Is everybody happy with their choice of a selective secondary education over an non-selective one?

[PooshTun]

DS's primary school wasn't particularly academic so he found the transition during the first three weeks at his selective school very tough going. They get three pieces of work a day and in theory they should only take 20 minutes each. In practice, for the first week DS would be up until 10pm doing it. He would then drag himself off to bed half asleep.

Most of his classmates came up from prep schools so they were use to the academic pressure. Also, since they had already been introduced to the material in Year 6 they were whizzing through the homework.

DS's middle initial is 'F' and during those dark days he would often say to us that it stood for 'failure' :(

Things werren't great on the friends front either. Most of his classmates had known each other for years from their time at the prep school so DS found it difficult breaking into these friendship groups. DS ended up going to the library during breaktime because he had no friends to hang out with.

Round about week 4 things started to come together. He got use to the routine, he was coping well with the work and he had made some great friends and friends begets friends.

Now, looking back, DS can laugh at his 'F' is for failure remarks. He looks forward to school, is very active in athletics and music, doing very well academically and was recently made 'editor' of the Year 7 newsletter.

During the first few 'dark' weeks DP and I did doubt that we did the right thing in placing DS at such an academic school. But everyone pushed on and now we are 110% sure that we made the right decision.

But that is us. Any parent out there who have regretted their decison to chose a selective education for their DCs?

Oh sorry Poosh should have made my self clear, yes the boy had won a place at one of the KEGS and did the first term and left.

Y5 Metabilis, so we're that much closer. The test is in exactly 4 months. Never mind OFSTED, DD4 is being taught in one room with four year groups and one teacher and beyond that I'd better be diplomatic and say no more. This is what the tutoring threads miss, the wildly variegated educational backgrounds of those attempting the test. Poosh would have it that a parent taking a child out to any activity which could be labelled remotely 'educational' equates to 'tutoring'. I'd tend to say that a child being taught in the only viable village school with one teacher to four year groups needs at least a modicum of extra help. And I'd also say that a lot of parents waste a huge amount of money on paid-for tutors because the outcome isn't likely to be vastly affected by that. The outcome is down to innate intelligence, type of school and parental interest. Some waste money on external help because their child will pass the test anyway; some waste it because their child won't pass the test despite it. For those few bright children with poor primary schooling and parents not able to help, it might count.

I tutor, but never children I think would find grammar school hard. Sadly, that means I have a fantastic record of children who pass and regularly have to tell parents that I have no magic trick to get children through the test! I'm always very open with parents.

I keep my fees low because I only teach people I know. I have also taught a couple of children unpaid in the past.

My older 3 (of 4) are at grammar schools. It has been amazing for my children - dds 1 and 2 who were both on the old G and T register have had an amazing education that has suited them (they are now years 13 and 11), but equally grammar school has suited my very bright but very dyslexic ds (Y10). He would not have received any support in other local schools because he went in on Level 5s/4 for English. I was told he was way above the level to receive support as other children needed it more. At grammar, he gets the support he deserves. Just because he's bright and works hard, he certainly should not miss out as he would at our non-selective schools.

Interesting goingmad. You see I think many tutors are 'open' but too many parents are desperate. I think very few tutors get children passing the test who they think wouldn't pass it on the first assessment. And few failing who they assessed as being in with a shout.

Thanks goingmad - I have a dd with mild dyslexia who's due to get level 5s or 6s - I worried if she'd be ok with the grammar due to the dyslexia so it's nice to hear that it shouldn't be a problem or indeed an advantage to be at a grammar in that situation.

Yellowtip - do I take it you don't have semi-selectives where you are? With 7 or is it 8?) kids you could have saved yourself a lot of hassle by going for a school that selects but also has sibling places! My dd2 is in year 5 and due to go to her sister's semi-selective grammar, and I am so glad not to be going through the whole exam stress now again... I found it stressful enough once - can't imagine going through it that many times. Though I suppose you're an old hand it now...

@bread I think it varies from school to school. There are quite a few young people with SEN at the GS DD1 attends, she is one of them. I don't think the provision there overall is any better or worse than at the comp where DS is. As has always been the case, so far as I can see, even the best SENCO can only do so much. If an individual subject teacher is one of those who 'doesn't believe' in things, or who thinks that it's so sad what a pity never mind grit your teeth and get on with it love, or (the most common thing) if an individual subject teacher is the sort of teacher who either doesn't read the memo or doesn't remember having read the memo or claims to have not got the memo, then there will be issues which will only be resolved once the SENCO signal goes up. Both the Seco dary schools I'm involved with have staff who have taught or are teaching my kids who fit all the above categories. They also have great SENCOs who do sort stuff out (in the main) and members of staff who are brilliant from the outset. But I wouldn't say that one school was better or worse than the other. Also my DD1 and DS have different things - DD1 is severely dyapraxic, DS is dyslexic and mildly AS.

No bread, no semi-selectives here, just how each does on the day.

I completely see the point about a child with dyslexia scoring 5s and above. That was DD2s profile and she'd have gone to the wall in a comp, I'm fairly sure.

Though my dd1 told me a horrifying story of an exam she did this summer - something involving lots of writing (English?) and 2 girls had extra time for SEN reasons. At the end of the exam, the teacher invigilating saw these two girls still writing and infront of everyone, accused them of cheating for writing after the end of the exam and ripped their papers up in front of everyone!!! Said teacher then realised her mistake - presumably utterly humiliated, cue lots of apologies - if it had been my dd I would have wanted major disciplinary action against said teacher. Ha ha - what an arse.

So no, I know not everyone in the school is quite on board how to deal with SEN appropriately. And i'm doing what I can to resolve the issues before she starts, as I think the time to resove things on top of homework will be too hard once she starts.

How does a semi selective work? I've never heard of them!

Poosh - you are obsessed.

The why part is the interesting question.

Some semi-selectives may allow siblings of children who got in on the test to follow in on their coat-tails - others don't.

My dd's school takes 25% on acade,mic tests, 10% on music tests, 10% on distance and then siblings. Any places left over go on distance. Basically, in most cases, the eldest child from the family gets in on academic (or music) grounds, unless they live on top of the school. Then siblings - most of whom take after their siblings and so are also bright - get in but without needing to take the exam. In practice, this means the overall standard is much higher than you'd imagine from the 25% on academic exam figures, as those who get in on musical grounds tend to be bright too. So it's only the kids who get in on distance and their siblings who are not in some way selected, whether by being bright themselves or having a family that is. In practice, a number of the distance kids are v bright too, as families who really want the school move near just in case their dcs fail the exam. So the school has all the advantages of high academic standards you'd find in a fully selective school, but is a far more chilled experience for parents (and younger siblings) once the eldest has got in.

I chose it over the super-selective I went to, which i felt had got far too pressurised in these days of league tables. The semi-selective keeps families together, which gives a nice atmosphere at the school, and because there are students who got in on distance rather than academic criteria, the general atmosphere is less pressured - you don't feel you'll be letting the side down if you get a B at A Level! Plus my dds' school is esp good at refusing to tell people on what grounds they got in let alone their precise mark, so everyone starts on an equal footing (in practice, you can tell in some cases, eg if you live too far away to have got a distance place, but overall it stops kids comparing marks in entrance exams, which I have heard of in some schools. )

Don't know which other areas have semi-selectives - i'm in S Herts and we have 4 here - all are v poular and get excellent results.

So a really bright child might not get a place because it's been taken by the sibling of a bright child?

I'll have to think about that- but it seems even more outrageous than straight selection to me!

@seeker I agree. It sounds like the worst kind of entrenchment of privilege, and I note that there is still the option to buy a place.

No, seeker, a really bright child would get a place. A middling child might not get a place.

I would have thought you'd approve of distance places going to local kids - the area my dd's school is in is v poor, so it is not expoensive to 'buy' yoursef a place if that is what you wish. Most of the distance places are taken by v poor local ethnic minority kids, though - who as a result, get the chance to have a great local and free education.

What's not to like?

plus a really bright child who missed out can apply to other similar local semi-selectives (as wel as a couple of super-selectives) with different tests and different cut-off marks in the tests, so any bright child will have several bites at the cherry. It doesn't all go on a single pass/fail 11+ exam.

Plus we have a number of excellent local comps.

So generally, a win-win.

tiggytape's info re siblings is wrong in my area - they are guaranteed a place, below only the 10% distance kids. They do not need to take let alone pass the entrance exam.

In the case of my dd2, I know how high the standards are for dd1, so would not have considered taking up the sibling place unless I was sure dd2 could cope - as she is getting level 5s and 6s I now feel happy she'll be OK; otherwise I would have been more than happy to send her to one of the comps.

My ds, for example, will not be taking up his sibling place - because it is single sex (two linked schools) and whilst I like that for girls i prefer mixed sex for boys. So he will be doing exams in year 6 or going to a comp, whichever seems more appropriate (he's only 5 so too early to say).

The schools he'd be doing exams for are semi-selectives but mixed ones - but i don't view it as 'unfair' that some kids will get priority by being siblings. Not that I have no future children so would not benefit if we were 'entitled to' further sibling places. I'm happy with the system as it is - so are all local parents i know - it provides stability for families, but with the option of a range of opportunities for kids who want a more academically-focused school. The comps get excellent results too - not as good, because the starting point of the kids is lower on average, but very good nevertheless.