How are Grammar schools so much better than comprehensives if they get the same funding?

[Karma1387]

Me and my partner are in a situation where we are looking to relocate in order to move to a Grammar school area. This is going to involve us both having to find new jobs and coordinate a house move at the same time.

Some of my family disagree with our decision to move for the sake of grammar school and don't see how they can be better than a normal comprehensive school.

I am hoping some people on here will have some knowledge on how grammar schools achieve so much better than comprehensives?

Also anyone with experience with grammar schools they could share? From what I have read the class sizes aren't much different to comprehensives and they get the same funding. Is it literally just a case of because they do the 11+ they tend to only take on the more academically inclined kids. Does this translate to less bad behaviour etc compared to comprehensive schools?

The move is going to be stressful with us both trying to find new jobs plus moving further away from both our families I want it to be worth it! Our local comprehensive is awful for results and we want to give the kids the best opportunities.

Personally I would rather homeschool and fully keep them out of the school system but my partner is very against this and is determined we need to move to a grammar school area so any advise to aid our discussion would be amazing!

Are we being unreasonable to relocate for the possibility of grammar school?

Personally I am staggering you are considering moving and both changing jobs to move to a grammar school area with children so young.

As pp have said you have no guarantee that all, or any, of the children will pass 11+ or if the educational landscape will change by then.

Have you considered where your children will attend school if they are not offered a place at grammar or what the primary schools are like?

Have you considered moving to an area with strong primary and comprehensive schools, perhaps a little nearer the time? I say this as a parent of children at such a school, that children have left grammar to join, where I feel my more academic child will reach the potential he could have without the long journey to grammar, and my less academic is also doing well and carries no stigma that she is at a different school to her sibling

Explained it badly but if there are no local grammar this raises the performance, behaviour and standards at the comps as the top 15% have no been creamed off by grammar.

I feel so sad for children born to parents like this ☹️. I truly hope you seeking help for your mental health issues

OP, it really varies by individual
school. Mine went to grammar because the local comp is fine but not very academic. Yet my friend in a different town sent her kids to the local comp where they all
excelled and one of hers went to Cambridge, which was entirely the idea of their school teachers.

A family member sent one child to a very highly sought after grammar, as their child was a top scorer in the 11+ and continues to excel academically, but the school has some drawbacks and they really wish the child would switch to the local
comprehensive that their other child went to and loved. The latter is a feeder school for an excellent A level college, and the older child got 2 As and a B at A level, which is what they needed for a place at university.

I would focus on all the reasons for choosing a new locality, when your children are older, such as house prices, job opportunities, closeness to family, as well as access to good primary and secondary schools. But definitely there are some great schools out there which are not grammar.

It’s more than just being selective. In an environment with bright, motivated pupils you can have consistently larger classes without negative effects, so you can save money on basic staffing. You generally aren’t spending as much on TAs and other learning support resources. You don’t spend as much time on behavioural support, ed psych and similar. So you have more money to put towards facilities and other things geared to improve achievement.

@Karma1387 if you don’t like where you live then it’s ok to move. Find a location that you do like, find a house that works for you, is near good job opportunities and family/friends if you can. Pick a location that has a nice nurturing primary school and as a minimum an ok comp. Primary school is all about socialization.

I understand that you had a bad experience moving at primary school, but many children move schools and are happy. We moved my youngest to a new primary as the first one refused to meet his needs. It wasn’t bad kids or bad teachers, but poor leadership. It was the best decision and my youngest loved his new school. My older children also moved primary schools because we moved house. We made the move an adventure and they adjusted well.

Many families here move house when it’s time for secondary school so that their child can go to a school that suits them best. We had no idea what our kids would be like academically, socially etc when starting secondary school when they were only 2 years old! The schools that are the ‘best’ when they were 2 are not necessarily the best ones now. Why not wait until closer to the time to pick a secondary school and focus on finding a primary one you like?

20 years ago, we made a similar decision to you. At the time I had a toddler and another one on the way. We could have moved to a grammar school area or an area with decent comprehensives. We ended up moving to the comprehensive area and I'm so glad we did.

A few people I know sent their kids to private schools from yr 7 and a couple of kids ended up commuting to the grammar schools (and the worst case of violence I've heard of in the last 20 years happened within a group of grammar school students - police involved and exclusions). Some of the best GCSE and A Level results have come from the comprehensive kids with so many of them going on to great universities or degree apprenticeship.

What I've learned is that if your kid's in a half decent comp and you're giving your kids a stable homelife, support and you're interested in their education, the likelihood is they'll do well.

I also read on mumsnet that parents get their kids tutored from yr 4 to get into the superselectives and I think it's beyond insane. I'm so glad I didn't put my kids through anything like that.

My response that you have quoted was to a poster asking why my partner was against be homeschooling not about his view on comprehensive vs grammar.

How can you feel sad we are trying to do whats best for our children. I have 0 interntion of presssuring my kids to go to certain schools or achieve certain things.

I am attemting to move somewhere where by kids have the best chances and options as they get older without uprooting their lives.

I imagine my kids will feel a lot more pressure and stress if they hit 8-9 years old and suddently I am telling them we are moving to a certain area and moving schools because I think they have the potential to get into a grammar school. They would then feel under pressure to do well and get in.

I am trying to make it so my kids have Options! I will never force my kids to do anything they aren't capable of or want to do.

Its not about being a 'grammar school parent' for us. Its about wanting to do whats best for our kids.

For me thats whether its Grammar, a very good Comp or homeschooling. All require a lot of thought as they are big decisions and I am just one of those people who thinks about things a lot!

Moving also really stresses me out so when we have DS needing primary school applications put in next year I feel a lot of pressure to decide this year where we want to move to.

if you have no intention of pressuring your children to go to certain schools, then you absolutely do not want to move to a grammar area. Move to an area with good comprehensive schools (even better, one where everyone just goes to their local school.

"Best for our kids" - You seem to be only thinking of the grammar in terms of "better results" (which as explained at length on this thread, is hardly surprising).

They can also be extremely pressurised and damage a child's self esteem and self confidence. These are much harder to rebuild, than it is to retake exams later or take a different route into a career. As someone who doesn't even want their children to move primary school once in case it disrupts friendships, I have no idea why you are even considering grammar as a "best" option.

We aren't just thinking of results we are thinking about exposure to behaviour and environment. Not sitting in school for hours with half that time taken up by disruption.

But I appreciate the comments about the drawbacks of grammar. Thats the reason for thos post is so we can make an informed decision not just one based off online data.

We aren't just thinking of results we are thinking about exposure to behaviour and environment. Not sitting in school for hours with half that time taken up by disruption.

You have a very polarised view towards grammars and comprehensives.
Not all grammars (I would suggest none) have perfect behaviour.
Not all comprehensives (I would also suggest none) have all children spending half their days sat in school with their time taken up with disruption.
The reality is that all schools (and even all year groups within all schools) sit within a range.

You are also assuming here that your children won't be the disruptive ones. No way to tell when your oldest is 2, and the other not yet born.

What you should be looking for is a school with a good behaviour management policy (that they demonstrably apply). Although, whether they have one or not now, is no indication of what they might have in the future.

You need to differentiate between super selective and normal grammar.

My son is at a super selective grammar. It’s not a grammar area like Kent. There is one ss grammar in about 60 miles. As far as I can tell everyone was tutored for the 11+. My son went there (we didn’t send him). The teaching is good is but the teachers couldn’t survive in a comprehensive school (one tried, it wasn’t pretty, he soon went back to the ss grammar).

Ds says there is no bullying, although the sixth form common room was trashed overnight for some reason. DS is year 13 now. Lots of the boys are going to “top” universities. DS likes the teaching but says their idea of EDI is funny.

If be careful about how selective they are. The grammars near us take the top 5% and have no catchment. It's 60% out of area students. There is also practically no Sen support. In theory our kids could get in. In practice it would be a terrible environment for them. They are absolute hot houses. I do worry they won't get the 'best' but actually they are much more likely to do just as well in the local comp with tutors and private 6th form.

As you're near Cambridge, I'd consider some of the areas around you that have good state schools. Somewhere like Saffron Walden - I hear excellent things about SWCHS.

Frankly, it sounds insane to move and give up your jobs for the sake of hypothetical places in schools that you don't know your children will even get into or want to go to. You'd be better off looking at areas where there's a good selection of comprehensives with a strong reputation.

I'm from Fenland so I know why you are worried about secondary school options. I would feel the same. Thing is, it is just too early to tell whether a grammar school would be right for your DCs. As a toddler/preschooler I would have said 'Oh yes DC1 is so bright, obviously going to be so academic' but actually they have ADHD and I don't think a grammar school would have been the right environment. I went to a selective state school and had friends who were not ultra academic and always felt as if the school wasn't bothered about them as only the students destined for top universities and prestigious degrees mattered.

Have you thought about south Cambs in general, not just Cambridge? Some good comps there. Or Peterborough? I know it's not the greatest place but at least you then get choice with secondary schools and there is a non-grammar selective state school (best if you are a churchgoer or want to go down that route).

I'm pleased you understand my concern regarding the secondary schools in fenland they really aren't good.

Yes I think we are going to have to explore moving more into south cambs and see what we can find without breaking the bank.

Riff raff?

I have one in a grammar and one in a comprehensive. The exam system is stressful and brutal on 9/10 year olds but ultimately, I believe mine are in the best schools for them. The comp is one of the best in the country, my child is living his best life and frankly it is the better run school imho but the grammar is absolutely getting the best academic results for my other child.

As yours are very young and you have two, I would say definitely look for somewhere with a good comprehensive as well as access to grammar otherwise you could end up with one in a grammar but the other faced with a challenging comp. Be aware though that a school can change in ten years!

Give yourselves good choices, don’t put your eggs in one basket.

The other reason is that the tests include Maths that has not been taught at that stage in the National Curriculum (I am also speaking of the Kent Test). So children need to be taught it - you can be as bright as anything but if it's totally unfamiliar material you'd struggle.

I don't disagree with the general sentiment but Kent retains grammar schools because that's what people in the area wanted (you can look at Hansard if you don't believe me) and it was never compulsory to convert them. And the grammars have expanded 30% in pupil numbers over the last couple of decades with no new schools, so they are very, very popular.

And grateful, often affluent parents who will donate to fundraising. The nice buildings some of the grammars have are NOT built with public funds by and large.