Contempt for Grammar Schools

[PencilMom]

Yesterday’s thread regarding the exclusion of private schooled children from state grammar schools has really highlighted that many people dislike grammar schools (and even more so private schools and the parents who can afford it).

AIBU for completely not understanding where the contempt stems from? There is dislike of the parents who explore this as an option for their children (many are characterised as elitist), the parents who can afford tutoring (which in many cases focuses on becoming accustomed to the test format), the children who go to grammars, I have even seen teachers accused of choosing the easy route.
There is not nearly as much dislike of sporting schools, creative arts or technical schools. If there is a school which caters to a child’s particular strengths or interests, why is that considered bad. Where possible all counties/cities should have a varied range of focused schools.

Please explain why you are opposed to or support grammar schools?
(I totally understand that the 11+ / selective tests has a negative undertone for those who “fail” — but is that not on the parents/primary schools to positively frame the experience regardless of their child’s score).

That's what these schools were supposed to do. Give the private education to those without the means to have access to one. We should be nurturing this talent.

Maybe then we should look at what it is that makes these schools so successful and roll that out. Arguments include no behavioural issues - so we need more schools for that cohort. No SEND so we need to support that cohort better. Saying we can't have something because others don't isn't a good enough reason, it should be firing people up to say "I want that for my child but not at the expense of others!"

More evidence we need an adult comprehension cause funded by the government.

@CurlewKate How do you know the income levels of all the parents in all the grammar schools? What income level do you class as middle class?
As stated before just because someone is not on FSM does not mean they are wealthy? You have to be earning less than 16K to qualify for FSM. A lot of the children in grammar schools parents will be on more than 16K and not eligible for FSM.
Grammar schools do not get additional resources/finances. In fact they receive less funding from the government (quite rightly) as they do not have the level of need in their schools.

@OnlyTheBravest I said I DON'T think grammar school parents are all wealthy. Some will be. Some won't. What I did say is that they are overwhelmingly middle class. That does not indicate a particular income level. It indicates a level of social capital. Of understanding and knowing how to deal with bureaucracy. Of having a level of self confidence. It means having a home with books and all that implies. It means having what grammar/private schools are said to offer before stepping through the doors.

@Overthemenopause "Maybe then we should look at what it is that makes these schools so successful and roll that out."

I can tell you that. Rigorous selection. Job done. Rich man in his castle, poor man at the gate.

@Overthemenopause sorry- posted too soon. I wanted to add- if that is the sort of education system and society people want then of course they'll be in favour of private and grammar schools. Personally I don't think that's good for individuals or society at large.

I’m not saying everyone would but clearly the grammar parents are happy for them to do this. My point wasn’t whether it’s right, wrong, desirable, not desirable, it was in response to the people on this thread suggesting that grammar kids are unworthy of their achievements- they are bright, very bright in the case of super selectives (admittedly the only grammars that I have direct experience of), they value their own education and take responsibility for it and they work very, very hard to make sure that everything they do is exceptional. Nothing is handed to them. They work for it and they deserve it.

Personally I don't have a problem with private schools. If you want to keep your kids away from the oiks for purely selfish reasons, fine, crack on and pay for it. My problem is expecting the state to fund your snobbery.

@Moglet4 "Nothing is handed to them. They work for it and they deserve it."

So do the kids in the top set of a comprehensive.

@CurlewKate I hate to break it to you but working class people understand and know how to deal with bureaucracy, we have self confidence, we have (cant believe I'm saying this) homes with books! and we understand the value of a good education.
This is why we are fighting for grammar schools because we are locked out of the best comprehensives in our local areas, which select by house price. Not all comprehensives are able to provide the best education to all the differing levels of ability within their cohort. We want the best for our children too.
Therefore until there are massive changes to the way comprehensives are funded and disruptive behaviour is tackled appropriately. I foresee parents tutoring their child, attending and participating with their church and renting in the catchment areas of schools with better reputations.
School admissions have never been fair and aspirational parents (both middle and working class) will always 'game' the system for the best outcome for their child/ren.

I'm one of your magic SEN children!!!

In primary school I was actually in a SEN group for gifted children, once a week I had an afternoon of special classes to push me.
Firmly working class, I took my 11+ and passed, went to grammar school. I wasn't diagnosed, but had obvious autistic traits and struggled. I'd have probably struggled even more in a bigger, less academic school, was bullied in primary school.for being a "know it all".
Looking at my friendship group (very small group of 5-6 out of 120 in my year), at least 2 of us are ND. But because we were academic I doubt we would have been assessed even now.

I was finally diagnosed BTW, at the age of 45 and guess what, I'm autistic, always have been. But I guess that makes me magical now

@OnlyTheBravest " I hate to break it to you but working class people understand and know how to deal with bureaucracy, we have self confidence, we have (cant believe I'm saying this) homes with books! and we understand the value of a good education."

To me that makes you middle class.

Wealthier pupils are more likely to pass the 11-plus, even when poorer pupils have the same attainment levels
Wealthy pupils are more likely to attend grammar schools than poorer free pupils, even when they have the same attainment levels (as judged by primary school SATs.) This is likely to be because wealthier parents are more likely to seek a grammar school education for their child, and because wealthier pupils are better prepared for the test through hiring a tutor or practising 11-plus papers. Read more HERE.

@OnlyTheBravest If you think your demographic is locked out of the best comps, good luck getting past the tanks parked in front of grammars.

And was that a state primary school with the specialist pushing you?

That was my experience too. I actually skipped a year in primary school because I wasn't learning anything. Got an A in the 11+ without tutoring (only 1 other person got an A in my year). Got into grammar school. And then the wheels fell off. By GCSEs I was a school refuser. I didn't submit half my coursework for assessment. I only got the few grades I did get because that school had the time to be on my back. I likely would have left with nothing if I had gone to a state school. Or killed myself.

No one knew what the hell happened. I was later diagnosed with ADHD and ASD. Turns out my experience is very typical for undiagnosed girls. I wouldn't be counted in the school's SEN statistics, either. Nor the other girls in my year.

Hmmm well yes, but this was way back

Actually, read my post. I state in the post I am firmly working class. Although thanks to the education policies at the time, I was offered a government funded place at private school, but my parents decided not to take it. I often wonder where I would be now if they had, would I have struggled so much in a smaller school environment.

I sometimes wonder whether the voucher system (standard amount nationally set, per capita) of education funding which gives every family the option to choose the schooling they feel would be best suited to their child, so the money follows the child. It would also eliminate the regional variations which see some LAs fund rural comprehensives at lower rates than parts of major cities which is just one aspect of the unfairness.

Solidarity @firef1y@HollyKnight

I was, with hindsight, a quite blatantly autistic girl at school. Of course, being a girl, it would never have been noticed. I maybe would’ve had a slightly better chance of being spotted now, but possibly not.

I had a different experience to you in that (as was typical for my working class background, and the town I lived in) I don’t think grammar school was ever considered by my parents. I just went to a local secondary, because that’s what you did. Ironically, this was because my high anxiety and need for the familiar meant I just wanted to go where the majority of my peers were going. Not because I had particularly strong friendships, but because my anxiety wouldn’t let me do anything else.

I had a quite rough time in a failing school with lots of issues. I was bullied for being a boffin, and socially awkward. My brains saw me through with quite stellar results for that school, but looking back there’s no doubt I would have had a far better experience, better teaching, better subject options (I only took 9 GCSEs because that’s all that was on offer) and better grades at a grammar.

Would I have floundered, not being a big fish in a small pond. Who knows 🤷‍♀️ The wheels fell off a bit at sixth form anyway, which seems to be a universal experience for undiagnosed ND kids at some point in their schooling.

Fantastic! A cap on social capital. Who decides when those who have ‘lots’ have met their quota. You?

@User020345 "Fantastic! A cap on social capital. Who decides when those who have ‘lots’ have met their quota. You?"

Nope. People who have already given their children lots of social capital by the age of 10 will continue to do so. People who haven't aren't going to suddenly start. So their kids need to get it from somewhere.

Let's legislate against parents taking time off work to.....parent

Have you perhaps considered that the parents have some responsibility to do that, and not the state?

@User020345 "Have you perhaps considered that the parents have some responsibility to do that, and not the state?"

Yes. But some won't. Some can't. And one of the justification for grammar schools is that they are supposed to level the playing field. But they don't. They just make it even steeper.