Genuine question - why do some people have a problem with the grammar school system

[englishteacher78]

I went to one - my choice in part, parents would have preferred me to go to the Catholic secondary. As a teacher I have worked in two.
I know if I had gone to the Catholic school I would have coasted (even more than I did).
Some people seem to he very against the grammar school system and I'm not sure why. It was the making of my dad (miner's son from council estate in Scotland)and I think that all counties should have that provision. Surely it's just split site streaming in a way.

Flatiron When I was at primary school, I had a friend who was in the care of the local authority when she took the 11+. She was in Local authority care because her father was in prison and her mother was in hospital (the two events not being unconnected). She passed and went to the posh grammar (a grammar which you could go to if you passed the exam and could pay or if you passed the exam with incredibly high marks). She was a year older than me (the last year to sit the 11+ in our LEA). Having a horrific life experience doesn't actually remove your intelligence, and if you live in an area where everyone takes the 11+ then you take it.

Math I disagree.Sorry but mine are well used to not getting what they want.We're going to tell ours it's study for Sats but we'll have a bash at the 11+too,will need to keep our options open etc.Won't enter one probably as I'm not sure it would be the right school.

They're all good kids and I know how they'll react and the best way to handle them.

Re hardship stories my dp had parents exactly like Aris and he went to the worst comp in the area(he's still bitter his parents couldn't be arsed to support him into entering the 11+ or even a better school).He was utterly miserable. Said dp has 2 red brick uni degrees and did his A levels in a year off his own back.There is no way he'd begrudge his kids the right school and is exactly the opposite in ensuring we get it right(having failed miserably re primary).

My dad was the child of very poor parents in service and took a train and cycled miles in the dark across country to get there and back to his super selective.

What Xoan said.My dad had a very difficult childhood.It didn't take his amazing brain or determination away.

There was a book written on this subject,author on Q&A saying difficult childhoods often mean kids are more successful.Think it was Why Kids Succeed.

That idea is a load of cobblers. If it were true then nobody would be poor and the word 'disadvantaged' would be meaningless.

Developing resilience makes a big difference, but it bypasses the majority. Resilience develops in such individual ways it is impossible to say a generic 'difficult childhood' will engender it.

My grandfather left school at 14 to go and work on a little Irish farm, and sent all 8 of his own children to university. They wouldn't have managed this without him and granny finding out how to do it (boarding school for everyone, which was not pleasant at the time due to rationing and also the regimes in their schools), believing it was possible and making my mother and her siblings believe it, and also making huge sacrifices (took one holiday in their entire life). All of his grandchildren went to university and his great grandchildren will too in all likelihood. Grandad was a very bright and determined man but that wasn't enough to overcome the obstacles to continuing education in his own path. His dad had died, nobody could afford to either send him to school or spare him from the farm. All his siblings bar one had to emigrate. It's only the really exceptional child who can succeed against those kind of odds.

Xoanon and Retropear Don't be so insulting. You have both completely missed my point. I doubt you have read any of my other posts, not that I expect you to have done, but you need to be careful when making sarcastic comments if you haven't RTFT.

IN OUR AREA children do not all take the 11+. The primary schools have nothing to do with the process. You have to apply to the (state) grammars to take the exam, at the grammar, on a Saturday. In addition, the exam includes curriculum-based maths and english papers, which would be very difficult for a child to pass without having been to private school or a tutor, as children need to be familiar with KS2 work up to the end of Yr 6, when they take the exam at the very start of Yr 6. They won't get that from a state primary.

My point is that I think the system IN OUR AREA is going to fail disadvantaged children, because only those with considerable input from adults are going to have much of a chance of passing. I agree that the old type of 11+ with VR/Non VR, where the entire year sits the exam can have a very positive outcome for bright children in difficult circumstances. I would just be interested to know how many of those children get the opportunity IN OUR AREA, as the selection process is so skewed in favour of children with parents/carers who have to be extremely proactive in the 11+ process.

Where's the argument?

Aris. Are you aware of the latest OECD report . This report states that
people born in to the worst social economic or difficult backgrounds are 8 times more likely to stay in those circumstances though out their lives.

The fact that a bookmaker would be prepared to offer 500-1 for a new born baby from an average to well off family to get to Oxford, i would say your
odds were 4000-1.

A failure at 11+ does not have to destroy you life . I have talked a lot about a close friend of mine that when her Primary school took the Exam
placed her in another classroom with coloring books. This continued though out secondary school , so much that she left at 16 without any qualifications. Now she has a masters in chemistry and is in her third year teaching it.

A grammar school in an area like Salford could act like "NOAH'S ARK"
in that it could not save everyone, but at least it could save a few.

I could have just gone along with the majority view on here.
this would not have been a debate representing many contrasting views
across the country regarding selective education.

Flatiron I have read the whole thread. I see no evidence that you have, but then, it isn't compulsory. You said - and this is a cut and paste:

I would love to know how many children in local authority care ever get the opportunity to take the 11+, or the support needed to have a fighting chance of getting in.

You bolded the love. Such a sentence construction is usually intended to indicate scepticism. You did not say 'in my area'. Children can be in LA care for many different reasons and since the LA can be sued for providing inappropriate care, and since 10 year olds are capable of speaking up for themselves, it is not outwith the bounds of possibility that even in a discretionary 11+ area a child who was in LA care would take the exam.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't swear at me again, thanks. Even in T+1LA form.

I did bit live in a grammar area , if I did I would not have gained a place. If I had gained a place I would not have been allowed to have taken it. I would have been even harder for me to escape if I had lived in a grammar school area .

I would not have coped at a grammar even if I had got in. I nearly dropped out of university in my first year because I was so far away from my social comfort zone. I thank God that I met DH, although we were just friends, because we had similar backgrounds and got one another .

I suspect both of us got our place because we filled a quota .

Ditto Flatiron.

I have read the thread thanks.

Your set up is exactly the same as ours.As I have 3 children and tutoring is too expensive I'm doing it myself,it's all online.

My dc are also in a not that great primary.Ironically due to the setting from Sats results they'll be more disadvantaged at the alternate.At least at the grammar they'll all start off getting pushed the same.My 3 would have to play catch up with kids from other primaries at the alternative and need to work extra hard to get into the higher sets.

If you want to froth froth over the crappy primaries that just coast and have no interest in pushing all children or achieving old results.

That is what puts kids at a disadvantage not whether 2 or 3 kids go to a grammar school.

I did not live in a grammar area , that should say

Good

I think I have expressed myself badly- although I don't see where I said anything that suggests I think this about zzzzz's children- Obviously their "job" is to act as some sort of human insulation for your marvellous mass of normal children."
I have said repeatedly that super selectives, which are obviously the preserve of "top end" outliers are different to "ordinary" grammar schools and I understand why the parents of exceptional children feel differently.

But for the rest of us, I really can't see the advantage of segregating children at 10. I I don't see who it benefits.

Retro- are you really saying that your kids are not going to hit level 5s at the end of year 6? Even with the extra work you are doing with them?

I am happy to be outraged with you about primary schools that don't do their job!

I don't know what T+1LA form is. When did I swear at you? RTFT? As far as I'm concerned RTFT means read the full thread. That's how I used it anyhow, and I apologise if you understand it differently.

"I would love to know how many children in local authority care ever get the opportunity to take the 11+, or the support needed to have a fighting chance of getting in."

I didn't think I needed to state 'in my area' yet again, (I've said it in nearly every post, I should think), as I had been talking about the grammars in my area.

I bolded love because I am sceptical about the number of children in LA care in our area who will ever get the chance, given the skewing of the 11+ process I have already mentioned, to benefit from the grammars' admissions policy, and I feel angry about that, just as I am about being told that I'm implying that you lose your intelligence if you have a bad life experience. I was an unlikely 11+ success, as was my mother, who really did have a bad life experience, so I don't need the point to be hammered home, I got it a long time ago.

That is what puts kids at a disadvantage not whether 2 or 3 kids go to a grammar school.

18 went this year from my dc's primary, and the majority of them were tutored. The primary is not crap, it's one of the most successful. It just doesn't undertake to teach yr6 stuff to year 5s. (The 11+ is 3 weeks into yr6).

Curlew before Ofsted hit them hard they couldn't give a stuff re pushing any of the kids and they just coasted. Very worried re the lack of pushing with 1 of my dc I complained re level 5s being unlikely let alone 6 only to be told by the head we don't have to get 5s due to Sats results.These are bright kids who were free readers at 4, G&T courses etc.I see how their cousins and friends are pushed at their schools and it makes me want to weep.

Due to the dire data they're now pushing to get more 4s which doesn't help my 3. 2 of my 3 are getting pushed more now(finally got decent teachers and I stamped my foot)however I feel it's too late.1 of my dc is stuffed,immature at ks1 Sats,bored,quiet and zero work ethic(due to several shite years).She'll get 4s but is/ was capable of 5s.

God knows what I'm going to do with her.She'll be in shite sets at secondary(the other feeder primaries are Outstanding or Good with better Sats results).Believe you me a few going to grammar is the least of her problems.

I find it ironic that people would think it occur to do stuff with them to prepare for secondary transfer but not for grammar.It would be the same stuff by and large and bar VR what most good primaries would cover.

Flat surely the brighter kids should be doing some year 6 stuff otherwise where is the differentiation?

Many kids will be capable.

Xoanon -- 'Not outside the bounds of possibility', but the odds are probably in the region of 1:10,000 all the same.

Even a one in a million chance is within the bounds of possibility. Probability is a different matter.

Ahhhh, the joy of parents who think that what happens in their area is what happens everywhere.

DH works in almost every county in England, a fair few in Wales, a couple in Scotland and some abroad.

Grammar schools are rarely as clever as they think
He loves catholic schools as they are generally blissfully disorganised
Prep schools, particularly in grammar areas - least said soonest mended
The most satisfying are the high segregation special schools because most people like to pretend they do not exist, but they can be really positive
Big comps are his fave - especially when kids bunk football to go see him

lots, and I post them all the time.

my thought on the internal audit and financial control arrangements of academy and free schools are a matter of public record both under this name and my real one

without governance there cannot be excellence