Those of you in favour of grammar schools, come and tell me what to say to my Ds...

[seeker]

He woke up crying in the night because the reality had just hit him that he won't be going to school with his close friends in September because he failed the 11+ in September. "I can't be very bright, can I mum, or I would have passed" " no, it was just one of those things-you're going to a good school, you'll be fine" "I know- but if i was clever I'd be going to school with X and Y" "You are clever- look at your SATs-you'll be in the top set at the high school because of those" " it's not SATS that are important, though, it's the 11+"

Do you want to have more kids feeling like that? Then campaign for more grammar schools,

Hmmm I see both sides of this.

My dad was a grammar school boy in one of the country's top grammar schools.He was a gardener's boy with both parents in service.He went on to have a very successful career,MBE the lot.Only one in his family who went and went on then to further education,his siblings did well though.His mother was even brighter but was put into service and never went to grammar.I suspect things would have been very diff if she had of gone.He is v bright and mucked around at primary school as he was never stretched,grammar was the making of him.

My mum didn't go(they grew up together) and has confidence issues even though she is clearly bright,I wonder if the 11+/the system is to blame.

Me I have twin boys.1 is uber bright like my dad,already starting to get lazy through lack of stretching.Grammar would suit him down to the ground but his twin although v bright too wouldn't suit grammar,he'd hate the pressure.

So what to do?Damned if I do,damned if I don't.I have another child too.Don't want to put 2 into fail but don't want to deprive swot boy,don't want to not put 2 in and have them later saying you wrote us off.Then there is the tutoring question which I don't agree with but I don't want to set any up for failure and if everybody else is....

As an aside I have a friend with a niece who had illness last year,has moved a lot and had zero tutoring.She did one practice paper with her dad the day before and got in to one of the top grammar schools in the country so I guess if it's meant to be it will happen and this is as it should be.

Parenting is hard,I hate all these worries and decisions.

"In a comprehensive he moves up and if a child isn't coping they move down. You can wait until they are 14 before you decide whether they can do 3 sciences."

To my mind this is the absolutely critical thing. Very few people these days argue for totally mixed education. But in a good comprehensive with setting (not streaming) you get the benefit of the grammar school in being able to provide education tailored to the needs of each group of children.

Plus you can deal with children who have varying ability in different subjects (eg dd's friend who has a reading age of 6 due to severe dyslexia but is extremely able in maths) and with the fact that children mature at different rates.

I find it hard to see the arguments against comprehensives, to be honest, once you introduce setting. What advantage is there in taking off one lump of children into a different school - you're even disadvantaging those who do pass the 11+ in some ways in that they won't have the opportunity to, for example, take some 'non-academic' subjects if they have aptitude for them.

Tough did you tutor both,just the weaker one or neither and how did you handle the "failure" letter?

"Appalling ok. I think it's appalling. I am allowed to think that and express my coherent views because I live in GSA and I chose not to send my bright child to one because I am not a hypocrite."

Oh good. When are you going to start expressing these coherent views?

Sorry, what's the difference between setting and streaming?

"Parenting is hard,"
It certainly is and there will and have been times when we even the most conscientiousness parents make "wrong decisions."
We as parents do have more choice than 20 years ago and are more informed.
The tutoring question is already being debated on another thread but how can you stop it? There are always going to be unfairness in the system whilst grammar schools exist.
seeker there are many children in the part of Kent that we used to live who don't go to grammar schools but do as well as those who do in fact some do better, many "high schools" were we are assured by friends are excellent and as you've said on previous threads if not you will intend to work with the school to ensure that they provide the type of education that you believe can be and will be as good as that provided by the top independent schools so what is the problem?

seeker, If next to none of the bright FSM kids go to the grammar then presumably they are all going to your son's school. Are they among the 10 able dc that you speak of there or have they fallen under that radar too?

greythorn, streaming means you are in the same stream for all subjects, so if you are top for maths then you must be top for English, languages, sciences and everything else too. Setting means you can have different top sets for each subject, so you can be top for English, bottom for maths and in the middle for science.

seeker you say we are talking about a system and the politics of it and there was me thinking we were talking about a sad little boy who woke up in the middle of the night crying because he feels a failure.

Sheesh. You really do take the biscuit.

You placed your son in this postition. No one else.

You could have avoided the test as many other families do. You could have said to your son that the system stinks and you aint playing. You could have said the high school is a good school and he will do really well. That the grammar school is not full of the super bright and many of them will be at the high school. People do this. People on this thread have said that they have done this.

Or you could have said, listen son, the system stinks but the grammar school is better. You'll be with your academic peers, who BTW are all being prepped, so we'll do that for you. It's not right but what are you gonna do?

Instead you've sold him a pup. You've got him to take the test but do no prep. What kind of half baked crap is that? So now he has the worst of all worlds: the idea that the grammar is better but he failed.

And yet you still want to endlessly debate?

Sheesh, sheesh and sheesh again.

tough if t'internet is to be believed, your stats are about right. Under half of all DC in Kent actually take the test.

I think too many of you have a touching faith in tutoring for the 11+. I would expect it only to make a difference on the absolute fringe. But these strident views about the need for tutoring do have the very real downside of deterring applications from those who can't pay.

Also, the FSM measure which is often trotted out is a very, very crude measure. There are a great many parents 'on benefits' whose children are benefitting from a gs education who are on very modest incomes but don't fall into the less than £16k pa category. And there are plenty who aren't claiming benefits who are also on a modest income and who would be offended by the idea that they bought their way in.

I give up with you Seeker. You are so utterly blind with your total complacency and self serving attitude on this topic that even Caroline Benn and Fiona Millar themselves would consider you a liability. My views are coherent and straight forward. I think grammars are hideous, live in an area with them but because of my views, did not even enter my dd for the test. She scored 665 btw. She will go to ye old local bog standard. No angst on my behalf or hers.

Seeker

You say the high school is good, that your son is bright and that you are achingly middle-class. You also state that you are quite sure he will do well at the high school where the range of subjects offered is not inferior to the grammar except there's no Latin. You also state a bit tetchily that this is not a disaster for your son or you and that of course you are not obsessing about this in RL (as that would be silly).

Apart from snidey comments from strangers about pass / fail, what exactly is the problem?

Yes, we all get that you are against grammars, sorting of kids into sheep and goats at 11 and the negativity that surrounds perceived failure. These are high principles which you can promote via your MP and local council, but really have no relevance to your son because as you keep telling us he is going to do fine.

So, why keep on postig about your son's specific case when actually you really the grammar system won't affect your son academically, only possibly on a self esteem level, and you have had plenty of people on this thread tell you that you need to buck up because your attitude is probably more detrimental to his self esteem than a random off the cuff comment from an unknown teacher.

I would have enormous sympathy for you if the high school was in special measures, with discipline issues, absenteeism, drug taking, pregnancy and inter-school violence rife. And if the high school only offered BTecs in Hotel Management and Media Studies.

That would be a scandal.

And remember that for many, many of the disadvantaged around the country, that is the reality and they have no options.

You need to get over the self esteem stuff and move on. Fight the good fight for FSM kids at a political level without using your son as a case study as he really undermines, rather than strengthens, your argument.

Agree with Mordion. The difference is not about subjects studied but all about pace.

My dad went to one of those top Kent ones,I think things were different back and there wasn't such a bun fight.My mums brother went to the other top grammar(there were 2),not sure it was handled well hence the confidence issues.Back then I think girls were dumbed down a bit too.I'm determined not to stuff up in the same way.

Thankfully we don't live in Kent and our local other schools are "good" so there won't be so much pressure.Grammar would suit dtwin 2 though down to the ground,I suspect he's on the spectrum somewhere but I really want to handle it right iykwim.

Oh, and by the way, I never stepped foot in South Africa but I knew apartheid was wrong. scottishmummy's being Scottish does not preclude her from having a valid opinion.

I suppose I pay to segregate mym children with very clever children of the same sex in a sense. That means in fact you get a very racially, culturally and religiously mixed group which is brilliant and the thing they have in common is brains so everyone does well who is in that group usually. It is not too different from grammar schools really. We are all born with different abilities, looks, personalities and most of us want to advantage our own children which is why we feed them well and read to them and help them rather than ignoring our own and only doing that with the children of a neighbour. There is nothing wrong with favouring your own child. That micro duty is the key to our children doing well and parents shoudl be saluted for doing that.

I believe you have taken this very badly on a personal level because you buy into the local rhetoric about the grammar being better. Your son might also be taking it badly.

But given that the only issue is one of self-esteem and not academic results, my point I made way upthread stands: what happens when something else knocks his self-esteem?

You seem singularly incapable of bouncing back after disappointment.

Seeker you make me laugh with you statements of how the grammar system only suit the children of educated,affluent,aware parents.
That is exactly what the head teacher appeal is for.
In Kent, the head teacher of your primary can appeal on behalf of any child who did not pass the Kent test. This is before the results of the test are released to the parents so you might never know your child missed the mark.
This was to allow the HT to try and secure a gs place for a disadvantaged child or one with additional needs, or one who just flunked on the day but should be at a gs. At our primary, 3 children got places this year on HT appeal that I know off.
It's funny how you don't mention this.. But I guess it's because it doesn't suit you, given your ds wasn't,t deemed selective by his ht appeal either.

Great snakes!
I agree with Xenia.

What is the world coming to?

I too am in Kent and my three older children are all at grammar - girls' school is excellent, boys' grammar here not so great right now. But there are no other state schools in the area I would even consider sending my children to.

DS is Y10 and very dyslexic - grammar is the only one that provides support for him. There just aren't the resources in the other schools for specific support for a boy who goes in with L5s for Science and Maths and a 4b for English. So so wrong, but they have so many issues to deal with. He wasn't tutored for his 11 plus.

I agree it's not a fair system but there is no other school round here I'm prepared to send dd3 to. I agree on one hand that if you hate the system you should not put your child through it, but round here you don't have a huge choice. I'm sure that having being entered, Seeker gave her ds the right preparation by learning the techniques and trying some old papers. Everyone does that, and it's very different from tutoring and much better than poor dcs being confronted with question types they've never seen before!

I have a searchable history of opposition to selective education which goes back since well before either of my children was of secondary school age.

There is an interesting and important debate to be had- and there is political will for the reintroduction of grammar schools. Which would be a terrible idea for everyone except the educated affluent middle classes. Who of course need more privilege....

But if people would rather persist in dodging the serious debate by making this about me being outraged that my son didn't pass his 11+, so be it.