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,

exoticfruit - you are right. I have 6 and they are all completely different.
There "more academic" ones , or musical or artistic benefit from developing their stronger sides, the better they are at something , the more is required of them in my house. By the time they get to 10/11 you as a parent know if they are up for selective exams,schools etc.

You certainly do pianomamma. However I am very thankful that they were not syphoned off to different schools. DS2 may not be suited to a grammar school education but he has always had as really good friends those who were. He is intelligent-just not academic.

Same here Jenai-I would never put my principles in front of what was best for my child.

Jenai me too.

In fact I think most of us would do the same. But we'd know it was hypocritical. And we'd back away from critisising others who have to make similarly difficult decions.

And we'd prep our DC for the test .

Yet many many posters at the coal face will attest that it is deeply flawed.

It is deeply flawed-but just not as deeply flawed as the 11+ system. I'm sure that we could do better in this day and age. We still have a school system based on outdated needs.

exoic you are right. It is outdated. But I'm buggered if I can come up with anyhting better that we can afford and that we have the will as a nation to achieve.

You have public school set up to send our DCs out to rule the Empire, the Grammar schools to provide clerks etc and the Secondary Moderns to provide heavy labour and factory work. Holidays to suit the the upper classes going off to their Scottish estates and the country children to get the harvest in. Mad!
I am just at least glad that we have moved on from girls concentrating on needlework!

Interesting. I think if I am a hypocrite for putting my child in to the 11+, then I would be a hypocrite for using the state system in my area at all- I genuinely don't see why it's more hypocritical of me to to want him to go to the school where the A*-C at GCSE he will get (dv) will just be taken as normal than to send him to the school where they will be used as evidence that the system works! Either way, I am using and supporting a flawed, unfair system.

And, can someone answer this. If you think that I am being personally hypocritical, does that mean that none of the opinions I put forward on the broader educational, political, philosophical and psychological impact of state selective schools have any validity? Is it impossible to think "well, I think she's a hypocrite, but she has actuallly seen how they system works, so maybe she has a point about grammar schools- I'll have to think a bit more about my unquestioning belief tha they are a force for good?"

Oh, and for those who think this is the ultimate minority discussion- a) why are you joining in and b) watch this space. There is a powerful pro grammar school lobby in the Tory party. If they get back in it may become a more real debate for you than you think.

H, and I don't think comprehensives are the holy grail. I just think they are the least worst system currently available.

I can get a better system.
You have all children in a comprehensive at 11 yrs old and you set for all subjects.
At 14 yrs they choose, with advice, which route to go down-academic, technical, practical or vocational. You don't aim to send 50% to university. You have far more apprenticeships. You improve careers advice and you start it before 14yrs.
You pour lots of money into nursery education in deprived areas -and in the primary schools in deprived areas you have small classes and nurture groups. You ensure that they can all read by 11 and have motivation to learn.
You open the schools to the community and have lots of classes for adults too, out of school hours. You have homework clubs to help those who don't get it at home. You have optional things they can stay on for-lots of sport especially.
You change the holidays.
You stop the cut off date of 31st August and you allow DCs to be in the year below or above, if it would benefit them.
You don't abolish private schools-but you make the state ones so good that no one opts for them.

A Utopian dream-we don't have the money for it. Parents play the system-and those at the bottom get the worst on offer. A sad state of affairs.

Going back to peterenas's point, it's a good explanation of why well academically educated parents produce children with the same inclinations. I want to share everything I know, can do, enjoy and appreciate with my children and want them to grow up capable of tackling anything. I frequently feel inadequate when it comes to practical things - I would love to be able to teach them how to make furniture (other than the IKEA stuff we put together with them), or tell the what the names of the plants are in the garden, or show them how to do effective DIY, or how to survive in the wild, but that was never my thing, so I'll have to pay someone else to teach them a bit of carpentry and botany if they ever express an interest, and send them off to cubs for a bit of outdoor adventuring. However, I always loved books and puzzles and maths and don't think I'm tutoring my children if I talk about something I find interesting and enjoyed learning, myself - I'm just sharing my enjoyment of something. I've also taught my children how to sew and knit, even though they are both boys, because it's something I can do and pass on. It's a natural instinct to want to pass on to your children what knowledge and skills you have, isn't it????

That is simply normal life, rabbit, it is not tutoring. I pity the DC if the parent thinks that is what they are doing-it probably sucks all the fun out of it!

"Most comps however have a wide range of kids from the able & aspirational through the able or aspirational right down to the violently disaffected. It is impossible for a single school management team to provide the level of service to each of its pupils that a grammar can."

I think that is true,but why is it fair and acceptable for an able, focussed child to be removed to a school where they do not have to deal with this so that they can achieve their best academically in a grammar school enviroment while leaving (this is where I get bitter and personal) my hard working,well behaved,but struggling academically DD (also benefitting from the high vocabulary she has acquired from being on the receiving end of her middle class mother's constant talking!) there?
The less bright,industrious children are then left not only to cope with the aspects of learning they find difficult,but also with classroom disruption,snide comments if they do the work,etc

The idea that grammar schools are elite institutions preparing children for an elite future is precisely why parents care so much about getting to them - because if your child fails the 11+ they are then obviously not going to have that elite future.I don't believe that,but it is hard to be unaffected where the idea so prevalent. It brings us back to writing whole groups of children off at 10 as well...

O.k. Seeker, some fair points.

Regarding the first, nobody would accuse you of hypocrisy if you would send your child to the high school. It is part of the system too. Yet nobody would expect you to life by your principles to such an extent that you'd opt out of school completely! Maybe hypocrisy is too strong a word. Maybe it is just that your words carry less weight because part of younger anger is about your son not getting in, IYSWIM? And not just about the system in general?

Also, I think lots of people, like you, who have children who do well at school seem to believe that a higher intelligence entitles you to better education (grammar school or top sets). What about the rest? Spare a thought for kids like my son, who has a high IQ (tested by Dyslexia Action at diagnosis) yet does badly (badly!) at school due to dyslexia, and will be put into a bottom set at a comprehensive, with lots of disruptive/uninterested children, some of whom are very intelligent too, but still an unhappy mix, right? (Personally I hope to send my children to private secondaries. I am not opposed to private schools on principle, but I wish their existence was not necessary)

And though I challenge you on some of your points, I will not campaign for more grammar schools, no way. I wish (maybe like you) that comprehensive schools could become so good they can compete with good private schools. I'd like to see private schools become obsolete because it isn't worth the money as State Comprehensives are just as good.

That is my dream. Maybe not so different from yours.

not "life", "live" ( non native speaker alert, sorry!)

You say it's a Utopian dream exoticfruits - it sounds a good one to me too. Over the past 40 years or so it's been lack of will as much as lack of money. How do you get the parity of esteem between academic subjects and technical ones, though? Gove & Co are sniffy about B Tecs, but they can be equally demanding as A & AS levels.

I can't help thinking the way that some posters are determined to
call the remaining Secondary Moderns 'Comprehensive' is a reminder of how deeply unpopular the whole system was.

"that comprehensive schools could become so good they can compete with good private schools. I'd like to see private schools become obsolete because it isn't worth the money as State Comprehensives are just as good."

It is good to have ideals and dreams Chandon but where does the money come for to fund this dream? Should we pay more significantly more taxes? More council tax? Would you make huge cuts in other areas and if so which ones? I read somewhere that by 2020 local authorities will only have enough money for rubbish collection and the elephant in the room health care provision for the ever increasing number of elderly. Our society is becoming increasingly divided the haves and the have nots we cannot ask the latter to pay more because they are already struggling and there is a huge crisis looming in the Eurozone that could push even more into hardship. I don't believe our government or any other potential government has the appetite to ask the former to pay significantly more.
Finally some people will always pay however good the state option is because they simply like and believe in indepednet ed.

yes but then that would be their choice.

I think free schools could be good (that is what it's like where I'm from). I think rather than everyone doing the same curriculum, there should be differentiation. Maybe technical schools, or arts/drama focussed schools, schools with a focus on language etc).

As a parent of a child who is good at maths and science, but rubbish and hopeless at English (dyslex), I'd love to send him to a school where he would prepare for being an engineer or a mechanic, or something technical, or a builder, rather than this life long struggle with reading comprehension and Verbal reasoning exams.

I don't understand why the Brits got rid of polytechnics either.

Where does the money come from? We could stop bailing out the bankers who have done so much to get the country in a mess. We could close some tax avoidance loopholes and start asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. We could stop rushing into wars at the behest of the Americans..... I could go on.
The money for a good education system could have been found if the will had been there.

"I think free schools could be good (that is what it's like where I'm from). I think rather than everyone doing the same curriculum, there should be differentiation. Maybe technical schools, or arts/drama focussed schools, schools with a focus on language etc)."
Chandon I couldn't agree more but how in this current economic crisis are you going to fund your dream?

We certainly haven't got loads of funds,. This July's tax receipts are massively down even on last year. All 3 political parties are going to haev to do hard thinking now about probably doubling the cuts we have had. Perhaps they should charge all parents in state schools something like £200 a year for education. Might make them value it more.

Grammar threads always seem very irrelevant. Most of the country has no gramamr schools. They were abolished where I grew up in 1970. I have never in my life lived in a grammar area. So if you want that elite education someone mentioned above to prepare your daughter (or son) to be a very high earner then you earn a lot yourself and pay fees. I do not think it is too different even in China - all cultures seem to come up with top schools even in communist states because people are made to favour their own children and that is a wonderful spirit - it is why we nurture and care for them not someone else's. It is why we love them and care rather than dump them in a room for 10 hours whilst we wash the feet of the sick. It is something to be encouraged not despised.

I don't think more money is essential for making changes. Just this one size fits all approach is not working (national curriculum) as all people have different strengths and weaknesses.

I believe it costs the state 5000 a year to educate a child (can anyone back em up? Must have read it somewhere but may be wrong!). For that money, you could do much better.

LaVolcan I'm not trying to be provactative I dont know the answers to all of this. Would doing the things you suggested provide enought money? How much does each child in the state sector get now. I've got the figure of £1000 per term in my head (someones once told me this it might be wrong) how much more would we need to provide the sort of education that top independent schools are currently providing?
We also need to remember that there are other areas that desperately need more money, decent elderly care as I've mentioned the health service in general is on its knees. We need more affordable housing, the unemployed need more help and also many would benefit form further education.
I suspect the only way to all theses things is to raise taxes for everyone.

*seeker has set the comprehensive system up as the holy grail.

Yet many many posters at the coal face will attest that it is deeply flawed.*

Perhaps, but many, like myself, attest that it is not. But that is apparently naive of me.

Sorry, bold messed up above!