'new' grammar schools in kent...

[oliverreed]

well, not technically. The local authority have been given the go-ahead for two (I think) annexe grammar schools in Sevenoaks. Gove is surely rubbing his hands with glee. I agree with the decision as pressure on places in this area is causing a lot of heartache for many families whose children are travelling a long way, but is it paving the way for the creation of new grammar schools.
Would be interested to hear your thoughts?

Not sure how I feel tbh. Our area was the first to scrap the two tier system and become totally comprehensive. Harold Wilson said our school would be the flagship to destroy every bloody grammer school in the country. But it didn't happen and they kept them in the south.

I didn't realise this until my DD was around 12 and I joined mumsnet looking for info about G & T. Basically the students in her year do Ok but out of 100 pupils, 1 might get into Oxbridge, 4 to Russell groups, non into Vet,Med,Dent, except DD as andaccess applicant. So all in all I think we need Grammer Schools.

My brother passed the 11+ & went to grammar school, I failed it.

Talked to my mum about this recently & she said 'ah, but you would have done well wherever you went'...if she was trying to flatter me it didn't really work as I was bullied for 5 years at my comprehensive & was mostly ignored by the teachers because I could be relied on to sit quietly and work without them breathing down my neck.

Sometimes, y'know, you WANT a teacher to breathe down your neck, to remind you that you still exist...

I went on to do my A levels at a grammar and was much happier there.

I don't like the system at all, but it did work for me. Well, perhaps I would have been bullied at a grammar school too, pre-A level, who knows...

Seeker
they are indeed comps in effect
BUT
with the dual campus approach are a bearable way for LEAs to switch from selective to comp
and having my kids at a HUGE comp, it is only the setting that makes it bearable as my kids rarely have to share rooms with carrot crunchers
running
parents who are willing to pay will never go away - a fair chunk of the boarding parents in the UK are not British after all

it all comes down to starting from where we are today, choosing where we want to be and thinking laterally to get there

No system will ever be fair tbh and money buys advantages.

exoticfruits - just because the alternative to grammar schools was secondary moderns last time doesn't mean it's the only option - perfectly possible it could be a good but less narrowly academic education, which doesn't after all suit everyone. As we are becoming aware, we don't have enough graduate jobs for everyone who graduates - yet have lots of Polish plumbers or whatever because we don't produce enough native-born, and many employers cannot find school leavers with the skills they need.

Silly to waste years teaching the non-academic academic subjects when they could be learning other stuff they'd enjoy and that would be useful.

Plus grammar streams at comps just aren't as good, sorry - my dh was in one and it's not a patch on my grammar.

I really do not get why so many English people are opposed to the grammar system. I am from Northern Ireland where the eleven plus is alive and kicking. Sein fein fought to have it removed but were met with huge opposition as most in NI do not see the comprehensive system as better. The problem isn't the grammar schools, it is under performing secondaries that need to be improved. I went to a grammar, it was fab, did three sciences for gcse and could have done two modern languages. I have lots of friends who went to secondaries and did equally well to myself in the years after school. At the end of the day it is the quality of teaching that counts.

so did they do the same subjects and have the same university employment opportunities that you did
if so WTF was the point of duplicating teachers across the two schools?
if not then your mates got short changed

No, they did not do all the same subjects as me, however that is not the fault of the grammar school is it?? My school did not force the neighbouring secondary to only offer double award science, and only one language. We did ten compulsory gcse, they did seven or eight. If a child did well at secondary they could transfer to grammar at a level. As I said, the issue is not with the grammar, it is with improving the secondaries. Of my friends that didn't go to grammar school, all are in decent jobs that they are happy in. Some have gone into construction trades and would happily say that university wasn't for them. There isn't the same stigma in NI.

Like it or not, some children are just more academically able and if a grammar caters for their educational needs better, so be it. My best friend is one of four, two went to grammar, two did not. Barrister, Fire Fighter, Teacher and Police Officer. All equally happy and with decent careers.

peace- I always think our town would be pfect for system like yours. We have q grammar school at one end and a high school at the other- and 90% of the town's children go to one or the other. There is practically no communication between the two- they are half a mile apart! They don't even play much sport against each other- the grammar is a rugby school, the high plays football. it's an insane system- how anybody can think it's even remotely sensible defeats me

It is a sensible system as it recognises that not all children are the same and allows them to be taught at a pace that is right for them.

But it decides which child is which on one day when they are 10. And there is no opportunity for later developers- or even for children who peak early. And it is q system that favours the middle classes.

On average, 2% of grammar school children are on eligible for free school meals. About 17% of children in the wider school population are.

think its a good idea. I grew up near sevenoaks and use to leave the house at at 7.00 each morning to catch a coach to school and would get home about 5.30 each afternoon. And then start homework. We didn't know any different (as pretty much all kids in the area were bussed to grammar schools or to the two church comprehensives), but now when I see school kids swarming at the supermarket from 3.00 where I live now, I wonder what a different childhood/adolescence I could have had without 3+ hours in a coach each day - time for out of school activities for example.

Having said that, as a working parent the existing travel arrangements would work quite well - wraparound childcare from 7 til 5.30!

There will always be a few children who have a bad day when sitting the exam, which is of course unfortunate. The system does have disadvantages and I agree it does cater for the middle classes, however, I feel the positives do outweigh the negatives. All schools should be excellent, but blaming the grammars for the failures of the secondaries or comprehensives is unfair. I also think the example of free school meals could be attributed to other factors than just the grammar schools being biased against those from poorer families.

It is interesting when they triggered a ballot on the future of grammar schools in north Yorkshire a few years ago 70% of parents wanted to keep them but only about 25% of children would have got into them. I wonder how the parents who campaigned for this new gs in sevenoaks would feel if their dc didn't pass the 11+? Probably like seeker I imagine.

I agree that a grammar school system is divisive, but certainly fairer than the system we have now in many areas - let me give you our own example.

We don't live in a grammar school area. Our local secondary is a sink (think drug riddled, 30% A-C, poor teaching, high staff turnover, you get the picture).

If we were in a grammar school area the overwhelming majority of parents would let their children have a go and/or do some tutoring themselves or pay £25 per hour for a tutor for a few months. This would be within reach of most parents, high earners, middle class, working class alike.

The current situation is much more divisive as only the superwealthy can afford the tutoring for the selective indies and then commit to 11k+ per child per year. This is the reality and I am sure we are not a unique set up.

Moving to a decent comp up the road would set you back 800k for a 3 bed terrace or if you want to rent the same house you are talking £2500k per month - and even then there would be no guarantees of getting in. Of course that comp does very well - selective by postcode.

Most people cannot afford this "fair system", which is now just advantaging a very very small percentage of people who can afford the indies or 800k for a small house.

We live in Bucks - a grammar school area.

The 11+ score is (or was) the best score of two papers on two separate days about a week apart.

Not only is there the 11+, there is a vigorous appeals process used by parents whose children have narrowly failed, or unexpectedly failed. Their is also the 12+ for late developers. There is also the possibilitiy of getting into the 6th form.

So it's not a one off pigeeonholing on the basis of one days performance at 11.

Personally I would build tutoring into the school curriculum to level the playing field between wealthy and poor paerents (some of whom can't even afford to buy old test papers), but at the moment it is forbidden.

mumzy - I campaigned for the GS in Sevenoaks. My motivation in doing so is that we live in an area that is unfairly disadvantaged by the 11+ and I wanted this to be redressed. It is nothing to do with whether my children get in or not.

I just want the options that everyone else in Kent has.

What are the positives? The only people who benefit are the 23% of the cohort who get a "better" education. The other 77% of the cohort are actively disadvantaged, educationally and in many cases psychologically by the system.

Incidentally- it is overwhelmingly not the middle class children who "have a bad day". Or fail, as we spade callers put it!

I live in Kent. I know more than one family who has moved here for the 'wonderful' grammar school system, only to be completely flummoxed when their child fails the test.

As someone said earlier, no one ever campaigns to bring back secondary moderns.

The positive in Sevenoaks is that we don't just have easy access to secondary moderns, we have them to a grammar too. Like everywhere else in the county.

I meant what are the positives to the system- not what are the positives to the new Sevenoaks back door new grammar!

I'm a believer in the comprehensive school system, my dd is still in juniors but my ds is in Y8 of a comprehensive in a town often looked down on and scorned by posters on here. The school is a large one with a high number of FSD, EAL and SEN but they serve all levels of learning well, including those like my ds who is ahead in some areas and behind in others.

Maybe I am biased as it's likely to have got in to a grammar because he has the right skills for the 11+ but would have struggled in some areas once there, for what it is worth his science teacher is certain he will be taking 3 sciences and a MFL are compulsory for all.

Oh. None, as far as I can tell.

Positives - parents can look smug when they tell you that little Johnny's going to the grammar school.