The other thread will no longer accept messages but I wanted to make some more points

[fivecandles]

Lequeen, I do find it utterly bizarre that, as a parent, you or anybody else, would accept that if your child missed getting into a grammar school by a couple of marks you would be perfectly happy to accept that meant your child was not academic and therefore should pursue a more vocational route whatever that means.

One of my dc would almost certainly fail to get into a GS. This does not mean I think she should take up a hairdressing course and stop learning GCSEs. I see no good reason why she shouldn't get a good academic education with as much support as possible and go on to university. She has suggested she might enjoy primary teaching and I think she'd make an excellent teacher. The idea that she shouldn't be able to go to university or learn languages and should settle with her lot just because she's not ever going to be a nuclear physicist is absolutely staggering.

I also find your idea that it would be better to segregate underperforming students into an entirely different school for their self-esteem staggering.

Why can't you just be honest about it lequeen. There are no advantages whatsoever for the majority of pupils who do not get into the GS. All the advantages go to the kids who DO get in and these are the pupils who are already doing well (and the research indicates most likely to be well off).

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that privileged and clever kids don't deserve the very best education and I absolutely agree that they should be challenged and supported but this can and should and is being done in the same school as students who are struggling academically and are likely to be from very different social backgrounds are also supported to achieve.

Grammar schools can be brutal, one of the numerous reasons I don't want my dd to go the local grammar is because it has a reputation for bullying, the comp is a much friendlier place.

I think Lequeen the reason you don't rate them is because they are a secondary modern rather than a comprehensive.

If you want your kids to get an elite and separate education then I think it's fair enough to go private. What's not ok is for taxpayers money to be spent on schools that benefit only the elite and exclude and disadvantage the majority.

I repeat it would be like alloweing hospitals to select only the healthiest patients and bar the rest. Then crow about their excellent mortality figures.

I agree-if they are comprehensives in a grammar school area they are not comprehensive-they need the top end. In our area they are all in the Times top schools list. The majority of parents are high achievers themselves and demand the best-the schools can't afford not to deliver it.

'exotic if I rated our local comps then I would be happy to send DD1 there. But, I don't rate them.'

That's ok, lequeen, your choice. But the part that's hypocritical is where you say it's ok for other people's kids to go there (the ones that don't get into the GS).

As I said before I think you can have very close to a true comprehensive in a grammar area, although it takes a lot of hard work to keep the bright students. However I suspect the schools that LeQueen has experience of are secondary moderns, they do not sound like a school you would choose to keep your children at if you had another option.

LeQ, it is difficult for you, as you have a choice between a grammar and a secondary modern.

You do not have a true comprehensive available, and so cannot see the benefits that such a school could bring - and you cannot send your child to something that does not exist.

I do see the problem that you have. However, as twinklytroll says, a proper, well-run, true comprehensive can open your eyes to how things can be.

However, I am also suprised that, having seen this very real downside, which could be avoided through the creation of true comprehensives and the abolition of the grammar school, you instead go the other way and want EVERYONE to have the school system that is causing you such a problem...

In my DCs comprehensive fights were not tolerated! They would be suspended.

So why are you not arguing for true comprehensives?

I can see how parents of top performing students might want their students to be taught separately BUT please be honest about your motivation.

OK. FWIW:

My motivation is that I want my kids to be raised with a strong and consistent ethos of knowledge and education being valued, and them feeling valued for their work and achievements. I want them to be around other kids from families that value knowledge and education as much as possible, to strengthen these values. I don't want them to feel pressured to compromise these values in order to fit in and avoid being bullied. I also want them to be taught at a level that stretches and inspires them, with a sense of focus and minimal disruption.

I'm honestly delighted for anyone who can feel confident about finding this at their local comp. Unfortunately I can't afford the house prices in any of the areas where such confidence is justified.

That is well put teacher. And I do suspect that however blase leq has tried to sound if her dd did not get into the GS, she would actually be bitterly disappointed. The only people that benefit from grammar schools are the ones who get in and the only people who argue in favour of them are the ones who are likely to get in.

No, you have never experienced a comprehensive - unless you have been in others you have not mentioned in this thread. The rider about 'supportive proactive parents' is not relevant. First see a decent comprehensive in a non-grammar area, then comment.

'I'm not saying it's okay for other children to go there'

You have advocated a 2 tier system where the non grammar schools are always going to be inferior. This assumes that you think it's okay for other people's kids to get that inferior education while you will go private.

exotic if I rated our local comps then I would be happy to send DD1 there. But, I don't rate them.

In that case-don't support they system-why should it be good enough for anyone's DC?-they are all equally precious. Those who have the worst start in terms of parents need the best schools.

You see I respect that point of view, confidence. What I cannot stand is those people who argue that grammar schools benefit everybody which is utter tosh.

I think even in the best comps you would not get EVERY parent to be fully supportive and engaged in their child's learning, no. But I do think that's rather a bizarre expectation. How strange to want your child to be educated in a bubble that in no way resembles normal life. I also think it's pretty horrible not to want your kids to mix with kids of whose PARENTS you don't approve.

My "comp" is in a nice area, parts of our intake are affluent , others are not. Parents are genuinely supportive although ambition is low. We have parents and students who place little value on education and behaviour, however they do not dominate and therefore the school is able to guide most of its students successfully through school to achieve results they can be proud of. The problem arises then the negative forces are widely held, this is much more likely to happen in a secondary modern.

But lequeen, you have said you would send your daughter to a private school.

If you didn't have the means to do this you have made it very clear that you would be very, very disappointed.

So you must understand that many other parents in your area (and in the whole country if you had your way and grammar schools were reintroduced) would feel this way too.