to wonder why grammer school entrance exam marks are required to be higher for children sitting exam educated in private schools?

[1dilemma]

Have thought this before and started thinking about it again after reading some of the 'are private schools better thread?'

so what do you wise mumsnetters think?

Surely if the marks required were lower for state edcated pupils it would remove some of the advantage parents (grandparents) are buying and even things up a bit?

I've thought 2 potential problems are that the state would not want to admit that state education might not be equal (in some cases) and there is tutoring to consider but.....

we do it for university, we do it for medical school etc etc

so what do you think?

(will be going out later today so will def. reply but might not be until later)

WHOA now Kemble! DD goes to a chavvy state school where she learns to say, "ain't" and "we done maffs" I'll have you know. She was very bright and articulate until the age of five but I have seen first-hand as a teacher myself how her potential has been screwed, for want of a better word.

SomeGuy DD is very bright but she is putting her considerable intellect into er, minimising it IYKWIM? There are no grammar schools where we live now btw.

OK, I get it now. I thought you meant you'd moved her out of her state school.

As someone who lives in catchment for a grammar school the private schools here do not coach for 11+. Reason? One has an attached secondary school that they want the junior prep pupils to go to and the other private school goes up to 13 so is focused on common entrance.

Apparently everyone coaches, whether they are at the private schools or state. Once at grammar school lots of private tutoring continues to keep the school's place in the league tables .

Ds says 'nuffink' and 'yeah' despite his private school education .