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"

I haven't read all of this one- it's moved too quickly and I've been at work. However, I wanted to point out to AMPF that it's not as simple as getting the LEA music services involved (talking about orchestras etc here) In my county, there isn't one. The current government has cut funding to the point that there is now no county music service. My school has no orchestra. We have a one-teacher music dept with 16 keyboards, 30 recorders, an enthusiastic NQT and lots of singing. The parents of the kids I teach cannot afford to pay for instrumental lessons, in the main. We have about 15 students having peri lessons, and that's it, which is a huge shame. We're a secondary modern.

LEA Music services

sorry?

Half the secondary schools in England are now Academies : nothing to do with LEAs any more

seeker - "Bonsoir- why did they "deprive the clever children of them"? That was a stupid thing to do."

Are you aware that education budgets are not infinite? Perhaps not...

I started to copy bits to paste, or to answer questions, but it has moved on so fast it is a bit too late to harp back.
Reading it all- it appears to boil down to one fact to me-people with clever, motivated DCs with a work ethic want them to be educated with other DCs who are similar. Don't we all? Where it differs is that people know that (by and large) the grammar school will supply this-(a top class education without going private).
I want all DCs to have it.
I want my DS who wasn't suited to an academic education at the same school with his brothers and friends and don't see why he has to put up with unmotivated children who don't have a work ethic (he has both) just because he isn't as clever in an academic way. ( but much cleverer in some other ways).

Honestly. Seeker has always been entirely consistent in her views about grammar school education - and, indeed, all selective education. There are no comprehensive schools in her area. She could not choose to send her children to a comprehensive school. Because she was faced with a choice between a grammar school that offered lots of enriching activities and more subjects and a high school that didn't, she opted to let her children sit the test for the grammar school. She still believed it was iniquitous.

This is not about her children (though, APMF, if you read the thread you would realise her DS got 556 in his SATS, not 4 - it was her daughter who got the 4 for maths and who got into grammar school).

It's not patronising of her to say that her DS has advantages over some other children at the high school; it sounds like a bald statement of fact. Arguing the toss over this is wasting a lot of keystrokes.

"I think it's out of order to mock seeker's DS Level 4 going into Yr 7. As far as I'm aware, a Level 4 is considered pretty average for most children I think, and far better than some.

A Level 5 is the exception, and not the rule."

It's extremely out of order to mock a child for getting a level 4. And in this case it's factually incorrect!

I know you were, LeQueen, thank you! I was agreeing with you and pointing out the additional bit of prattishness as well. Oh well, it's just more evidence that AMPF doesn't actually read my posts, she just responds to what she thinks I've said!

"This is why I don't have an issue with most of you. But, as I said above, seeker wants to remove your/my choice while retaining her right to choose. To me that is hypocrisy."

That's right. I want to keep one special tiny grammar school just for my children!

If the argument is that grammaer schools inhibit social mobilty then why is social mobility so low in non-gs areas? The answer seems to be that education cannot be the catalyst to social change most of us hoped it would be.

There are WAY more "non-GS" areas. Are you seriously suggesting lower social mobility in the majority of the country?

I don't think grammar schools inhibit social mobility. I think they as institutions have no impact on it at all. The problem is that while the myth that they are an instrument of change exists, the real issues of inequality aren't addressed.

The problem is that while the myth that they are an instrument of change exists, the real issues of inequality aren't addressed.

In a nutshell! When they started they were an instrument of change but no more! Hogged by middle class parents who want an excellent education for free!

I went to a grammar school (briefly) and my first cousins attended the same girls' grammar and the boys' grammar in the same town. Both schools are now "super selectives" and all my cousins, who did their A-levels there, went to Oxbridge bla bla bla. Why? Because they came from über academic, highly educated, families.

That is exactly the case. Sadly a lot of children who would stand to benefit immensely are out of the running before they start, some parents at ds1s primary were not even aware of the grammar school.
There are 3 students in ds1s year who live in the "deprived" bit of the borough-and I'm including ds1 in that 3.
The rest are from the much nicer areas and come from MC families.
And then there are ds1s friends who work hard because they want to do well but don't have the oppourtunities that ds1 will have, in terms of education. Not because I think we are better than anyone but because for whatever reason, they either didn't sit the grammar exam or didn't make it through.

Wordfactory, social mobility is low everywhere. I don't think the a british do social mobility very well- I think generally people believe "He made them high or lowly and ordered their estate" . Sad but true.

I also think that a lot of people in the working classes and large parts of the middle classes don't really care about music and art and drama. Sad, but true. Even at my son's very middle-class, academically selective school music is not given as much weight as music by the boys. Cool boys play rugby, football and row.

If you introduced more classical music to most British schools they would not be interested. Our 'culture' is now focused on sport and slebs. They might be interested in learning how to sing (pop songs and perhaps very light classics) so they could go on X Factor, but that's all.

On the other hand, the children of immigrants from all classes often do seem to be very interested in learning musical instruments and playing classical music. They haven't been as blighted (in my view) by the prevalent 'culture'.

Bonsoir was absolutely right when she said that schools can't be expected to redress cultural issues in a vacuum. Xenia is also right when she's said (on past threads) that a certain amount of social mobility since WW2 has resulted in families who were once working class now being middle class. Those who are left in the 'working class' no longer benefit from the Fabians, the Methodists, evening classes, reading rooms, etc: all those movements that propelled people upwards. There's a tranche of people who don't work, don't vote, don't read books, don't listen to music unless it's pop, etc. And quite what you to do encourage children from these groups to do these things, I just don't know. I find it very depressing. And you can't expect schools to do it all for them.

Evil I'm suggesting that the existence of grammar schools or not appears to make jack shit difference to social mobility.

The majority of the country have comprehensive education and record levels of time and energy and money were ploughed into it during the Blair administration. Sadly it has made no differenceto socail mobility.

The Education x 3 initiative (whichI must admit I had huge hopes for at the time) has been a dismal failure vis a vis social mobility.

May be it's time we accept that education cannot be a driving factor in this regard?

I also think that most primary schools do a decent job of trying to open their pupils minds to new things.

Primary schools after all are comprehensive...no secondary modern primaries, and not that many private ones either (I think it's 4.5% of DC who are privately educated at primary level).

And yet social mobility doesn't budge.

Maybe it can only do so much, whilst private schools exist?

Woah- steady on there, TOSN old girl!

The existence of private schools is neither here nor there as far as the prevailing culture is concerned.

Sorry, meant to add this: Do you really think the abolition of Eton would in any way make it more likely that children from estates in Manchester or Blackbird Leys would want to take up the oboe?

grovel

Was that a post in support of the existence of good comprehensives? I am only on here to convince people that they can work.

A comp trying to thrive in the presence of a grammar and some private schools is going to struggle. The fear/snob factor will psych out the majority of parents with money and or able children.

I also have Eton relatives, who have no trouble spending time with my comp children.