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).

The German system is not a panacea though.

My experience of it is the combination of later start to formal education (age 6) then the splitting between Gymnasium/RealSchule at such an early age is incredibly pressured for kids. Plus the heavy reliance on the subjective view of the class teacher at the time as to whether your child makes the grade or not. And the horrendously outdated modes of teaching and testing. It's a bit like the 1950s UK grammar system in many respects.

It's undeniably better at proving useful skills and pathways to those not wanting or needing a university education but it's not without its flaws.

(It is also different state by state in Germany and I only have experience of the Bavarian system).

Fab - really pleased for your children

I'm not a bitter person. I was pretty sure they wouldn't pass as I couldn't afford a tutor but they passed much above the base line mark and my opinion then hadn't changed.

I've always thought they were a good idea. My aunt (out of several siblings) was the only one to attend grammar school, so I'm certainly not bias.

Well you are because your kids go to them ,what your aunt did is neither here or there.

Thank you. Just seeing their confidence and happiness reassures me that they are privileged, it's ashame more children aren't given the opportunity.

Comprehensive schools can only work if children if all abilities attend. If they cream off the cleverest kids then how can the comp system work?
I think the reason that grammar schools are not popular with parents whose children don't go there is that there is this sense of elitism that goes with the grammar schools that gets up peoples noses.

Such a small minded, narrow view of the world

Not against private schools. People can educate their kids on their own dime as they wish.

Very much opposed to grammar schools funded by the state. It segregates children at too young an age many of which have got in purely through being hot housed through tutoring or private schooling. They essentially get a better education funded by the state via stealth. Kids that go to the adjacent non-selective schools are written off.

I am in an area with only state schools and it’s a much better system.

First off, not all children get tutored - the majority of children who get tutored are aiming for super selective schools

I live in bucks and honestly, unless you are literally on the breadline, almost everyone is tutored. Children from poorer families tend to be in cheaper tutoring in larger groups. The only people i knew who opted out had children with learning difficulties who were taking the choice to not take the test at all.

It’s entirely politics of envy. And yet the same vitriol is not aimed at private healthcare users.

I think they are a great idea and we should have more of them. I live in the North West and we have one out of area that my son managed to get into. Our local comp has metal detectors as you enter by comparrison. Ds1 is exceptionally bright and ds2 has complex needs, I'm very aware of the lack of send funding, the number of sen kids in mainstream without the right support and can see how that would impact ds1.

Ds2 now goes to a non maintained special school out of area too.

Out local state schools are rubbish, they have low aspirations for the children and the grades reflect that.

Well, it is considering that my family wasn't bitter only 1 out of 6 didn't make it to grammar. It's always been highly praised in my family of something to aim for. I went to comp as there was no grammar school in my area - not that I would have passed.

So why you think, I would change my mind over something I've been brought up to believe is odd but hey apparently you know a stranger off the internet better than I know myself.

Interesting to hear from someone who has experience of the German system @astonssandboxisalittertray

I guess if the UK was ever to return to a full grammar system across the country (and I suspect, despite personally being in favour, that won't happen) implementing it would need careful attention to avoid the negatives you mention.

I think it's very very important that kids aren't made to feel pressured, and the 11+ shouldn't be seen as something to pass or fail. Vocational and academic abilities, education, and opportunities should be given equal value. Also need to allow movement between academic and vocational schools at various stages, if it becomes apparent that a child's abilities would be better catered for in a different school.

TBH I'm sick of the brightest kids being touted/used as useful tools in state education. It's never about them reaching their full potential, it's always about how they benefit the school/the others by being there

100% agree with this. It’s very much in evidence at the primary that DD currently attends (and where I am a governor) - they have recently stopped all setting by ability across the school explicitly so that the higher attaining children can be used to inspire and support the lower attaining ones in all lessons. The massivel buzzword atm is ‘equity’, which is laudable in principle but in practice essentially means focusing all resources on the ‘have nots’ while the ‘haves’ are at best allowed to coast along and at worst used as a tool to improve standards.

NW England and we have 6 grammar schools in our education authority area - 2 are Catholic and have their own exam. The other 4 select from the 11 plus exam. It’s quite competitive but they are all very good for exam results and extra curricular stuff.

My kids went to one of the local comprehensive though, mainly due to location and where most of their peer group went.

I went to a comprehensive myself ( different area though)

What's going to happen in this race to the bottom is mass resentment and brain drain.

Isn't it better to have different but equally valued schools catering for different abilities? I think one of the issues is viewing academic ability as 'clever' because people can be clever in vocational skills as much as others are clever in academic skills.

Comps don't address inequality imo (the real causes are housing affordability and poverty). Whether or not it's a 'good' school is often dependent on where the family live, and tutoring isn't only a thing for the 11+. Some parents pay for private tutoring to "top-up" their state comp DC's education.

Personally it divides our area into haves and have nots. It encourages kids of the haves to be mean to those who have not from primary age. The entitlement is far worse than the local private school kids; the grammars look down on them because they assume they are thick or they'd be at the grammar.

Anxiety and eating disorders are rife. Kids get tutoring just to keep in the school or be pushed out and to keep up because most of them were tutored to get in and wouldn't be able to keep up. Kids are churned into achieving constantly and failure is felt deeply. Very little in the way of clubs, largely crammed into lunch times with no after school provisions. Competitiveness between kids leads to bullying. If a FSM kid does magically manage to get in they usually can't keep up with the mass tutoring and leave which makes them feel terrible.

It's jam packed full of very rich kids and their parents are complete champagne socialists taking away spaces for kids who are naturally bright but can't afford tutoring. Often no SEN provision (or only for high achieving autism) so is selective against disabilities.

I’m in Lancashire in a grammar area. People from catchment only enter children with a good chance of passing as the other options are good or outstanding. Some people will deliberately opt not to put child in for it even if bright if they don’t feel it’s a good fit. Tutoring happens but the familiarity for test yr 5 type. A top table child should pass its about 75% required in catchment.
So it’s about 100 catchment children a year from a very wide catchment that go.
The pressure is on the out of catchment children as in the neighbouring areas results are poor and schools not great. Some of these children are tutored extensively from young as they need to be scoring over 90% and if they don’t the plan b is a school with poor results.
It seems to work well. Children just accept some go to catholic, some high school some grammar.
The only sixth form provision is at the grammar so lots join yr 12 even if they go to a different school initially.

In Hertfordshire we mostly have comprehensive / academy schools and it works. Academic kids do well and there are chances to shine for all kids. Siblings stay together.

Herts used to have a grammar system and it’s mostly phased out now so it can change and work out well. The key though is good funding of schools.

I went to a grammar and, at the time, I didn't know anyone who had any tutoring to get in. I was one of very few who had even seen a practice paper. There was a real mix of kids there, my best mate lived on one of the roughest estates in the area.

However, nowadays the school is so competitive that only those who have been coached for years have any chance. It also means thousands of kids are taking the test, not getting in and feeling like a failure. I don't think this is in their interest at all and feels more like a way for parents to ensure kids are not mixing with the "wrong sorts".

No, education should be an exercise in equality of opportunity, where every child achieves at the highest level possible.

DD#3 is very good at maths and physics - one of the ways she embeds her learning is to take her classmates through the work - it is the most effective technique she has found

I don't think we should be using the brightest kids to pull up the performance of other kids at their expense. Why is not OK to take that strong academic ability and develop it to its full potential.

This can't be done in a class full of mixed ability kids where the attention is either focused on behaviour or on developing those at the lower end.

Surely everyone benefits if the teachers can teach to a narrower ability group rather than having to cater for very high and very low abilities at the same time.

How we manage this could be done better and fairer but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to tailor teaching according to the characteristics of the class.

The best thing they could do for my area is abolish grammar schools. The private tax isn't going to make any difference but abolishing grammars certainly would even up the playing field here for thousands of kids instantly.

I don't get it either.
Until reading this it hadn't even occurred to me just how many other schools are in my local area that are available for DC to go to. But there's more private/Grammar secondary schools than State.

I've only ever spent my time concentrating on what was going on with the schools my own DC went to.