Grammar schools - which dc to prioritise?

[sylviavana]

We have a dd aged 9 in Year 5 and a ds aged 8 in Year 4.

Dd is extremely clever, and has always been top of her class. Ds is a lovely, kind boy but he’s never been a high achiever at school, even though he tries very hard.

We currently live in a grammar school area. As things stand, dd will be sitting the 11+ next year and is pretty much guaranteed to get into a great girls’ grammar school where I know she’ll thrive. She often gets frustrated at school when the teacher has to slow down to help other children - I think a selective environment would suit her perfectly, and I think she’d love being at a girls’ school, as she frequently gets annoyed by the boys in her class who mess around.

However, ds will almost certainly not get into the local boys’ grammar school, and the non-grammar options in our catchment area are not good. They have a reputation for very bad behaviour and low attendance, don’t get good results, and all have pretty crap facilities and buildings compared to the girls’ grammar that dd will be going to.

I’m so worried that this will cause ds to resent dd - that she has so much better a school experience. I’m also worried that it will crush him to see some of his friends joining dd at the girls’ school or going to the boys’ grammar school, when he has next to no chance of getting in no matter how hard he works.

All this is leading Dh and I to wonder if we need to bite the bullet and move as quickly as possible to a comprehensive area, to be ready to apply for secondary schools for dd this time next year. On the one hand it would be lovely for dd and ds to go to the same school and have a shared school experience, and for ds not to feel ‘less than’ but I worry that I would be robbing dd of an amazing grammar school experience. She has never quite fitted in at primary school, and I think she’d do well in an environment where being clever wasn’t seen as ‘uncool’. On the other hand, I’ve heard that comprehensive schools stream in almost all subjects now, so maybe her classes wouldn’t be that different to a grammar school?

Sorry for rambling! Can I ask what you would do in this situation? Which dc’s education would you prioritise?

I agree TheTurnofTheScrew, there is some very bad advice from some on here urging op to try her ds for grammar school when he is not academically inclined, not all children are, that is fine. The grammar schools are really academic hothouses which prepare young people for Oxbridge or Russel group universities for the 'professions'; to put a child who is struggling academically in that environment is madness, as well as urging op to try him for the 11+ which he would probably fail, setting him up for low self esteem and self worth.

Just because op dd is academic, does not mean op ds will be, siblings can be very different. My mum is not academic at all, maybe has learning difficulties, whereas her sister was very clever, went to a grammar school, on to Uni and got a very good job.

OP the qualities your ds has: tries hard, being kind, are fantastic qualities that will set him up in life, those count for so much!

“yes she'll probably do slightly less well in a comprehensive but with universities increasingly using contextual offers it will not be a problem) “

No reason to think she would do less well in a comp. The kids in top sets in full comprehensive areas are not doing less well.
And
Contextual Offers are not made simply in tne basis of a school being comprehensive. Some Unis use postcode to determine areas of high deprivation, some set a benchmark and offer where the average achievement in the school is significantly below the national average, sometimes by subject.

To those saying stay, send DD to grammar and DS private - be careful. Depends where you live again.
Yes, absolutely, I am probably biased. I am in one of "grammar" London boroughs (with plenty of private options locally as well), but the non-selective state secondary closest to me seems to be a feeder to, predominantly, local gangs.
I actually agree with the previous posters that a bright child can do very well in an academically average but nurturing school. What scares me is things like knife crime, gang culture, drugs etc. I would rather sell a kidney than send my son in one of these.

Also most contextual offers for Uni are made on the basis of results for A levels, ie. 6th form/college. DD went to a comp secondary school that fell under those in the lower percentile but went to a 6th form that didn't and most Unis only considered the latter.

www.bristol.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/entry-requirements-qualifications/contextual-offers/

this explains who can get a contextual offer - you have to look up your school on a database and apply through that school to get the offer.

Schools drop on and off the list - looking at our local school it was on the list one year and then not on the next because they had good A level results.

Regmover

Having just gone through this I can assure you I didn't know single child who was not tutored going for the exam bar my dd.

All her classmates were tutored for average 2 years.
It's moot on tutoring now. Everyone does it.

Send your DD to the grammar and DD to the comp. He wouldn't be going to the same school as her anyway given it is single sex. You say you are concerned your DS will resent your DD but your DD will more than likely resent your DS if she is unable to attend a grammar school (assuming she wants to go to this school), because he wouldn't get it.

If your DS isn't academically inclined for grammar then he would be more suited to a comp anyway.

DS* to the comp, sorry.

It really seems extreme to me ( but then I don't live in England) to uproot yourselves and move house just to theoretically not shortchange your DS but in the process potentially limit your DD.

Surely the obvious solution is to stay put and avoid the hideous expenses involved in moving.

Wirral and Cheshire are great for both grammar and comprehensive schools

Zevitevit I know that my friend did not tutor her dd for grammar school, just practised past papers for a few months at home, as she wanted her dd to get in her merits and not because she was tutored. Her dd is extremely academic, and is destined for the 'professions'.

Every single child in dd year who took 11 + was tutored for two years.
Not all of them got in mind you!

I'd be amazed by any child in crap primary being able to suddenly just get... Non verbal reasoning having never seen it before etc, do maths their school never covered etc pass 11 +.

A friend of mine hasn't had outside tutoring because his school is absolutely switched onto the entrance exams so they don't need too.

At 8 it's far too early to tell anyone's academic potential and your carried along by your peers at grammar. At worst he will fail but be bolstered by the extra homework at best he will pass and be with all of the other borderline tutored kids.

Don’t split your family up. Move to Shipston on Stour with a great small comp for DS and the option of Stratford-upon-Avon Girls’ Grammar 10 mins away for DD.

You need to prioritise DS really. If what you say is true DD will do well enough wherever she goes

What she's said is that DD has never fitted in at primary school and needs to be in a place where it's okay to be clever in order to thrive. And that DS is lovely and kind. It sounds to me as though DS will be happy wherever he is, but DD will not. I would be prioritising my children's wellbeing over possible minor improvements in their future exam results. Which is to say SEND DD TO THE GRAMMAR SCHOOL.

This is why the grammar system is fundamentally unfair.
It privileges the bright at the expense of the ‘not so’ bright. Those who struggle more need the best educational environment to thrive, they deserve equal opportunity, not being dumped together in the school for thise who fail to make the grade. What message does that give to kids?! Is it any wonder local comps struggle.

Oh and the social mobility argument is rot because the wealthy parents just get tuition for their children. It’s too much stress and pressure on the kids but anything to avoid the local dive school

OP, move to an area without grammar schools, where your children will get equally good education and opportunities in life.

You aren’t disadvantaging your daughter by doing this. She will do well wherever she goes, in fact her mental health and wellbeing will probably benefit, because she will be towards the top end of a true comprehensive, which is a good place to be, but not without equally bright peers (the joy of properly comprehensive education).

The same will be true for your son, who will benefit from being an environment that is equipped to educate the brightest and best in addition to those with SEN and he won’t run the risk of an inferiority complex at age 11.

Zevitevit I know that friends dd was not tutored, the parents got past papers at home, I think 6 months before the exam, and did them with her at home, and covered areas that she needed to. I know friends dd would not need years of tutoring as she is naturally academic. It did help that friends dd dad is a teacher and very academic himself, so knew what to do. If my kids were academic (which they are not, both SN), I would want them to get to grammar school on their own merits and not be tutoring them to the hilt. If they have potential, they will do it.

It is sad that people are tutoring average kids to go to Grammar school, when it was originally set up to give bright children of working class parents a chance. My friend says that you get a lot of rich parents tutoring their average child, as they do not want to pay for a private school. These parents give the school a lot of financial donations too.

My dd wasn't 'tutored' in the formal sense by an outside tutor, but we spent at least 6 months going through past papers, working on problem areas and so on. I was more than able to do that with her myself as I also am very academic! That isn't really a level playing field- many many parents would not be able to do that, and grammars do miss out on some great bright kids as a result of this and formal tutoring.

Sorry the kid was still tutored though, the kid had a heads up on past papers and weak areas they just didn't pay for it!!

Stream I think the blame and focus is wrong on grammar schools.
Plenty of super bright kids won't have interested, savy parents who can get them into grammar... Plenty will be like Shakespeare in English but their maths let them down.

And vice versa.

The only thing a good comp does is segregate but on site, by streaming! That pushes up their grades.

So called secondary moderns should and can be just as good schools as comps who stream.

I don't blame grammars for failing sec moderns I blame the way dc are educated and how we go about it.

Fwiw I have two dc and one is super academic so yes I'm going to worry and try and get her into the best school to support her talents.. My other dc is very young but quite behind. Their talents may lie in art or being a mechanic so I will look for a school that accordingly will also support their talents or buy it in in extra curricular classes.

It's simply not one size fits all.

Orchid, exactly!

I didn't have a clue on how to help my dd with maths and nvr! It would have given her a massive boost if I had been able too.

I am a bit confused by why heavy streaming in a comp is so much more desirable than separate grammar school. One of my dd's attends a heavily streamed comp and she almost never is in a class with people outside her own academic level. It isn't 'comprehensive' in the way my classes were at my comp, where we were all mixed in together til GCSE level. She then has friends from this stream, so I wouldn't say the social mixing is that great, although obviously she does have to learn to get along with everyone and how to avoid difficult situations relating to bad behaviour, which do happen from time to time.

It's like a grammar school within a comprehensive school really!

On paper, much more liberal and inclusive, in reality, heavy segregation and the children in the not-grammar/lower stream do know they are in that stream.

If your daughter is bright she will thrive regardless. I think you need to support your less academically capable child to ensure THEY achieve the best they can.

Orchid I am a bit confused by why heavy streaming in a comp is so much more desirable than separate grammar school.

NB. Streaming (for all subjects) happens far less than setting (for individual or strongly related subjects).

• Because you don't need tutoring at 10 to get there.
• Because bright FSM children or children of less organised parents aren't disadvantaged because they aren't aware or can't afford the tutoring, or the bus fares to the grammar on the other side of town.
• Because in a comp you can be top set for maths but bottom set for English
• Because as far as I can see many (most?) comps initially set for maths and maybe other core subjects and only later for e.g. humanities, but many do creative arts and tech subjects as 'mixed ability' for key stage 3.
• Because by keeping the lop 20% academic kids it widens the range of options available for all. My mid-low DD was able to do 2 MFLs at GCSE. In many secondary moderns there won't be the 'demand' for this so it won't be an option. Similarly secondary moderns may not have enough DC wanting to do triple science (at our comp about 25% do it). If you only have 10-15 pupils who want it because they others have been siphoned off, then they don't get the option.

“I am a bit confused by why heavy streaming in a comp is so much more desirable than separate grammar school. “

Most comprehensives set by subject.
For me it is more desirable than a Grammar because:

1. Entrance to the school is not a pass or fail selection based on a test in one day aged 10.
2. They can move up or down sets depending on progress in different subjects
3. Children who are brilliant at English but struggle in maths (for example) and may not pass the 11+ as a result, can be in top set for English and be pushed st a fast pace, while in a slower paced set for maths
4. Summer born boys (for example) who may not have matured enough to do the heavy tutoring regime many families start early and who might therefore do badly in 11+ may we’ll be flourishing almost a year later when they start secondary, and can be put in the appropriate group
5. Evidence seems to show that top sets in comps are more demographically representative than Grammars
6. Whatever sets / strand they are in they mix in extra curricular activities, sport, school band or orchestra etc
7. The whole Grammar selection is so random, blunt and inaccurate. When I look at the kids from our primary who went for the super-selective places within travelling distance of here, many who got places did no better, and in a significant number of cases did worse, than those who didn’t get a super-selective place but excelled at our local (good ) comp.

Send dd to grammar school - best thing that ever happened to me two postgrad qualifications later

Use money you save by not moving to ensure cultural capital for your son; a tutor, access to good books, educational visits

Having taught in a notoriously awful school, children CAN do well in those situations as long as parents support the school and their child/ren

Don't disadvantage your daughter for the sake of her brother possibly doing better in a potentially better school - it just teaches her that women's achievements and success are secondary to men's wants.