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"

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

Utter rubbish? Oh but it isn't.

Top set GS teachers expect every single student to achieve an A*
Top set comp teachers do not.

And if you don't accept that, it's up to you.
But it is true.

[TalkinPeace2]

Tantrums
How many schools have you worked at / seen children at to make such a sweeping generalisation?

just that DH goes to all sorts of schools and his reply to your post would be codswallop

[Arisbottle]

They are normal expectations for able pupils in many comprehensives and I also say that as someone with experience of both sectors .

Perhaps we are forgetting that we are talking about people's children, I have one son at a grammar and be at a compreheive and soon will have 2 at a compreheive. My children are not being failed by the comprehensive system

[TalkinPeace2]

^Top set GS teachers expect every single student to achieve an A*
Top set comp teachers do not.^

BOLLOCKS

that may be the case for the one comp you seem to have experience of.
It is patently not the case for all comps - as shown by the DFEE data.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

qlb grammar school-100% A*-c at A level

Best comp in the area-83%

[Arisbottle]

Tantrums you are quite right, out of my top set of 25 students , I expect only 20 to get a* ( roughy) the others will get A grades .

I do expect every single child to fulfill their potential.

[Arisbottle]

Surely if the pupils are all so amazingly bright, so bright that they can't be educated in the same building as people who are just merely very good, they should be getting 100% A*

[QuickLookBusy]

LaQueen and, while I fully accept QLB's example of her own children - I would suspect that they were in the relative minority of pupils at their comprehensive...and that the majority of pupils actually got inferior exam results to the local selective schools.

Well of course you would be correct in assuming that, because the comp doesn't select children. If you compared the top 20% of a comp with a grammar school, you would get very similar results.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

I dont have experience of comp.

I have experience, personal and professional of the borough I live in.

If you are actually going to sit there are tell me that the north London comp expects every single student to achieve an A* you are wrong.

If your theory is correct, that top set comps achieve the same results, have the same expectations and oppourtunities, why on earth are 1145 students battling for 138 places?
Why do parents pay for tutoring, for years, why are parents so desperate to get their children into a GS if there's no difference in the level of education?

[TalkinPeace2]

LaQueen
Your understanding of the statistics of the normal distribution of grade scores is spectacularly poor.

[QuickLookBusy]

Gosh LeQueen, I k ow you joke about your inability to do Maths and your proving it on this thread.

You aren't comparing like with like so your statements don't make sense.

[QuickLookBusy]

x-posted Talking!

[TalkinPeace2]

Tantrums
North London Borough "Comp"
Except its not a "Comp" is it.

What proportion of pupils go private in your borough? In my county its 4%
What proportion of pupils go to selective state? In my county its under 1%

So our comps cater for 95% of the kids : so their top sets are pretty top.
As evidenced by the results.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

But the top set of a super selective is made up of amazingly bright children. What's the issue with that?

[TalkinPeace2]

Tantrums
That is not the answer to the question I asked.
What percentage of children in your borough do not attend the "comp" schools?

[QuickLookBusy]

tantrums- grammar school-100% A-c at A level*

Best comp in the area-83%

Your grasp of maths seems to be in the same league as LaQueens.


If you took the top 20% of the comp's children and compared them to the grammar school results( because the grammar has selected the top 20%) you are comparing like with like. The comp results would be as good as the grammar school's.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

As I said before, we don't live in a grammar school area. There is one selective in the borough. There's one in a neighboring borough.
So yes, the local comprehensive schools cater to the majority of the borough.
Which would make our top sets pretty top as well.

However the results speak for themselves.

100% GCSE A*-C.
Best comp school in the area doesn't come close.

[QuickLookBusy]

LaQueen, could you please point out where anyone has said All good comprehensive offers as equally high standard of education, with equally impressive exam results, as any grammar school

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

LaQueen you'd wonder why anyone chose grammar schools would you, given that it's exactly the same as a comp?
Top sets get the same results, teacher expectations the same, who on earth would bother with the GS then?

[TalkinPeace2]

LaQueen
Many years ago, when League tables first came out, I wrote to the BBC, a couple of newspapers and the DFE, asking for them to produce a league table of the top 60 children in every school.

This would instantly show how schools performed with their best pupils, regardless of selection.
I was told that the data was available but would not be 'informative'

Yeah right.
More to the point, the results would have shown that a lot of parents are wasting a lot of money on tutoring and fees.

My kids school is a true comp.
If you "selected" its top 25%, you would have 100% A-C and around 60% A/A*
and I've spent the tuition / fees money on riding, swimming, tennis and fine dining.

[yellowsubmarine53]

Of course comprehensive schools don't have the same exam results as grammar schools - grammar schools select the top whatever %, and comps take everyone. So the top set of a grammar school will contain the top of 20% or whatever and the top set of a comprehensive school will contain the top of 100%. You're not comparing like with like.

Whether they offer an equally high standard of education depends on the comprehensive and depends on the grammar.