Changes to 11-plus to stop middle-class parents 'buying' access to grammars by hiring tutors

[breadandbutterfly]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2241411/Changes-11-plus-stop-parents-buying-access-selective-schools-hiring-tutors-children.html

Similar article in the Times apparently but paywall.

Anyone with half a brain would be able to tell that I was being ironic referring to " the gene pool"

I think what you are all desperately trying to do is abolish this countries social stratification system using state education institutions. It wont happen. This country is deeply stratified ( as are most but its clearer here )

Anyone with half a brain would be able to tell that I was being ironic referring to " the gene pool"

Were you wiggly? Irony doesnt travel well on the internet. If you are suggesting I want social exclusivity and association with DC of a higher intelligence group( as might be increased in chance by social grouping). Then yes, I will own up.

I certainly hope he finds a suitably matched partner.

Ronaldo - The Boasting Thread is open and waiting for your fascinating insight into life with your amazing wife and brilliant son, in your socially superior home. Please don't deprive readers of an insight into your everyday life - think what we could all learn about how our social and intellectual superiors behave!

Now bog off my thread - I've asked you nicely but you have the skin of a rhinoceros.

This thread is about GRAMMAR SCHOOLS. Your son is 6. He is not at a grammar school. You are not planning to send him to a grammar school. You have never been to a grammar school or worked at one. You have NO connection with grammar schools at all, in fact.

SO WHY ARE STILL ON MY THREAD??

Could you find a different thread to infest???

Whenever I read opinions like Ronaldo's I move a little bit closer to voting yes in the independence referendum in 2014 ( I hope he is English or my point is ruined).

OP to be fair Ronaldo is responding to our questions. Lots of MN threads organically develop into something else. You can't dictate who does and doesn't
Post.

Whenever I read opinions like Ronaldo's I move a little bit closer to vomiting.

I just Wiki'ed Grammar Schools. I didn't realise there were only 164 of them in England and that they are so unevenly spead about the country.
Interesting.

Arisbottle - you may have no interest in the original topic, but others do and I am not alone in finding it quite frustrating that intelligence response is shouted down by a loud man with no conection to the topic. It's extremely rude as well as utterly irrelevant.

On the contrary breadandbutterfly I live in a grammar school area, reluctantly have had to place one of my children in a grammar and have taught in a grammar. I have a further two children yet to move up to secondary so it is something that interests me. I have posted my thoughts on here and I have posted in your other thread.

:)

I better go away then, as there are no grammar schools at all in this country, thank goodness. If I did live in a grammar school area I would want them to take more children, not have entrance based solely on a test and have a more fluid intake, eg. at 11, 13 and 16.

Sorry about not walking away from Ronaldo's baiting breadandbutter, I'm off to watch The Walking Dead for a rest.

I live in a grammar school area and hope they take as few children as possible.

I think changing the test is just rearranging the deck chairs. The only wqy is to abolish selection. Comprehensive schools, properly setted , is the least worst option.

Arisbottle - cleaerly you have had a v bad experience of grammar schools and as I don't know what that is can't respond, expect to say that many people do have very positive experiences of grammar schools and those who went there themselves are often their keenest supporters.

seeker - if this new test had existed and your ds had passed it, would you still feel strongly anti-selection?

I could be convinced that there is an argument for super selectives taking the top, say, 2% academically. But the is no argument at all, apart from the blatantly self interested, in favour of the sort of grammar school that takes 23%.

Yes, breqdandbutterfly, I would.

Oh Ronaldo, you're a wealthy former academic who couldn't get tenure. An unusual combination. What's your h index?

@seeker - but you sat him for the test - why do that if you were so strongly anti-selection?

Why choose to live in an area you must have presumably always known had the 11+?

It is more that I have experience ce of excellent comprehensive education. My son is only at a grammar because we allow our children to make free choices and he was being badly bullied. He will leave school with a string of A* but I suspect he who have done so if he had gone to the comp. The teaching is dull, although my son likes dull regularity so it suits him.

I teach in a state comp which is packed with ex grammar school pupils who all swear they would never teach or send their children to the grammar. I tend to find that men who have been to grammars are much more positive about then than women who have attended.

I think that the top 2% is fine, I am against any more and ideally I can't see why you need to select. I would at least like it to be fair so that the bright DC with parents who have no money and no interest have an equal chance. Sadly a pipe dream.

I am anti selection but my son is at a grammar . It was a decision we tried really hard to make and I am not sure it was the right one.

I live where I do because my husband has family ties here, nothing to do with grammar schools.