Middle class access to grammars via tutorproof 11+ part 2

[boschy]

May I do this? only there were some contrasting views at the end of the last thread which I found interesting.

One was mine (sorry!): "I think fear actually drives a lot of those parents who are desperate to get their child into GS, so they can be 'protected' from these gangs of feral teenagers who apparently run rampage through every non-selective school in the country.

Because clearly if you are not 11+ material you are a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who likes nothing better than beating up a geek before breakfast and then going to score behind the bike shed before chucking a chair at the maths teacher and making the lives of the nice but dim kids a misery."

And one was from gazzalw: "If you had the choice would you opt for a grammar school or a comprehensive that has gangs?"

Soooo, do people really think that all comprehensives have vicious gangs, and all GS children are angels? Or that only those of academic ability adequate enough to get them through the 11+ should not have to face behavioural disruption of any kind? If you are borderline, or struggling but still work hard, should you just have to put up with disruption because let's face it you're not academic?

PS, re the knuckle dragging Neanderthals I mention above, should have said - "and that's only the girls"

But why should only the top 23% escape this, Tantrums? Why does the DC with an IQ of 100 or less not deserve the very best of education too?
The grammar school just cherry picks the 'deserving' and gives the message that the rest don't matter and they can put up with poor teaching, low expectations and disruption.

Here we have the contradiction again - other posters say Sec Mod pupils don't get the same standard of education and opportunities.

But if you believe the education level being offered is the same, why do you object to grammars? You approve of separating students by academic ability in setting. There are obvious benefits to it. So that works for the very top, then the next top, and so on. Why should expectations be lowered when they are working at the same leel or have the opportunity to do so.

"Why does the DC with an IQ of 100 or less not deserve the very best of education too? "

Well now you are contradicting yourself. You said the opportunity to be taught at the same level was very representative.

Actually they do deserve a superb education but it is not grammar school pupils' fault if they don't get one. That would be down to the head, the teachers and the local authorities.

As to why they should escape this - we need people who learn and learn well. It should be everyone. But when it isn't - we need a knowledge and skills elite. We just do.

Behaviour, attitude, and discipline are major factors why I'm so pleased my two DC's are (and hopefully will be) going to - not a GS - but a good, faith school in our City.
I know not everyone in their standard catchment school would be disrespectful to the teachers and disruptive by any means, but having been a teacher myself, I know it only takes a few to make learning difficult for all.
I just want them to be with others who, like them, want to learn and are respectful of everyone in the school community.
I don't think it's learning with all abilities that is a problem for GS aspiring parents, I think it's all about the behaviour and attitudes.

You seem to be missing the point, Brycie, that a mere 4% of DCs go to grammar schools, around 6% go to private schools, so although they have a huge success rate in getting to the best universities it still leaves the majority of students coming from comprehensives. DS was at a RG university from his comprehensive and the bulk if the students were similar.
The maths have to add up, if the aim is to get 50% to university and only 10% are at grammar or private then 40% have to be comprehensive. In huge swathes of the country, where there are no grammar schools, the top sets are the same ability- and they can spell!

I'm not missing any point. It's not me saying that, it's the Sutton Trust.

Exotic I think you need to acknowledge the contradictions in your posts and in your position. You seems to want to have it both ways. Or if you could just state your position so there's a clear idea of it that would be great too.

I can't believe we are having this argument about 4% of pupils and a mere 164 schools! Most pupils can't have a grammar school education because they don't have access to one and they can't all fit into Kent, Torquay, Salisbury and other tiny pockets of the country- even if prepared to move!
Luckily most have to have comprehensive schools.

I know - so what's the problem.

No I think every single child deserves the best education. I hate the divide, I hate it but at the same time find myself in the grammar school system because of it.
I think that the brightest children should excel and be given the oppourtunity to achieve the highest results but I also think that applies to every child regardless of whether they are in this top 23%

But it doesn't work like that. That's the problem for a lot of people isn't it?
What do you do?
Do you stand by the principle that every school should be outstanding and opt out of the best education possible in favour of supporting the SM knowing your child will not be given the same opportunities or level of teaching?
Or in essence become part of the problem by supporting GS knowing that this will provide your child with the best education, good results and university?

I chose the latter for Dd and ds1. For ds2, who is academically in the top 23% we will move out of the borough, in fact out of London next year, in preparation for his secondary school transfer the following year.
I would love every child in this borough to achieve what they are capable of.
But sadly the teachers at north London comps, our part anyway do not motivate and inspire the children who need it. They assume they will achieve very little and treat them accordingly.

My ds2 has been very happy at his primary and would love to go to school with his friends, into year 7 with the people he knows and likes.

But in all honesty, being in the middle range academically, he will not be expected to achieve very much at all. That makes me very sad.
So IMO we have no option but to move.
I could maybe have started tutoring in year 3 and somehow pushed him into a position where he may stand a chance at a grammar but it is not the right school for him. In that environment he would struggle.
He is not highly academic, he is creative, musical, artistic and just as wonderful as the older 2. But he would not thrive in that environment.

Sorry ds2 is not in the top 25% academically, typing too fast

Ok - my position is simple and there are no contradictions.
Every DC goes to the comprehensive school and they are set for all subjects so if the are great at English and poor at maths they can be in the top set for one and a lower one for the other. They are free at any time to move up or down, depending on the most suitable set. You do not treat them all the same but it is completely flexible.
I would stop expecting them to jump through the same hoops and would send them down different routes at 14 yrs - depending on their choice.

ARisbottle-so sorry for your loss rest up and take care,

I think the league tables are misleading.

if grammer schools all top set then of course they get better results than mixed non selective as %.

if area has no grammer and is true comp/high school-I guess results could be better.

I imagine kent has most uneven mix amongst grammer areas of which there are few.

No one has once mentioned demographics?

A comp in in inner city maynot be comparable to affluent rural town.
They are not like for like.

exam results are subjective anyway if

school a -near near me has 43%pass rate a-c my thourghts are omg 57%fail and think that could be my dd wont risk that one.

school b- another comp better one state non selective gets 73% thinking thats better but what if dd is one of unlucky 27%.

The local selctoive private gets 100% couple get 98% i would feel more reassured that she stand better chance there.

its a risjk, its a gamble as that a*grade at gcse in year 11 exam has so many varaibles.

A lot ca happen in 5years leading up to it.

schools change
exam rules/marking criteria suddenly change.
schools forced to expand due to rising birthrates.
good teachers ad attitude
ethos and dsipline.

I imagine if schools i very deprived area then aspiration will be lower as home influnces education equally as much as school.

at the inner city comps anyone with money goes private so it will always skew the results to be lower.
one was celebrating a b grade as if it was an a.

Our local league table is dominated by independants, faith schools and few selctive/lottory academy

Quick question gifted and talented register in primary does that not extend to secondry?
Although many parenst dont think their childs stretched at state secondry.

A overly academic school can raise everyone.
spoke to lady whos child went to piushy academic junior school reguarly gets 92-95%sats level 4+ and she says if he was in another school he be clever but hes ha to ork and keeping up and she thinks although hes needed help its been good for him its pushed him to do better and their linked infants is coaching their year 2 for sats.

No, I mean your position on grammars. Do you think they offer the same level of education? you said that was "very representative" then you said "why shouldn't everyone be offered the same level of education."That's the kind of thing I mean - it's exceptionally difficult to address points when the goalposts keep changing

An over academic school can raise everyone's levels but it doesn't mean the school is good for the individual child.

And the comments regarding deprived areas? That's the reason the flipping teachers expect nothing of their students.
Inner city north London, poor area. Oh so all the kids have parents that don't care, they will never amount to anything.
That's a very sad perpective.
There are plenty of families living in poorer areas that care a great deal about their child's education and plenty of bright kids who don't achieve their potential because of that attitude.

All those who want a grammar school education should be offered it. I wanted it, my parents wanted it for me, my primary school wanted it for me, I was suitable, had I lived in the next catchment area I would have got a place with my marks, possibly a different year I would have got a place- in my case if two people had moved or gone private I would have got a place!
Not everyone is suitable but everyone should be offered it- they are in the comprehensive because they can simply be late developers and take it up later.

brycie all schools are different though.

Some SM or comps could offer the same level of education as a GS.

But not all of them do. That's the problem. I guess that's why opinions are so different depending on where you live and the schools in the area.

Can you see, so far we've had :

grammars should be abolished because they offer children the same educational opportunities so there's no point in them

and

grammars should be abolished because they offer children different educational opportunities and that's not fair

Tantrums - you are plainly right - I wish this could be acknowledged as a complexity by those who argue against grammars. I'm jut trying to point out that it's more complicated than people think, and they need to get it clear exactly what is wrong iwth grammars and why they want rid. As I say, Nit and Boschy were good at this.

My middle DS isn't suited to a grammar school, my youngest is artistic and not suited - luckily they were able to all go to the same school as the eldest,who was academic, and yet all be treated differently. My middle one, not being academic was not separated from all his academic friends and was able to remain friends all the way through school.

I have to say tantrums, while all schools are different, there are only two alternatives in the choice I gave above. Either grammar schools do offer different educational opportunities or they don't. That's a very basic question which people who campaign against grammars really need to have thought about.

Ok thanks for explaining your experiences exotic.

The bottom line, Brycie, is that they have been abolished! They are left with a tiny 4%!!

But brycie do you think it's fair?

I sent 2 of my children to GS. The alternative here is bloody awful.
In an ideal world, there would be a high level of expectation and education in every school but that's not reality.

I support the grammar system because it was the best thing for my DCs. That doesn't mean I think it's fair that the children who's parent don't even know about grammars or the children who's DCs missed out on a place by a few points should receive sub standard education.

I just don't see what the solution is right now.