Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

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

999 replies

seeker · 19/08/2012 10:34

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,

OP posts:
Toughasoldboots · 21/08/2012 20:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JollyBear · 21/08/2012 20:23

Greythorne There are two areas with grammars in Lancashire - Clitheroe and Lancaster.

My exbf failed the 11+. He got in on appeal, got A's from then on and went to Oxford. Very clever children with plenty of promise can fail the 11+.

rabbitstew · 21/08/2012 20:25

And does this show us whether "choice" is good or bad for state education? (The "choice" to go to a faith school, or to pay for a private school, or to go over the county border to a grammar school and mess up the calculations of local authorities as to how many school places they need to have available for their constituents, etc....). And is it a system of free choice if you can only choose a school if you fulfil certain criteria, or is it a system of deliberate segregation? And is it not unbelievably irritating when people say we should look at the wonderful example of grammar schools and private schools and copy that for more people when we all know they perform well largely for the reason that they exclude the majority of people and can by and large pick and choose their clientele? Roll them out to everyone and they'll lose their allure and their results record.

When it comes down to it, though, I suspect the majority of people would rather some people were kept out of their child's school and dealt with elsewhere, out of sight and out of mind. People don't really like to own their own community's trouble makers if they can actually either ship the trouble makers out of the way, or ship themselves off elsewhere for anything important.

Greythorne · 21/08/2012 20:25

Jollybear

Did not know about Clitheroe and Lancaster.

flexybex · 21/08/2012 20:27

Jollybear - that's good. Not in Bucks though.

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 21/08/2012 20:36

We keep talking about whether schools are comprehensive or not, but I'm wondering why we seem to be holding comprehensive education up as the best?

Why do people think comprehensive is best, and do the benefits of a comprehensive school really outweigh the negatives?

alemci · 21/08/2012 20:44

@Mordien - dad lived in Hackney but not the gentrified bit and i don't think it was particularly leafy. he was definitely from a working class background as was my mother who went to one uup North.

do you think though most people think themselves as Middle class nowdays. you can't really blame people for wanting to do the best for their children - why do they have to put up with mediocraty because they cannot afford the private sector.

grammar schools used to be the making of people and my parents definitely moved up the social scale as did many in their generation.

rabbitstew · 21/08/2012 21:05

Grammar schools used to be the making of people because not that many people actually needed an academic education. They no longer fulfil the same function because now a far greater proportion of people are expected to get an academic education whether they like it or not, and to stay in school for FAR longer than they ever used to be required to do. As a result, there is no logic to grammar schools any more - lots of us want and need what they do, not 23% of us. They have therefore ceased to be a means of giving a leg up to someone who wouldn't normally expect an academic education at all, because for generations family members had followed their parents into manual or blue collar jobs and could have done the same again, but for new opportunities.

Original poster
seeker · 21/08/2012 21:16

"consist of those at the grammar. And that your DS is a top set child. But he isn't going to the grammar, even after appeal. I don't mean to be harsh, but really."

Well, 655 at SATs- top 10% IQ, reading age 16- sounds a bit top setty to me, yellowtip..............z

OP posts:
LaVolcan · 21/08/2012 21:18

Pre-war grammar schools might have been the making of people - it was certainly the case with my father and his sister. Post war, I suspect people did well because of an expanding economy.

TheFallenMadonna · 21/08/2012 21:24

I "moved up the social scale" from a comprehensive school. My mum has 2 O levels and my dad left school at 15 with none. I have degrees and a professional job. Same goes for a lot of my school friends. Lots of my students (comprehensive) are going into higher education as the first in their family to do so.

MustTidyPlayroom · 21/08/2012 21:25

And there is Bacup and Rawtenstall Grammar in Lancashire as well.

scottishmummy · 21/08/2012 21:34

if your son is so gifted why no gs place
clearly other pupils exceeded his scores
that's the competitive nature if 11+ but you would have known that upon application

Original poster
seeker · 21/08/2012 21:38

Nope. Not competitive. Cut off pass mark. Maybe you don't know quite as much about the system as you think you do? Just a thought.......

OP posts:
LittleFrieda · 21/08/2012 21:39

"Well, 655 at SATs- top 10% IQ, reading age 16- sounds a bit top setty to me"

Eww.

LittleFrieda · 21/08/2012 21:40

seeker - how do you know he is top 10% IQ?

LittleFrieda · 21/08/2012 21:42

Seeker of course it's competitive, as the cut off score changes each year.

Greythorne · 21/08/2012 21:46

Did your HT explain why his appeal failed?

Do you know your son's mark?

Was your son having an off day?

Did he think he had performed well or did he feel it had gone badly?

Did you not pay for coaching on principle?

Do you regret that?

All genuine questions.

scottishmummy · 21/08/2012 21:46

clearly you have knowledge gaps about gs
and it's competitive nature
no wonder youre worked up

Original poster
seeker · 21/08/2012 21:47

Cutoff has changed by no more than 3 marks over the last 8 years.

The school told me his IQ centile. I think IQ testing is crap myself, but as somebody has decided to challenge my son''s abilities (a bit low of them but hey ho) I felt obliged to provide some evidence.

OP posts:
Yellowtip · 21/08/2012 21:49

Oh flexy that makes a nice story but no way no how does being scouted for a football club meet the criteria for appeals.

'Verbose'? I'd be prepared to bet a large sum of money that verbosity would piss off Appeals Panels no end. No merit in verbosity per se.

pianomama · 21/08/2012 21:54

seeker - this is not meant in any way nasty or unplesant.
But I cant help thinking that lots of people nowdays tend to blame system/goverment, anything else but themselves.
Just being bright is not enough,in fact the brighter the child is, the more they can and should learn and that requires work.
I dont think that primary state schools alone would prepare a DC for 11+, yet a lot of people on the forum use the term "tutoring" as a negative nasty activity.

Your DS probably would have done well if he was better prepared for the exam - and that was your responsibility.
Of cause there are bad days/bad luck, whatever, but I think that instead of blaming the unfair system, you could have invested more time in helping your DS. You know the best his weak/strong points, you should have helped him with preparation. At 10 nobody naturally have exam technique, no matter how bright. You would not even need a tutor, most of us could help DC to prepare for 11+.
You seem to want faireness without trying/working hard to achieve in competitive world and if you dont succeed you blame the system.

As I said many times before, the most important influence on DC is the family. Only you can and should teach DC how to learn and work hard.
You cant leave it up to school. It is easier to blame it on unfair system then taking a look at where you yourself perhaps could have done better?

Original poster
seeker · 21/08/2012 21:56

Absolutely- you always hear stuff about extra curricular activities winning appeals. Nope. Academic suitability only. Not even extenuating circumstances any more- except aen in some circumstances,

OP posts:
Yellowtip · 21/08/2012 21:58

Tbh I absolutely agree that 655 in SATs and a reading age of 16 should merit a gs place in a grammar school area such as Kent. Especially with the safety net of a HT appeal.

So what went wrong? Could your DS have deliberately messed up? He wouldn't be the first.

LittleFrieda · 21/08/2012 22:00

seeker - in what way is the Kent Test not competitive though? All those who score 360 with not less than 119 in each section are ushered through and those that did not acheive that are not admitted, or left to appeal or whatever? If there were lots of bright children, the threshold would rise. That is competitive isn't it? They have to select the best 23%, whatever the calibre of the cohort.