Grammar Schools and Private Schools

[peapodlovescuddles]

I genuinely don't know what to think here so would be interested to see what other mumsnetters have to say

Today while my son was swimming I overheard another mother moaning. Her DD has just found out she hasn't got a place at our fantastic local grammar school.
She was saying it wasn't fair people like peapod sent their children to grammar school when we could easily afford private school fees, my DCs went to a good prep school and then onto the grammar because I wanted them to meet a wide range of people from many walks of life. I didn't feel this would be accomplished at the local public school and I don't want my children to board.

So should I have sent my children to the private school so someone less well off could have had their place? Or is ANYONE entitled to a state education?

I have 2 children at a state grammar and a 3rd who will be starting in september. They didn't have any coaching and they went to a state primary. The grammar they are at is in the top 20 of state schools and has 10 children chasing each place. My children are not unique there, there are some children who have come from private primaries, and there are some who have been intensively coached (they are generally the children who struggle to cope with the pace of the work) but the majority are ordinary children from ordinary primary schools.

If your child is bright enough to win a place on merit then they 'deserve' that place. I hate this argument that just because you can afford to pay that you should pay. Imagine extending it to the health service for example.

I was astounded at our book group when a member started bemoaning the fact that "rich bankers" were starting to appear at a local (very good) Primary sschool. Her objection was that they could afford Private and so should go elsehwere.

Education is never a level playing field when it comes to selection as obviously the home environment is the single biggest factor and more important than whether or not a candidate has been privately educated.

Am I right in thinking that with 11+ its not really a case of "making the grade". In as much that its not a case of if you get over 75% or whatever you get a place. Instead if there are 100 places then the 100 highest scores get a place.

So a child could get 98% but if 100 other children get 99% then the 98% kid won't get a place.

I suppose this mother feels that your child has had an advantage that her child hasn't been able to have. Basicly your child has had a betetr education/coaching and is more likely to pass the 11+ than a child who's been in a class of 30 kids. Her child could be more intelligent than yours but still hasn't got a place and now may have to go to a crap comp (not that I'm saying all comps are crap). I can see that would be annoying. But its not your fault.

"I can understand why she is aggrieved you are playing the system fully to your advantage because you can afford private school now
hardly fair or a level playing field "

surely an open entrance exam where the pupils sit the exact same paper,at the exact same time in the exact same place is the definition of a level playing field? if you are going to start taking background into consideration for a uniform exam it will never work.

Stripey - at 'our' school they take the top 150. So the 'cut off' varies each year. The scores are also age standardised.

Everyone is entitled to a state school education.

surely an open entrance exam where the pupils sit the exact same paper,at the exact same time in the exact same place is the definition of a level playing field? if you are going to start taking background into consideration for a uniform exam it will never work.

No it isn't a level playing field - not when some of the children have had far superior teaching for the previous 7 years. It doesn't work. Grammars used to be the place where intelligent "working" class kids had the chance of a decent education. Now they don't get a look in as its full of "middle class" kids who have been privatly educated or coached or both.

Stripey - do you have a kids at a grammar school? My non privately educated/coached kids are there with loads of other kids like them.

My ds will start grammar in September. He is going from an average state primary with no private tuition. I have just arranged today with a single mum on a low income that I will explain to her what papers she needs to do with her daughter to prepare for the 11 plus.

I wish people would stop perpetuating the myth that you cannot get in unless you have been to a private school or have paid a fortune for a tutor. Any bright but poor child can get in by downloading and going through the free papers online. But every time someone says you need lots of money to pay to get in it is going to encourage poor parents to not even put their child's name down to sit the 11 plus and to not bother preparing.

There is plenty of academic research showing that preparation increases a child's score but there is no research showing that preparation needs to be extensive or done by a professional.

Since passing, some very barbed comments have been made to me and my son. I just ignore them, and avoid mentioning where my son is going to school to people offline. But every time I have heard those comments I am even happier that my son is going to the grammar. I would not want him to be in a top set at our local comprehensive, and have the pressure of the lower set boys making similar comments (but about the set rather than the grammar) to him while he was at school. No wonder so many boys are failing when we their peers are mocking high ability.

I would ignore the swimming pool woman; you just have to accept that whatever background you are from, people are going to be make negative remarks about it.

I also find it bizarre that people are against elite grammar schools but are for Oxford and Cambridge, which are elitist. I don't have any interest in my son getting into Oxford and Cambridge or any Southern university where his Northern accent and background will be mocked. I just wanted him to get into a grammar school, and having read the grammar school destination list, I have seen that I am not the only one who feels this way; only two of the entire sixth form are going to a Southern university. That has nothing to do with distance, as some are going to Scotland or the United States. That says far more about prejudice in this country than the existence of grammar schools.

"Education is never a level playing field when it comes to selection as obviously the home environment is the single biggest factor and more important than whether or not a candidate has been privately educated."

I'm not sure I completely agree with this. I couldn't come out unequivocally and say that home environment was always going to be more important than a good school in improving children's life chances.

I went to a grammar school.

DD isn't old enough for a secondary school yet but we are in the catchment. DD goes to Kip McGrath for extra tuition as she's a year behind (dyslexic). 80% of the other kids there are from the local private school and are getting coached for the 11+.

The grammer school has a 98% pass rate at GCS whereas the private school is 80% so a lot of parents try to get their kids to the grammar where there is a better pass rate and no fees.

I know from talking to other parents that there is an increasing percentage of private school kids going to the grammar. When I went there (same school) there were only 2, and they only came 'cos their dad's restaurant went bust and he couldn't afford the fees anymore.

I suppose it is still a fairly small proportion, but probably because the private school is quite small and also in a different town from the grammar. There are no private schools closer than 15miles to the grammar. I suspect if we lived in a bigger town with the grammar and the private school in the same town there would be a higher proportion.

Selection isn't a level playing field!
I have suggested on here that people don't do anything to prepare their DC because a DC with high intelligence will get in. People won't accept that their child is average, or only slightly above average. I wish that a test could be devised that was impossible to do any preparation for at all-the only fair way.

"No it isn't a level playing field - not when some of the children have had far superior teaching for the previous 7 years. It doesn't work. Grammars used to be the place where intelligent "working" class kids had the chance of a decent education. Now they don't get a look in as its full of "middle class" kids who have been privatly educated or coached or both."

i'd accept what your saying.but my point was it's the only workable level playing field as i can't imagine any fair alternatives.exclude children because of their primary school? unworkable. means testing? each child is entitled to a state education so that too is out.
lets say you do weed out the middle class kids and it is now only working class. surely it isn't a level playing field if one child comes from an environment where education is encouraged and valued and the other doesn't as he is much less likely to study or be supported.
so there is no such thing as a true level playing field,so my point was an anonymously marked exam, that is uniform for all participating where by the best results get the spots available regardless of who their daddy is, is really the only viable option imho. if you start to try and break it down furhter than that into who can can't afford it, who had an unfair advantage due to superior preperation, there is always going to be someone worse off/more "deserving" in their eyes than the people who got it. just like the olympics, the bigger countries do have a superior advantage in their preperation and their sports science. but all the athletes compete on the same track under the same rules.whoever comes first gets the gold regardless of country size.but no one is suggesting handi-capping bigger nations because they have superior equipment/facilities. so just like the entrance exams, while as you say there might be blatant advantages to some of the pupils preperation, it is the fairest "unfair" system available.

I think that a lot more parents should put their children in for the grammar school entrance exams than currently do. The reason that some parents are surprised when their supposedly bright child doesn't get in is because their child has a September birthday, so of course they looked bright compared to their younger classmates.

But the eleven plus is age standardised, and an August born child who was only average at primary school may well get in to grammar while the high achieving September born child doesn't get in.

At the moment, there are too many Autumn birthdays in grammar schools, and according to the grammar schools, this is because parents are not putting enough Summer born children in for the exam because they underestimate their children's ability.

Historicaly it has never been a level playing field. My old grammar school (now long comprehensive) had a prep school attached, so nearly all the girls who went to the Prep carried on to the main school. Back in the "golden days" of the Fifties and Sixties the same things happened, only then there were grammar schools in all areas, so then the poorer children in industrial areas where there were fewer middle class parents had a better chance of an academic education.

I agree its hard to know what could be done to make it any fairer and its never gong to be 100% fair.

The only thing I could possible think of is to maybe have some form of percentage handicap against those who have had the advantage of a private education? A bit like the way they do the current age handicapping? Of course that would have all the parents' of the private school kids up in arms!

We don't have grammar schools wear I live - all done by Catchment ares, which isn't massively fair either.

However, putting your DCs into prep and transferring them to grammar schools is playing the system. They will be much more likely to pass the test. It isn't fair but it is not illegal.

"putting your DCs into prep and transferring them to grammar schools is playing the system"

Why do you think this? I don't agree that it is "playing the system". I think it is giving your child the best possible opportunities you can afford.

And I must admit the OPs reason of "wanting them to meet a wide range of people from many walks of life" makes me a bit

Id rather people just be honest and say that they've paid for a good education for their kids when that was the only opportunity, but now there's a free option they're taking it.

If they were really that committed to meeting people from different walks of life they'd have done it from age 5. CrackFox is right when she says its playing the system.

"Why do you think this? I don't agree that it is "playing the system". I think it is giving your child the best possible opportunities you can afford."

I think its both, they're not mutally exclusive. I wouldn't have a go at anyone for doing it. But it is playing the system.

But what "system" is it "playing"? The basic primary education system in England is a choice between state day school, private day school, private boarding school and home education. Any parent can choose any of these options, resources permitting. And from any of the options the system allows a parent can choose any secondary school for their child, selective criteria exercised by the school permitting.

I am very about the only grammar school in our area. It claims to take children from the top 25% of the ability group from the area, but actually has people applying from all over the country. I actually know people who have moved down here for the duration of their child's secondary schooling. That is one issue.

Furthermore, school in question is funded way more than any other school around here.

Third, all the other schools (67 of them) use the presence of this one grammar with an intake of 125 a year as a good excuse for getting substandard results.

Fourth (and this is the really unforgivable bit), they turned down all three of my children. All three are now doing extremely well in the next two schools down in the county league tables (both selective & private) and are most definitely within the top 5% in their year group. So how they did not end up in the top 25% of their county's year group for the purposes of getting into the grammar school I do not know.

Fifth, the kind of people who get their children into that grammar are generally not going to send their child to the local comp if they fail to get into the grammar (ie they have cash). The grammar school runs a £1000 ski trip to Aspen ffs. How many people on limited means could contemplate that? So the grammar is in my view just as skewed financially as the private schools. Possibly more so, if you saw the beaten up old cars driven by most of the parents at the two private schools vs the landrovers pulling up to the grammar...

That's a ridiculous comment and she's just feeling jealous and bitter. However, i am not a fan of the grammar school system because (same as PiscesMoon) I think it's totally untrue that it gives poor but bright children an equal chance. That may have been the case 50 years ago, but not now. There is nothing equal about it when they are being measured against middle-class privately educated hot-housed and tutored children who may or may not be as bright, but have had enormous amounts of support and have been taught the tricks and strategies to get through the 11 plus since they were 7.

Some areas (such as Bexley and Bromley boroughs in Kent) are awash with grammar schools and can therefore take around the top 25% of children. I grew up in those areas and it seemed to me there was a selective state school every five miles or so. Where I live now (Essex) we have far far fewer grammar schools to go around so they only take the top 2-5% of children. The two in Chelmsford and the two in Colchester are consistently judged as being in the top 10 (and they frequently appear in the top 5) in the entire country. But that's hardly surprising when it's so super selective, is it?!

I've tried before to find out the percentage of children from private school backgrounds currently taking the grammar places in Essex but I can't seem to find an answer. But moving in the circles that I do, I can tell you for sure it is very very high.

It's not fair, or right, but it's a fact of life. (And I do privately educate my children so I'm not bitter and twisted!) Besides which, I am uncomfortable with the notion that the state should treat some children as more special and worthy of a quality education than others. I'm all for streaming and teaching to ability, but that can be done in a mainstream mixed ability school surely?

Many teachers in grammar schools will tell you that the privately educated children often flounder a little once the coaching had stopped and their parents have relaxed, goal achieved, whilst the very bright state school children take off. Well that's all very well, but it's no consolation to the parents of the very bright, state educated also-rans who couldn't afford coaching or didn't realise they would need it to stand a cat in hell's chance!

Look at it from the prep school parents' POV - Paying for a grammar-crammer prep school is their investment for a stronger chance of a grammar place. No need to continue paying through senior school when a little pushery-shovery in the first few years secures you the very best education for free, is there? Private and state pupils will all find their own natural level once there, agreed, but once your child is in that outstanding school, with its fantastic teachers, and its beautiful building, with its impressive name and reputation to go on the CV, and an academically inspirational peer-group with no 'bad apples' to disrupt class and bring down the tone, who cares if they are bumping along at the bottom? The kudos is there for all to see, job done!

MillyR -I find it sad that you assume that your child will be mocked at Cambridge. I always enjoy your level-headed and rational contributions, and your pithy summaries of arguments, but I would beseech you to reconsider this frank prejudice. If your son is bright and loves his subject, that is all he will need to be deliriously happy at Cambridge. The pastoral system is excellent, and if it elitist, it is only intellectual elitism. Most of my friends there were from comprehensives and grammar schools, quite a few from the North, and we viewed the public school nobs of which there were extremely few thicko ones with amused detachment. Quite a lot were poor screwed-up fruitcakes anyway and one felt sorry for them more than anything!

Duchesse, yes I will very carefully consider all options before offering my son any advice! I have many years to think about it, and I am going to ask for lots of opinions before I get to that point. Ultimately, it will be my son's decisions not mine, but I will get plenty of advice before I say anything that might sway his decision. I also think that university choice depends a lot on subject choice, and we don't know what he will want to do yet.