Would you choose to move to an area with the 11+ or an area with very good comps?

[arizonagirl]

We are busy debating where to move to (as some of you might have already noticed from previous threads - thanks everyone, so much help from these boards!!)

We are being realistic and realise that we will be unlikely to keep our four children in private - it was mainly a necessity after moving back from abroad.

We can move anywhere within commuting distance of London. I am tempted to look at Tunbridge Wells, Bucks for the 11+ and grammar schools but know how hard they are to pass. Ds is doing very well and so would probably have a good chance. But I am not sure all the stress/worry about one exam is worth it?

Just wondering what others would choose - an area with grammar school option or an area with good comps?? Also, are grammar schools that much better than comps - I'm not sure.

Any thoughts? Thank you!

Definietly into a catchment area with good comps
becuase if you fail the 11+ the alternatives are generally rubbish sadly

A vote for good comps from me too

Unless you have no doubt at all that all 4 children would sail into a grammar, then good comps!

If it's either/or, I'd go for the good comprehensives, too.

But lots of areas do have both. Ingatestone, for example, is in catchment for excellent grammars and a very good comprehensive.

And it's commutable to London.

comps every time, for the reasons stated above

Good comps. Otherwise you will feel duty bound to force your children to do extra study for the 11+ quite possibly at huge expense to you!
Why put them and you through this if you don't need to!

Also, having taught at some of the countries top comps, I am not sure Grammars are better. I don't have the same detailed knowledge of them obviously comps give you the ability to be fantastic at some things and terrible at others without feeling you are on your own!

Good comps. If you fail the 11+ what you're left with is usually crap pretty poor.

Excellent comps, or good comps in an area which also has grammar schools

Good comp.

The 11+ system offers stressful exams that have become unpassable without extra expensive tuition.

Also, there is additional stress for the kids, that they will envitably be seperated from their friends.

hmm, I see the OP says she would be unlikely to keep 4 children in private - so maybe she has the option of keeping one or two private, should the others pass the 11+ and those not. So for her the choice is slightly different than for someone with no option other than state.
I think for me it would just depend how bright the kids are and how good the grammars are (bearing in mind that not all are actually nice schools, even if they do get great results).

The Bucks non grammars are also very good, especially if you consider that the top 30% of kids get creamed off into grammars.

We moved here before I had any idea whether my kids were bright. The deciding factor for me was that the non grammars got as good results as the local comp in Harrow where we were living.

A number of the brighter kids from the non grammars move to a grammar for A levels too.

DH was relocated and had a large area to choose from. Went for the best comp we could find and bought within the catchment. DCs went to feeder primary school. Have since however, moved primary schools but are still in catchment - I hope. Have just applied for DDs place!

My primary reasons for going comp was that I wanted both DD & DS to go to the same school.

(Incidentally, prior to relocation was totally and utterly anti any type of league table system at all. What was the first thing I did when told of relocation - turned straight to the league tables .)

Wow, thanks for all this wonderful, helpful information. Off to google a few of your great ideas . Stethstark - possibly we could stretch to one/two at private - with sacrifices inevitable (not rich by any means) but I would loathe to do that. Would be so worried that it would cause problems between siblings later and would be extremely reluctant to go down this route. Thanks again!!

Good comp....... no contest

Have had a son go through grammar school, which didn't suit him at all (he's not that academic) - he would have had a broader curriculum at a comp (no comp option here, I'm afraid).

The grammar didn't do either food or textile tech, even though it is has technology status - obviously not subjects for boys, eh?
Even more surprisingly, it didn't offer Spanish (yes, it specialises in languages too.... how do they do that? )

I also thought there was very lazy teaching at the grammar (marking and content) - something I realised too late, I'm afraid.

But lots of areas do have both. Ingatestone, for example, is in catchment for excellent grammars and a very good comprehensive.

And it's commutable to London.

I'll second that recommendation, Animula. The school in Ingatestone is excellent, and the local grammar schools are very good too!

Personally, I would go for a good comp over a grammar school any day. It's a myth to assume that the grammar schools are necessarily better. Each school is different, and so is each child.

Good comps for me too.

Can you really not do lots of research and find an area that has both?

If it really is an either/or thing, I'd go for a grammar school personally, but that decision would only apply if all 4 of your children were likely candidates for the 11+

The Essex grammar schools don't have a catchment area so it is possible to live in an area with good comps that is also within a reasonable commute of Colchester/Chelmsford for access to the grammars.

The thing with grammar schools is that they do more or less guarantee that your DC will take and pass (often with top grades, though not always) GCSEs in academic subjects only. No childcare/tourism/media studies options.

So it depends on what you want and the type of child you have. A lazy but clever child may choose the easier subjects on offer at a comp which are then not acceptable at university later on (even though it is suggested that all GCSE/A level subjects are equal, unfortunately the universities do not seem to agree....). I know one of my DCs would have done that, and I would have been under intense pressure to give in. At least he achieved a decent set of GCSEs and A levels which enabled him to apply successfully to top universities.

Obviously comprehensives also offer a highly academic education too, but I imagine it could be harder to go for that option when there are other less strenuous options on offer!

I would say, though, some of the teaching at a grammar school leaves a lot to be desired, many with the attitudes of 'oh he'll get an A in X subject, they all do' (he didn't :)).

However, as you say, you have to be sure that they will pass the test in the first place which cannot be guaranteed in any way (although some grammar schools are less selective than others I believe) so it is a bit of a risky business.

It is also easy to think that they will naturally work hard, buckle down, choose sensible options when they are farily biddable primary school children. It's a different kettle of fish when they are teens which is why I preferred them not to have the choice really. Personally, I wanted mine to have a good grounding in academic subjects just so they would have a proper choice later on in what they wanted to do and not be held back from anything because they hadn't got the 'right' qualifications.

Another thing about grammar schools (which for my 3rd DC was the more important than the academic side of things) is that they tend to be smaller and have less (possibly no) bullying issues. It is ok to be 'clever' and no picking on for being a nerd or whatever. The other side of that is some children who have always been top of the class at their primary, won't be at a grammar school. They are all much of a muchness and some children don't like not being top dog any more!!!

thelastresort sorry but just have to correct you about "lazy options"

Universities will accept a number of these subjects at GCSE and even 1 of them at A Level.

It is a widley spread falsehood, reinforced by the media, that they will not accept these more creative subject-even Russell Group unis WILL accept one creative A Level.

Bullying goes on in all schools, a school which admits it is always preferable (they might do something). I know smaller schools with worse bullying problems than larger ones (even when OFSTED has praised them on their attitude to bullying, teachers have expressed surprise).

I'd go for good Comps, as you can't guarantee passing 11+, university actually isn't right for everyone. Good comps actually give little choice, 3 options, and compulsary 2x English, double or triple Science, Maths, LAnguage, 1/2 ICT, 1/2 RE, at my sons school. He struggles academically and still choose Geography, with a technology subject and an arts (compulsary at his school, but he might wiggle out of it).

The choices a good comp can offer maybe what your child needs when they are a disaffected 14 year old. (The competition to do something like a work based leisure course are much greater than to go to Uni). A lot of comps don't offer BTecs etc. and if they do its usually only for students who would not be predicted to get a C normally. (Some schools which look good on paper do go down this route, but they are not what I would call a good comp.)

You judge a good comp on the same grounds as any school: the atmosphere, the results (including Oxbridge), management systems, OFSTED and do they offer the kind of courses your kids might want?

If you say so QuickLookBusy :).

I think, though, that many universities state their minimum requirements but, in reality, some courses are very oversubscribed and preference is given to those applicants with more academic subjects at A level certainly. If you read the small print, many require a B at GCSE Maths, a foreign language at GCSE that sort of thing. It isn't a widely spread falsehood, reinforced by the media. It's actually something that parents need to know whilst being spun the line that Media Studies = Physics A level, if their child wants to apply for Medicine in the future, for instance! If they don't, then fair enough, it's not a problem.

All comprehensive schools also have to offer proper academic subjects too and are successful in getting many pupils into top universities. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. But it is one of the reasons that there are disproptionally more private school pupils at university (not because they are naturally more clever).

However, that is a whole new discussion :).

*disproportionally

Good comps the 11 plus is a nightmare and the alternatives in areas such as ours where they still have it do tend to me a harsh contrast.