How much of a difference is there between top streams in a decent state school and grammar?

[Krakken]

We have some very good state schools in our area and a grammar.
The kids who get into the grammar are really tutored.
I'm going to give the grammar a shot for ds1 but I doubt he'll get in as I haven't tutored from the age of 5, which seems to be the norm around here.
But how much of a difference is it actually?
Fwiw, I went to grammar and was in the bottom streams which didn't do much for my confidence at the time.

I have a child at a grammar and one in the top maths and science sets of an outstanding comp, and I find it hard to pinpoint what the differences are! There are differences, but that's fine by me because my children are very different even though their academic ability is similar.

I think there is more pressure at the GS, not from the teachers but from the fact that everyone is very clever and no one wants to fall behind. My son who's at the comp wants to do well, but as he gets older and peer pressure increases, I worry that he won't have as much inventive to stay in the top set because he can see that others in the middle sets are doing fine and he'd find their work easier, which could end up appealing to his lazy teenage boy side.

Overall I don't think one school is better than the other, they are just different and are each better in different ways.

Coolas. You are quite right about behavioural differences. I mentioned how DD2 got a detention in her grammar school for 'being witty and funny' making the class laugh. The same thing happening at DDs1 modern school ended up with the teacher joining in with the laughter.

" I mentioned how DD2 got a detention in her grammar school for 'being witty and funny' making the class laugh. The same thing happening at DDs1 modern school ended up with the teacher joining in with the laughter."

I think that might be something about the quality of the wit, the personality of the teacher and the behaviour of the children concerned. Rather than type of school specific.

Exactly Hakluyt- it is nothing to do with the type of school, it is more to do with the teacher's personality .

I wouldn't have thought that there would be much of a difference between the two.
Children in the top sets in the state comps in a grammar school area would have been those who missed out on a grammar school place, or did not take the 11plus .
I would have thought that there would be high expectations on both cases

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on doing well in tests at grammar - with lists of how many marks each child has got pinned up on the wall, frequent testing, etc. Academics seen as more important there.

like the sound of a teacher joining in with the laughter!

(depending on the content and intent of the wit, of course).

DS got a Black Spot (or whatever the sanctions are called) for having his shirt untucked this week.. Inner city comprehensive.

So, if it's all about the behaviour and the social influences (and some posters on another of the grammar threads have been very clear about this), what about the well behaved, aspirational hard working middle ability kids? Should there be 'Middle Grammars' for them so that they can escape from other members of society? Because surely as ones needing maybe more learning time to achive the grades, they don't deserve to be sisturbed by bad behaviour? And also vulnerable children in the support sets - can they have 'support grammars' too if they have the right kind of parents (care about education etc)?

Or is it jus high achievers who need - and deserve - state support in the form of segregated schools to be separated from less well behaved peers?

Blu. Hakult. DD2 was pretending to be 'lauren' from Catherine Tate . The English teacher who DD2 gets on with very well with, took exception to this sent her out of the classroom and issued her an after school detention. The teacher commented: Your 'behaviour is not funny ,childish and offensive to children who are not lucky to attend a good school'.
I hit the roof with DD and grounded her for a week. DD1 who was year 13 tried the same thing cue 'laughter' from everybody including the teacher.

I do actually believe the hard core of trouble makers should be removed from mainstream schools, if you like a 'middle grammar' school could be created. Here though is where it gets controversial and expensive should the bottom 20% of the academic spectrum be educated in more vocational schools.

Ah. So your dd got a detention not for being "witty and funny" but for being snobby about "chavs"

We have that problem in our local grammar school too- it spills out into the street and causes real hassle sometimes. The teachers are very quick to stomp on anyone they catch doing it.

I think smokepole has already said that she did not approve of what her daughter says, Hakluyt.

I know. But she used the story as an example of how life was serious and no jokes and laughing allowed at grammar school, rather than an example of how behaviour is managed.

DD has just finished GCSE at a comp
she did a lot worse than many of her friends
she only got 3 x A* and 10 x A
her best friend got the Hat in Further Maths
(and neither of them are tutored at all)

much more humour in a comp but similar grades in the upper sets
but better provision for a diversity of kids (art, music, sport) than at a grammar

Hakult. I don't think she was being 'Snobby' I think she thought she was being funny. The trouble is she has a 'habit' of saying in-appropriate things at the wrong time , like two days before A2 results to DD1 that it did not matter if she failed 'she could start an Open University Degree like Mum.
I set up a thread on that one!

This particular incident was in march she was in year 10 at the time. She can sometimes get mixed messages about what is funny and appropriate and what is not funny or appropriate. The English teacher concerned has taught DD since year 7 and his fond of her, knowing all the 'difficulties' she has overcome to become one of her best students. The teacher also knows that DD must 'learn' to think before she speaks especially If she wants to go in to teaching. I don't think she would make that type of comment again.

There is a time and place for particular joke. smokepole older daughter was laughing with people where as the younger daughter was being a snob and laughing at people. Its quite right at smokepole dd2 was punished.

Its a bit like a jew can laugh at their traditions but for non jew to mock jewish traditions is racist.

Talkin the best grammars have loads of music, sport, art and drama with talented children engaging in all of them (county and national level for music and sport) plus at least 85% A/A* at GCSE. They manage to do all that. I'm not sure why you think comprehensives are so much better at extracurricular? It depends on the school.

the best grammars do
but the shite grammars don't :
and as the comps round here beat 40% of the grammars I rest my case

the point of a comp is that it has not segregated the kids on the basis of a narrow set of subjects at age 11

not many grammars allow great but illiterate artists or athletes

its one of the reasons why private schools are so over represented in UK competitive sport : the wallet private schools can see what the grammars cannot, so offer scholarships
in comp areas its less of an issue

Talkinpeace is known for her dislike of grammar schools. I wonder therefore if she knows what Stretford Grammar ,Chatham Boys Grammar and Boston High School for Girls of all got in common.

Answers on a postcard.

I bet Talkinpeace Knows the answer.

nope, no idea, do tell

its not just grammar : its ANY segregation within state schooling BTW

They all have in the last 7 years or so received an Ofsted Unsatisfactory and are the only three Grammar Schools in the country to do so. Boston High 2008 Stretford Grammar 2009 Chatham boys Grammar Special Measures 2013.

I thought you would have known about these 'shite' grammar's.

Bad 'Grammar' Sorry. They are the only three grammar schools to have received either unsatisfactory or special measures.

Talkin are n't Your comprehensives supposed to be the best, in which case you should be comparing like with like since you would n't argue that poor comprehensives without extracurricular negated your view.

I think selective schools are a more efficient model for focussing resources and helping both ends lf the spectrum but would probably go for comprehensive ( or middle school) until 13 with testing at 12/13. However if either the comprehensive or grammar were poor I would choose the other one. A grades at GCSEs are achieved by about 23% so a quarter of comprehensive intakes and all pupils at egKent grammar schools should be getting them

talking why did your DD do worse than all her friends?

So what is your point smokepole? There are only 164 grammars in the country and 3000+ comprehensives - not counting Kent 'comprehensives' which aren't.

The type of school does not necessarily indicate whether the management is good - back in the Days of SecMods/Grammars and a handful of Technical schools there were always good and bad within each sector.

There is a time and place for particular joke. smokepole older daughter was laughing with people where as the younger daughter was being a snob and laughing at people. Its quite right at smokepole dd2 was punished.

Nobody is disputing that, but one or two seemed to think that smokepole needed telling off even though she was quite aware that what her dd2 said was not right and had already said yesterday: 'I hit the roof with DD and grounded her for a week.'.