Why do Grammar schools have better facilities?

[UndertheCedartree]

We've been looking at secondary schools for my DD.

The Grammar school stands out as having better facilities, nicer and more outside space, very good head teacher and pastoral support. I'm just wondering how come Grammar's are so much better? Do they get more funding or do the middle class parents donate to the school?

I hate the Grammar system as it just seems to mean the other schools aren't very good.

My DS's grammar school is always complaining about lack of funds. It's a very old building and is quite run down in places. They request a voluntary monthly donation of around £100 from parents and mentioned at the new entrants open evening that they will call any parents who don't set up a direct debit to discuss further!

My DD was at a state academy until we moved her to private and it was a modern building with great facilities , a swimming pool, a well equipped gym and sports centre. They never asked for a penny from parents.

Why did you go private if the state school was so good?

Totally agree that it is selection by house prices. Do not agree that grammar schools provide an answer to the unfairness of this.

There’s a state primary school near me that is very good at raising money from parents and local community. They make £20,000 from their summer fair every year. That’s just the summer fair.

Phil the spectators article misses out key issues which renders it almost pointless.

If you disbelieve me - just stop by TOGS, Judd, TWGGS, Tun Wells Grammar and Skinners in Tonbridge/Tunbridge Wellls and look at the vehicles picking these kids up.. wall to wall Porsche, Bentley, Mercedes' 4x4s... (easily afforded when you are getting a private education on the state)

So true. My DNiece was horribly bullied at TWGGS because her parents were "poor" (they're not, they lived in a house worth £1.2m and had a thriving business) and her clothes came from Next and not Abercrombie & Fitch or Hollister.

This ^

My reason for being adamantly against grammars is that you V CANNOT judge a child's academic potential at age 11 !!

I 'passed' my 11+ but failed the report as 'suitable grammar schools character' because I objected to my head teachers physical abuse of my younger brother .. ?this was 1975...

I went to the LSE .. despite being the first year to sit o'levels in 1980 in a secondary modern.. am now a senior civil servant on 73k but has taken 32
Years ... had I been given my 'worth' it would have been half that time ..

Sorry you have said you were denied a grammar school place because of your character (rightly or wrongly) not because of academic ability. So you carry that chip n y our shoulder?

a lot of very well off parents saw it as they were saving ££££££ on private fees so would donate well.

^^ this. And wealthier alumni.

Grammar school classes are not smaller. Well some minority option classes are but my KS 3/4 classes are the same as other teachers of my subject.

To all those who say only the rich can afford tutoring: my DS will be doing the 11+ in a few weeks.

He's had a tutor since beginning of year 5. So 1 academic year. It is £60 per month and £40 if he does a mock test with them. We've supplemented the tutor with some practice books from Amazon. 4 x £5 each.

£840 total across 11 months. I know that £70 a month would be unaffordable for some. We knew we wanted DS to try the 11+ and if needed to, would have saved for it. This cost for us has been affordable, but I don't think we could have stretched to much more without saving. Which we've had plenty of years to do if needed.

The only alternative non-grammar school in our area is awful, very much a sink school for those who don't get in to one of the many Grammars. We don't really have a choice if we want DS to do well.

DS's Primary school run an 11+ after school club for the children who want it. No tutoring costs for us.

@Malie we moved her to private for a number of reasons. She became seriously I'll during the pandemic and now has a chronic condition that requires her to have a day in hospital once a month plus a few other appointments for blood tests and scans every few months. Illness caused her mental health to suffer and she developed awful anxiety and OCD and also experienced quite a bit of bullying.

State school couldn't provide the pastoral support she needed and their strict rules on attendance and having to do catch up work put too much pressure on her. She's much happier at her private school.

When we did our local secondary school open days, we were pretty appalled at the state of the grammar, which literally had buckets to collect rainwater coming through the library roof (derelict classrooms in the same very old building), a few very run down "temporary" classrooms, a manky ancient pool, and generally a very run down appearance.

It was in contrast to one of the comps which had virtually been rebuilt, with state of the art theatre, sports hall, brand new classrooms, "atrium" style entrance, etc.

I think it depends more on how good the school management is re applying for grants etc.

I have since noticed that the grammar's oldest building which had the leaky roof and derelict classrooms has finally been re-roofed and one of the derelict wings has been refurbished and is now re-opened as classrooms, and the temporary classrooms have been removed!

Lots of grammars still where I live. There are a lot of wealthy parents who are so relieved not to have to pay school fees that they are very generous with donations etc. We had one DC at Grammar and one DC at secondary modern at the same time, and the difference in available resources was quite remarkable, and really quite shocking.

One of my children is at a grammar and it doesn't seem to have more funding to me. In fact in some ways it seems a little run down and old fashioned, but said child loves it.

I went to a grammar back in the 80's . Everyone sat the 11+, primary schools were able to prep all children and nobody had tuition.

Teachers knew exactly who would pass and who wouldn't / could go either way.

Having had the benefit of a grammar education I was the first in my family to go to university and the first to subsequently qualify in a profession.

Having returned to Kent my eldest two children are both at local grammar schools. The schools certainly don't have more money or better facilities.

Preparation for the 11+ needn't be paid tuition, there are plenty of online resources, past papers and work books. The problem as I see it is twofold - schools are no longer able to prepare children for the test and children are reliant on their parents entering them........ These changes are detrimental to social mobility, children are reliant on their parents to enter them / help them prepare.

The children my eldest two children go to school with are not from super wealthy families. They are from families that value education.

We opted for the local grammar schools rather than the super selective options - I do think they are very different.

Because the pupils don’t trash them

That isn't entirely true though is it? In one of my neighbouring boroughs the local formula results in more money per head overall in the grammar schools because it has a massive skew to 6th form pupils (much higher than in my borough). I'm surprised they can still get away with it.

In addition the top grammars set the expectation early of very high contributions to the school fund per pupil (not per family). They also have more expensive uniform policies. These two, and the open evenings stressing all the expensive extra curriculars serve to deter poorer families from even applying and reinforce the kind of intake with money and enriched environments at home. Its not unusual for every child entering in year 7 of the top three or four grammars to have been to private primaries or heavily tutored - the parents boast about it.

Not all grammars do this - interestingly another neighbouring borough with a more mixed system and fewer grammars actively works to get a more mixed intake. However for children in the first system the grammars are not offering opportunity they are withholding it.

They also get ground down by the expectaion that they alone can solve all the parents' problems at home, in the car park etc.. If teachers were allowed to simply teach standards would rise, as it is they have to waste too much time on external things, eg dealing with pupils' spats on social media which, if the parents could be bothered, would never be a school issue.