In suggesting whether you are pro or anti the 11+ exam is down to whether you or your offspring failed or is it more nuanced than that.

[redhilary]

The 11+ results have just been released across all the LEA that still have Grammar School provision. Every year around this time, I notice this site and others promote those that past as winners and those who failed as losers. Inevitably this provokes hatred towards the system, by those whose offspring had failed one test at the age of ten. The fury of parents is invoked who believe, academic opportunities have been withdrawn to their children at the age of just 10.

On the other side for some parents, the passing of the 11+ is giving their children great academic opportunities. Therefore, they are entirely grateful for their children to be educated in one of the remaining 163 Grammar Schools in England. Many of these parents actively sought out the 11+ Exam by moving areas. In so doing they maybe risked that their child might fail, (even if the child concerned had extensive tutoring) Are these parents views tainted by their child's failure.

On a personal note I come from a 'blended' family on the pluses and negatives of the 11+ Exam. I passed the 11+ so did my younger sister , my brother failed . Brother ended up at the local Secondary Modern, where my mother taught who was at the time politically hard left Thus, mother was an ardent protester against the 11+. My Father is/was a 'dyed' in the wool Tory existed at the other end of the political spectrum ( the discord between the two about the merits of the 11+ and the Miners Strike was interesting to say the least)

In terms of achievement it is my brother who is the one who has excelled most. This, with a P.H.D in Chemical Engineering and a place on the board of a large American Company. My sister is a H.O.D of English at a Kent Girls Grammar School.

Personally, i have just been employed or trapped in mid -management since my thirties.

what I really hated about the 11+ was that the school itself didn't have any information on it.
up to the parents to apply and ferry dc around for the tests. dc without engaged parents (or clueless parents) don't stand a chance.

I live in a comprehensive area so I went to a comp and my child does. I dont like grammars because I think they are an odd concept. I dont think that aged 11 is good age to decide someone is academic or not
And I dont think that everyone is an all rounder so why should children who could benefit from a grammar school education in maths and physics not get it because they didnt do well in other parts of the exam. I think a well managed comprehensive can put children in sets on a subject by subject basis and share some subjects more widely.

I am sorry if my poor SPAG has upset other posters and deemed my thread as being totally irrelevant and incoherent in nature.

I am like every other poster on here entitled to an opinion and capable of making a large number of spelling mistakes missing words and comprehension errors. However, my opinion is not bigoted rude nor is designed to cause offence, therefore I should not be open to ridicule for a incoherent thread !

Finally an opinion even if it goes against the grain should not lead to being randomly put down. Especially if the put down is largely about the use of inappropriate words or incorrectly punctuated grammar or quotation marks.

This, is a form of bullying, it is not debating, the intent here is to seek a posters weakest point and for the poster concerned to point out how clever they are.

I'm anti 11+ because it is discriminatory. Children are more likely to pass is from privileged backgrounds whose parents can afford tutoring and those who fail go to substandard schools. My dd was a late developer, has dyslexia and it was around 13 before she really click with English, fast forward and she got a*aab at a level. If she hadn't been at comprehensive school she would not have had as good teachers, not had the opportunity to study 4 a levels. We are not in a grammar school area

I am sorry if my poor SPAG has upset other posters and deemed my thread as being totally irrelevant and incoherent in nature.

This, is a form of bullying, it is not debating

Mistakes in grammar and spelling do not normally impede meaning. I just found your your previous post a bit confused tbh. My comment about that wasn't meant to be debating, but neither do I think it was bullying tbh. I did then go on to give points in response to what I thought you were saying.

I live in Kent which is prime grammar school territory.
I worked for nearly twenty years in a primary school in Kent.

It's brutal. The children go to school, usually midweek , at the beginning of September ( in Yr6) then start these exams on the Monday of the first full week.

The tears of children who were scared before and even more tears after the papers is quite frightening. They just want to be with their friends.

When the results are known, oh my days... even more tears and then , almost overnight, the friendship groups completely alter. Children that were friends since even pre-school , are dissolved and new cliques , consisting of new school groups, evolve.
Yes, it's called growing up but it's so sad to see.

Also , academic ability is not a sure way of accessing grammar schools. Many's the time that a clever, able child has failed yet a pupil who has always struggled has passed.
And yes, I appreciate full well what I have said , but , over the years, I've lost track of the number of pupils , who passed the 11* , who ended up leaving or having to leave a grammar school .

Let's not mention the helicopter parents who won't consider any school, other than grammar, who studiously coax/get private tutors .

(this is not particularly aimed at anyone on this post) I know my grammar, spelling and punctuation at times can be inconsistent or 'Crap' .Thus, I would never call anybody out who themselves are struggling to articulate themselves correctly.

However, what I do know is nobody knows other posters, backstories conditions or situations . Therefore the reasons they might struggle with comprehension or grammar , when other posters might consider writing correct grammar and being punctually correct, to be straight forward and simple.

I only recently in the last two years attained a 2:1 Degree from the Open University in Combined Social Sciences at the age of 43. This being some twenty years later than both my younger siblings attained their Degree's.

I am capable of producing high quality computer typed essay's through Mircosoft Office (even if it may take me longer than the average poster on here) The reason I did not go to University at 18 was down to a combination of physical and mental illness, that stayed with me until I was in my mid twenties.

Despite these debilitating issues, I have worked full time since I was 22 and I have two wonderful Daughters aged 15 and 13. Therefore, considering the issues I have fought against my family are exceptionally proud of my O.U achievements (which due to Covid I have not been able to graduate from yet ).

O.K my Degree is not from the prestigious places my siblings one's are from, but personally I am pretty happy with it.

Two things I like to point out here, there have been three posters on here taking aim at my posting issues. One of them perhaps trying to suggest the Grammar School I went to, did not do me any good, or perhaps intimating that I did not pass the 11+. Please don't judge a book by its cover, is an apt description here, in relation to me.

The second point is more important, and should be considered by all here . This being, when certain posters join in and gang up on someone they consider to be an appropriate target. What might seem to these posters as a bit of a riposte, giving the O.P a bit of her own medicine. This in order to bring her down a peg or two, risks creating mental scaring that can lasts years for that poor person..

Is this an incoherent rant, or a thought about logical posting about the dangers that Social - Media can pose to the well-being of people.

@redhilary Take no notice, your SPAG may not be perfect but it is a damn sight better than many of the posts I read on MN. We're the same age btw, we might even have been at the same GS! Well done on your degree - the OU is as good as any.

OP, this is meant genuinely and kindly; if anything that has been said on this thread could cause you mental scarring then you need to protect yourself by not posting on AIBU. Honestly, this has been pretty mild by AIBU standards!

I went to a grammar school. I’m now against them. People in favour often say they boost social mobility. I noticed that increasing numbers were getting expensive private tuition over many years in order to pass the 11+. I think it became a way for middle classes to avoid private school fees and poorer kids were pushed out.

Thank you Roberto Firmino. It was a very good win last night for Liverpool against Athletico Madrid.

In real life, in terms of the numbers of pro or anti academic selection people I meet more that are pro selection. The majority of these parents themselves did not pass the 11+, but they want a selective education for their children.

In terms of the numbers of people in real life who I meet, the vast majority do not have at least the equivalent of level 6 qualifications. In fact in the firm where I am in middle middle management which employs 200 people just myself and a senior manager have Degrees or equivalent qualifications.
This site has a habitual problem in understanding the views and opinions or hopes of those not University educated. In real life other than the people I went to my Grammar school with and my family, I know nobody over the age of 45 with a Degree. Yet if you were to solely exist in the prism of this site you believe over 90% of the population have "Three Degrees".

In real life, in terms of the numbers of pro or anti academic selection people I meet more that are pro selection. The majority of these parents themselves did not pass the 11+, but they want a selective education for their children.
I don’t understand what your thread is really trying to find out.
It sounded like you think that people like the 11+ system when they are the winners, and don’t like it when they are the losers. You ask if there’s anything more to it than that, despite acknowledging that for your family there was a political aspect... I haven’t seen a response from you when i asked if that was enough of a nuance for you.
They you say above that people you know IRL are the reverse of what you suggested; people who didn’t benefit from 11+ wanting the benefits for their kids.
I just don’t understand the thread.

At the risk of confusing people even more. The initial thread asked or suggested that whether you are pro or anti selection is down to personal experience, of either passing or failing. However, the reason I stated someone's reasoning might be more nuanced than that, is because people who are socially conservative are more likely to be pro 11+. Those, that are perhaps more socially progressive and possibly educated to a higher level, are more likely to be anti academic selection. This, is despite those people having being more likely to have personally benefitted from academic selection whether that be at 11, 16 or in their choosing of an R.G or of a Oxbridge University.

My posting about the people I know, who despite not benefiting from academic selection themselves, aligns itself to some of the reasons Labour's Red Wall fell.

This is to suggest that the educated liberal elite are on a completely different page both socially and culturally, to those they profess to have their best interests at heart. The educated liberal elite keep asking themselves why can't we win General Elections. The answer is they don't want to listen to what they consider to be outdated views on society.

In the case of the 11+ I can tell you many people who ,I have mentioned up -thread are just grateful for their child to have a shot for grammar school. Even though many professionals will tell them selective education is highly unfair on those who fail. Parents are happy for their child to have a go even if there is less than a 5% chance of successfully passing the 11+.

The liberals, struggle to understand why a parent would ask a child to take the 11+ even though their child will most likely fail. Therefore, the academic establishment and political liberals are ardently anti selective education.

There aren't many Mumsnetters who have taken the 11+.

I am in my late 50s and the grammar system was phased out in my city before I got to 11, as I believe it was in most of the country.

I loathe the grammar system with a passion, having not taken the 11+, neither have either of my children. Had I lived in a grammar area when my children were approaching secondary age I would have been tempted to move away.

It is archaic, outdated, does not even begin to serve the purpose for which it was devised.

Does that help? I doubt it!

So the thread is asking if liberal professionals have realised they are so out of touch with the majority of people in this country?

I think education has been so undermined in the last 30 years, that our kids are so miserable there, that even liberal minded professionals are sending their kids to private/ selective where possible... l can remember people being judged for doing that 10, 15 yrs ago. Not any more. You have to give your kids a chance not to learn to hate themselves in school.