To believe that we need to create two hundred more Grammar Schools for the Shires of England.

[redange]

To believe England needs two hundred new Grammar schools across the country and in doing this take the number of English Grammar Schools to 363.

I appreciate this is a post that is going to lead to me being called names and for posters to be looking at spelling and grammar mistakes as a means of belittlement .

Nonetheless, there must be support among some posters for the lifting of the 1998 Labour Ban on the creation of Grammar Schools where there is a desire or clear need. The only Grammar School that has been built since 1965 being the Weal Of Kent Grammar Annexe in Sevenoaks . Surely if the country is going to be able to grow economically, we need to revisit the idea of selective education across Sport, Art and academic rigour. It is also not impossible that a fairer and more equitable system of selection could be introduced alongside the 11+ exam. Thus, in doing so access to selective education should not be a 'one and only' chance. I think this is where a lot of people have problems, because they see selective education through the prism of pass or fail. Pass or Fail does not mean the same today as it meant in 1965 because firstly the advent of a single exam system of GCSE's and A levels that all pupils take or can advance to.

I spent most of secondary school having the piss taken out of me because I wanted to work hard.

’why are you revising for that test when you could be hit by a bus tomorrow’ etc.

There was none of that when I went to a grammar school for 6th form.

I’m sure I would have still got good grades if I stayed at the other school but socially I enjoyed my time far more at the grammar school where everyone wanted to work hard and valued the education we were being given.

No, because they are totally skewed towards the parents who can afford tutoring. My friends son got full marks on his year 6 SATS, something only the brightest children acheive. But he failed the 11+ as they couldn't afford tutoring.

I got 9 A*s at gcse, 4 A's at A level, a 1st degreee on a very competitive course, and earnt a scholarship to a private school. When I had a go at one of DD's practise papers, I failed it.

One of the local non selective private primaries near us boasts a 100% pass rate. Not all these children are super bright, but they have been coached to pass.

The system is totally skewed towards those who can afford tutoring, not necessarily the brightest. The pressure it puts on them at such a young age is ridiculous, and I think they should be abolished.

My DC were exposed to so much more educationally, had their eyes opened to new things. My DS wished he took more advantage on what they had.

DS was happy to not have to go to the same school as the slower kids who would tease him and exclude him and be horrible to him due to their intense jealousy.

My region almost exclusively has single sex schools and the boys schools are dire. It might be better for the girls but for some reason it doesn’t work out well at all for the boys. The few co-ed schools are hugely over subscribed.

Disagree. That’s lose-lose.

i have 3 DCs now finished at the large local comp. We live in rural Kent in the epicentre of ‘grammar school central’.

I’m glad they didn’t go to grammar school for a few reasons esp as they have experience of inner city London comps before moving here.

if they’d been to grammar round here: costs £££ in transport because free school transport under 16 is ONLY available if you are going over three miles away and to the nearest school. Grammars aren’t usually the nearest. Don’t underestimate the cost even to a well off family to get three kids to school at around £600 each per term. Poor kids can’t do that.

Getting a bus to school if you can walk - living near schools allows kids to do after school activities- in the arts and sports - so often missing for the curriculum.

Grammars have similar money to comps but they have to win on academics. They can’t afford to spend time on non academic stuff like music or arts, or soft skills the like of which private schools can lean into. This I know because our local ‘grammar that people move house for’ has virtually eliminated its highly regarded music department. All kids lose out if they don’t get a rounded education- mine would have been very unhappy that environment.

As for the comp lovely teachers, great and wider ranging facilities from technical to art and music and business. The big problem is that of course all the bright well off kids have been creamed off to the many Grammar schools, so if you are bright and motivated as mine were (mostly) you suffer low level disruption ALL the time from kids with no interest.

my last 18YO DC just left with the best A levels in the school to his preferred RG Uni and is chuffed, but up until GCSEs he found it very difficult to work in that mix of kids.

Worse still some of his bright friends have done ok enough for uni and some are very talented but lack of aspiration or education in their backgrounds has resulted in them not going on to realise their talents. It’s heartbreaking.

not an ideal world!!

also the comp they have just left has 300 less intake this year as we are now at the end of the 2000s baby boom. So they will now go downhill.

In reality, I don't think most people really worry about whether other peoples kids get in, they care about their own. The horror for me won't be if her friends get in and she doesn't. It will be seeing the disappointment on her face that she has worked so hard and still not passed. She lacks self confidence anyway due to bullying in her younger years and I fear a fail will knock any confidence out of her that we have worked so hard to build back up.

We aren't all sharp elbowed middle classes trampling our way to the top, we are just parents who are trying our best (like most parents) to help our children acheive something which is important to them. The choice to go for grammar is solely DD's, and whether she gets in or not I will be so proud of her for trying her best to acheive something she wanted with no guarantee of success.

I do think it's an awful system though

I live in a Grammar school area. To get in you need either prep school from Y4 at the latest (there are zillions of prep schools round here) or two years of private tutoring. So it's basically just become a cheaper version of private education.

We live in a fully comprehensive area. Some of the comprehensives have better results that some grammar schools in selective areas. Overall the county has better results than selective areas like Birmingham, Kent or Essex. Most schools are 11 to 16 with separate sixth forms and colleges. I went to a grammar school but much prefer this system.

Would like more technical and vocational options at 14 or 15. GCSEs really don't work for those mainly getting level 1 grades. Agree that better provision for SEN and poor behaviour is needed.

YABVU. Grammar schools were abolished in the majority of the country decades ago for good reason.

the 11+ is not a reliable way to select children. I was at a grammar myself. There were plenty of kids there who shouldn’t have been. Conversely, DM was a teacher in a secondary modern (in the 1980s) and she she was getting kids through O-Level Physics in her own time - they should have been in the grammar.

I now live in a comprehensive area but near to a grammar area. DC1 took the 11+ and failed it. They went to our local compressive, where they were very happy. They came out of there with a clutch of 8s and. 9s at GCSE, 4 x Astar at A-Level and a place at Imperial College to do an integrated masters in a science subject. They got a 1st. So clearly top end of grammar school yet could not even come close to passing the 11+. So how do we make it fair for the kids who pass but shouldn’t and those that don’t pass but should? Oh yes, I have an idea, abolish the 11+ and send them to a comprehensive!

Absolutely! Parents pay for private primary to get them into the grammar schools as that's cheaper than pri ate secondary. They should definitely limit how many children from private school children are allowed into grammars to maybe 10% of total intake

Exactly that. My dyslexic son failed his 11+ and everyone wrote him off. Fast forward 5 years in a good school (not grammar) with real value added teaching and he has 11 GCSEs eight at 8, one at 7 and two at 6 (one of those being Eng Lang - hardly a surprise). I remember going on an open day round one Grammar and the tennis courts were a car park (faded lines, so not just for open day), small outside sports, overcrowded classrooms and generally just filthy.

The better off pay more tax, so I can't see why they shouldn't get a better education for their children, so long as the worse off are getting an education as well.

We need more technical schools that concentrate on STEM and more apprenticeship type courses earlier on rather than more grammar schools. There are so many uni students out of work because they have pointless degrees and AI is taking so many jobs. We don't need more of this. Vocational courses are much better for thier future prospects than passing an 11+ and getting 9s in exams.

My DCs grammar was great for maths, arts, sports and extracurriculars. Don't know what PP is talking about.

If you really 'can't see why' then you are just not thinking hard enough.

Of course taxation should not be used by the government to give better services and provisions to those who paid more tax!

I think comps with a grammar stream is a much better solution especially for kids who are exceptional at say maths but struggle with English. My kids are at a school like this and it's been great for them. They are pushed in lessons but also mix with all different children in tutor and arts / non academic subjects.

Theresa May in 2017 ran on a general election manifesto promise to bring back grammar schools, and she lost her majority. They're not a massive vote winner.

The reason that grammar schools fell out of popularity was because middle class parents were terrified that their kids wouldn't get into them.

They still are. Look at the huge tuition industry in places like Kent where parents pay a fortune to bored teens to supervise their kids in tuition centres. Thank fuck that's not the norm.

I am sorry I really don't get it. Grammar schools for higher rate taxpayer's DC seems fine to me.

Maybe it’s the case in NI in which case that’s very much the point of them. My own info is perhaps only relevant in Greater London/home counties where there is a lot of tutoring going on, albeit not just for the grammars.

"A 10 year old who fails the 11 plus shouldn't get the same investment and opportunities as one who is academically clever and good at passing exams."

I really am not sure whether this is satire or you are being serious.

Sadly, there are people who would say that in all seriousness.

you are right - a 10 year old who fails the 11+ should not get the same investment and opportunities as one who passes - they should get better investment and opportunities to level up and make sure everyone is maximising their potential.

England was never anything like that though. At it's peak in the early 1970s around 25% of pupils went to a grammar school. In the 1970s Mrs Thatcher closed a lot of grammar schools so by 1980 the figure was less than 5%.

Secondary Modern Schools will always exist and at least 50% of current Comprehensive Schools are in reality Secondary Modern Schools . There are just not called that as people hide beyond having a few bright children which in this case get grade 6's at GCSE .

The actual standards of education in most Comprehensives and discipline standards are below what good Secondary Modern Schools offered in the 60s and 70s. Nobody can really say the schools shown on Educating Yorkshire or Greater Manchester are anything other than sink schools . They maybe classified as Comprehensive but they offer far less than what a 'good' community Secondary Modern could and should do if they existed . What we have in these areas are terrible schools that the political left deluded themselves as being Comprehensive and providing good educations to the pupils attending them.

They are just not called Secondary Moderns but Community Colleges and exist as so because they have not selected their pupils.

My experience of close proximity to Wirral grammars is that those that really want to go sit the relevant entrance 11+, and on the whole succeed for at least one of the options. Many children don’t want to take that route and do not sit the selective tests.

this played out with my niece and nephew, she did not have intensive tutoring ; though I do think the Wirral primary schools do help with preparing those who are sitting