To bring up how unfair the 11+ is?

[Jaggerdagger]

I live in a notorious grammar school area in the south east (I'm sure you can guess which one!).

Reasons why I dislike the 11+:

1. Tutoring is an unfair advantage and can only be accessed for those that can afford it. How can the 11+ be accurately assessed if the majority are tutored and only a handful manage to pass the test without additional support?
2. If a child is tutored just to pass a test, it doesn't necessary mean that they will thrive in a grammar school. I'm a teacher and I've seen lots of pupils not coping well in the high pressured environment.
3. It's divisive and can make those children that don't get in feel that they are inferior. Feeling like a failure age 11 for something that could be totally avoidable if this system wasn't in place seems terribly sad to me.
4. Comprehensive schools in the area suffer in various ways because of grammar schools. For instance, more private schools are opened in the area due to parents wanting to pay for better facilities for their children that didn't get into grammar school.

I'm sure this has been discussed before on here but I think it's worth bringing it up once more for debate.

Aibu to think that this is an archaic and unfit system that should be either be abolished or drastically changed?

I assume most people who are against grammar schools are not against selective 6th forms - as kids would have had longer to develop and find what they like? So people are necessarily against selection in general - just selection at a young age.

The only way to make it fair would be to make the secondary modern in the area more desirable for many. This could include increased funding per pupil, more help for special needs, smaller class sizes, wider and different subject range. That way parents could make their choice depending on what their child was like.

The thing that saddens me about the whole system is that some children appear to be deemed 'unworthy' of a good education.
My eldest has additional needs. Honestly, a Grammar would be the worse place for her educationally. But it shouldn't mean she's not worthy of a calm educational environment that stretches her potential.

So we deliberately moved to an area with a good comprehensive school with a wide rangebof vocational subjects and academic subjects so both her and her sister (who would thrive in a GS) have the opportunity to have a good education.

The way our exam is set up, 100% of pupils can never recieve the top grades... the furore over the past couple of years of "inflation" has shown that. For Maths and English at least we need a skills test with a set pass mark so that the traditional "Maths and English at Grade C" thing is an actual possibility for everyone.

I went to grammar school, my brother didn't. My son is at the local academy, daughter at grammar. Both my brother and son are equally as intelligent as me or my other child, perhaps more so. The system is just rubbish. The concept is rubbish, how it's applied is rubbish, the notion that it is in any way a means of 'levelling up' is laughably rubbish. Nearly all kids these days are tutored and the few who gain a grammar school place without tutoring are the exception not the norm. It's elitist in the extreme, from the cost of getting there to the cost of uniform (almost 3x the price of my son's academy uniform, as nothing can be bought in normal shops) to the cost of trips etc etc. And many kids who only got to grammar through relentless tutoring are now sinking, or having to have ongoing tutoring on top of an already heavy workload just to keep up.

Totally agree and I had two who passed and one who didn't. Tutoring raises the bar and does give an unfair advantage to those who are borderline definitely.
But then the whole school system favours children from more privileged backgrounds with educated parents who have time to help with homework, provide more resources and give them more experiences.

In my experience my child who went to a comprehensive had a more challenging educational experience and less was handed to them on a plate. But as an adult they are a great problem solver with a fantastic career they worked hard for.

We live in a grammar. My dad got in, my mum didn't, yet both had successful careers.
My sister and I were not put through the system and went to a comp which wasn't great, but we both have successful careers.

I won't be putting my children through the 11+ system and was mindful of catchment areas when I brought my house. I suspect my niece and nephew will be sitting the exam as DHs family have mostly attended a grammar at various points.

One poster mentioned behaviour as a reason for wanting a grammar option. This is an interesting point. Our eldest DS is in Y6 with one kid in particular who is very disruptive and that boy will go to the local non grammar school. We know that if DS goes non grammar the disruption will continue and all indications are that it will continue to affect everyone’s education (as it clearly has in Y6, according to the teachers).

I reckon there are many parents who buy the notion that comprehensives and secondary moderns can stretch capable kids (I would imagine a preoccupation of many parents of capable children). But it’s the perception of a lack of disruption, and the higher standards that might bring, that drives some of the wish to have grammar schools.

Is there a way to somehow bring much better behaviour to all schools so that those same parents don’t remove kids and put them into grammar (assuming they get a place)? I think that would be a key part of dismantling the grammar system - “reassure me that the classes will not be disrupted”.

I know lots of children who have tutoring for all sorts of things. Extra coaching for sport, instrumental teaching, tutoring for GCSEs and A levels. Tutoring to help catch up with maths or reading. SEN tutoring, homework tutors, parent doing the tutoring (often the ones who are very vocal about little Johnny not needing any tutoring). EAL tutoring, ballet classes, tutoring for a foreign language. People want their children to do well and will use the resources they have available to them. A lot of state schools, outside grammar school areas, have what is effectively a grammar stream within them (people tutor to get into the top sets). Whether it is fair or not, it will always be difficult to keep people from trying to help their children do their best. Getting rid of grammar schools won’t stop them. I know teachers who volunteer to tutor children as part of a charity to help disadvantaged children. Many state schools also have mentoring/tutoring programs within schools to help failing pupils. I used to do 1to1 support/tutoring for children doing GCSEs at a previous school. All the teachers had to do this for 2/3 pupils outside their own subject. I also did weekly drop in sessions for my own subject. I think tutoring is just teaching by another name.

Many years ago when I took the 11+ our teachers helped the whole class prepare for the exam. We did Maths , English and Verbal Reasoning . Like @Meatbadger I am so grateful for the opportunities the grammar school gave me. My mother was clever but her parents couldn’t afford the uniform so she missed her chance and went to work in a mill. She was so proud of me.

I live in a non grammar borough sandwiched between two grammar boroughs. Loads of local kids here are tutored to pass the 11+ to get grammar places, even though it's not their LEA. Competition is hugely fierce. That would really nark me if my kid lost out to a non Borough kid.

Interestingly friends who live in Kent 'proper' have had their kids pass the Kent test and into Grammars with no tutoring. They do do lots of practice at school. They are worried about the non selective schools for siblings though.

I am lucky and my kids have had a great education from comps, and wish that that were the case for all.

Interestingly my dad failed the 11+ but passed the 13+, his local grammar was in Knightsbridge. He hated every second as he felt so out of place as a council estate boy that he moved back to the secondary modern in the end. So they weren't always the great levellers even back then they were sold as.

Personally, I'm saving some money to help both my DC get through GCSE maths. If that means a tutor so be it. Both hate it and it's neithers strong point.

But there aren't grammar schools near us and the local secondaries are all fine.

@badspella

Fifty years ago, I sat and failed my 11 +. I went to the local secondary modern school. We were not taught the relevant material for the test, let alone how to pass it. Only occasionally did someone from our village school pass the exam. My father said he would buy me a bike if I passed. I never got the bike, and I felt I had let him down. The school was rough, and we were streamed according to how well we had performed on that wretched 11 +. Those who did fairly well, were put in the top streams at school, and would learn a modern foreign language. Those who did not do so well, were put in the lower streams. If you went to the grammar school, you were considered to be 'academic' and might even go to university. For secondary modern kids, we were encouraged to learn a trade. The system was totally, totally unfair. It was social engineering at its worst. Even in those days, it was the children of the parents who had the benefit of a higher education , who were more likely to pass the exam. I went on to get a first class honours degree, a masters degree and a PhD, but only after returning to study much later in life and juggling study with work and childcare. For nearly half my life I felt like I was a failure. I am surprised the two tier system still operates. It was not designed to give poor children a chance. Rather it was designed to keep poor people in their place.

Gosh, that's shit, but I'm so glad you never gave up. Congratulations, Dr!

For those saying all children should have an equal education, I would say life isn't fair!

We are sending our children to private prep, where they'll get coaching for the entrance exams, and we'll be using tutors too. We may even move house nearer the time.

We simply don't want our children to be forced into the local comps. The nearest one is Roman Catholic, and we are completely opposed to faith schools, and the next nearest is huge. Both have issues with behaviour and their curriculums can't compare with what is on offer at the grammars.

If they don't get in then we'll have to look at private secondary for one or both. It's one of the reasons we've decided to stop at two. It's s huge sacrifice but it's what's best for them.

I was a teacher for 15 years, working in grammar, private, community schools and state academies.

@Liverbird77

For those saying all children should have an equal education, I would say life isn't fair!

We are sending our children to private prep, where they'll get coaching for the entrance exams, and we'll be using tutors too. We may even move house nearer the time.

We simply don't want our children to be forced into the local comps. The nearest one is Roman Catholic, and we are completely opposed to faith schools, and the next nearest is huge. Both have issues with behaviour and their curriculums can't compare with what is on offer at the grammars.

If they don't get in then we'll have to look at private secondary for one or both. It's one of the reasons we've decided to stop at two. It's s huge sacrifice but it's what's best for them.

I was a teacher for 15 years, working in grammar, private, community schools and state academies.

When life isn't fair you should strive to remove the inequalities not reinforce them

I work in a grammar school and yes we have a lot of incredibly bright students, but are they any brighter than a lot of children who didn’t pass the test? I’m pretty certain there are students who failed the 11+ who are more suited to a grammar school than some students who passed after being tutored to within an inch of their lives.

Completely agree - I've seen this with some of my pupils too.

Personally I think the U.K. system is too regimented in that people move up each year even if they have not mastered the previous year’s work. Some kids may just need the extra year to learn and pass gcses or a levels. I’m not sure gcse maths and English are useful tests for skills required for the workplace.

I'll always feel annoyed about the grammar system. I'm late 20s now but when I went through secondary school in Southend area it was disgusting how awful ALL of the non-grammar schools were. It was like 'we've picked out the 50% most talented ones, the rest of you don't stand a chance anyway so go to shitty belfairs or prittlewell'. Hopefully these schools will have improved now but the system is horrible for children who don't pass.

How can I personally as one person remove the inequalities in the faith based grammar system in Northern Ireland without disadvantaging my own children?

We don’t even have an integrated option in the area I live in at either primary or secondary never mind starting on the grammar system.

@ExpulsoCorona

My DD got into the grammar but if she hadn't, she wouldn't have got into our nearest comp which is Church of England, we're not the correct religion. Lots of things are unfair.

I don't agree with faith schools either, just for the record. I know "life is unfair" but when it comes to education and creating equal opportunities for children who have no control over their financial or religious background, why on earth should it be?!

@MoiraNotRuby

YANBU its a terrible system and very unfair.

Both my DC got into grammar and having a great time so this isn't me being bitter. If I could vote to abolish the system I would. Its not fair for the majority of kids.

If you are so opposed to grammar schools why did you send your children to one? You could’ve sent them to a comprehensive. You sound very hypocritical wanting to abolish a system that you use.

@Jaggerdagger I don’t know about anywhere else in the uk but here where I am in Northern Ireland the religious divide is a chasm.

Better people than me have tried for 100 years to solve that problem and failed.

@LefttoherownDevizes and where do you draw the line? I've got friends who are doctors/barristers/work in tech etc. If my children show interest in any of these careers, I'll be making sure they get the best advice and any work experience available. I suppose that's not fair either?
Should we all earn the same wage? Live in identical houses?

Also, for one of the grammar schools I am interested in, they have taken steps to widen access. They are doing outreach at local primary schools, and they reserved a good number of places for pupil premium children, who can actually pass with a lower mark than non-pp children.

iShould we all earn the same wage? Live in identical houses?

Just a different kettle of fish. Children should not have to be a reflection of their parent's wealth or religious background when it comes to education. This is what is happening in my area.

If a child is tutored just to pass a test, it doesn't necessary mean that they will thrive in a grammar school. I'm a teacher and I've seen lots of pupils not coping well in the high pressured environment.

So you teach or did teach in a grammar?

I won't apply for jobs in grammars because I'm opposed to them.

We are in SE .Competition for places at GS are fierce.My DS had a Tutor but still didnt pass! DS now has a MSC in physics from a RS Uni .Working in his first job in Industry .His Teacher felt that 11 plus is unfair as it is only a snapshot of how well child will do on that particular day .