet access at home and child has to walk 3 miles each way to and from school. They’ve done well and managed 8 GCSE O levels at A-C including English and Maths. Their school is supportive but they have 27 children in their A level Chemistry class and 32 in A level Maths. Obviously tutoring is out of the question. The child had to borrow a suit from a teacher for university interviews. They volunteer at a local refugee support centre helping people with IT skills and administrative support. They achieved 2As and a B at A level.

Please tell me you understand achievements are not just about the grade and context is essential when considering potential?

I guess I didn't see the top set as 'aspirational' or actually my peers really - as they weren't people I knew very well, what with never sitting with them in any class.

That said, I disagree with the idea that "Your education option isn’t based on affluence." in a comp system, in my experience, parents can buy access to good schools via house prices.