People who are in favour of grammar schools....

[BertrandRussell]

....what is your proposal for the majority who are not selected?

"Not sure it's relevant to this thread"

It's totally relevant to this thread, because the supporters of grammar schools believe that you can categorise children as 'bright' or 'not bright', or 'academic' or 'not academic' and that you can easily do this at the age of 11.

"Well total under my system of '40% ' educated in selective education"

And what about the children who are in the bottom 30% in literacy and the top 5% for maths?

Or the really really clever kids who don't want to do the 11+. Or the ones whose parents won't enter them?

How would secondary moderns where the top 40% were missing meet the needs of the really bright children who don't do the 11+?

Bert
I didn't know you were familiar with Clitheroe Grammar, you'll know then that it has a long history of accepting children from all backgrounds.
My dh went there too

I don't profess to understand the kent system but from what i hear I don't blame people for complaining about it, it sounds like a right old circus tbh.
Trafford has head in that direction too, but the usual complaints don't apply to all grammars.

I think every town should have a grammar and parents opt in if they want their dc to take 11+. Round here there really wouldn't be herds of people tutoring for a place, the brightest whose parents were interested would apply, the rest would stay as they are in our shit little secondaries. They will never improve these as it's ingrained from generations past and present.
At least some would have a chance of social mobility. Which is why I support grammar schools.
Out of the children I have come across in the past 20 or so years, I can count on two hands each year, the dc that would be likely to pass 11+, they haven't had the chance of a good education. If there are this many in other schools across our borough, what chance do these bright kids have?

Utterly brilliant:

twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/773901035639279617

The main issues with grammar schools is the selection process. The tests, as any test, can be taught and people spend a lot to try to ensure their kids a place. That shouldn't be allowed because it totally defeats the point of grammar schools. How is it fair that a bright, academic student who can't afford tuition can be beaten to a place by one less able and academic but who's parents paid for a year of tuition? The whole system is flawed unless they can sort out the selection process and make it an actual meritocracy.

Zodlebud I would like to send my children to a single sex school at 11. There are no state options in my area other than grammar.

Well the money will have to come from somewhere. How much more tax are you and your family prepared to pay to see your individual personal preferences met.

I went to a grammar school and enjoyed it but obviously I'm sure I would have enjoyed a comp too.

I would be for them if there was a way of making the test impossible to tutor for. I think the test has become synonymous with parents spending obscene amounts of money on tutoring and therefore pushing out children from backgrounds with less disposable income- the very children that grammar schools should be targeted at.

"Oh for goodness sake Mini your DC go to a bespoke selective comp which selects music ability. What about the non musical kids"

It selects 7% for music and the rest get in through sports (7%) or through a lottery system.

There are quite a few partially selective comprehensives in London. Partial selection allows them to achieve a COMPREHENSIVE intake of students - ie, to have children from across the ability range.

It makes me laugh that you have the rage about comprehensive schools which make special provision to take children from across the ability range. Prior to my dc's school introducing music and sports scholarships (about 10 years ago) it was considered one of the most appalling, roughest schools in the UK. The scholarships were introduced to attract more local m/c parents to the school, and it has worked. The school is now a truly mixed community with children and families from all walks of life. For some reason you think there's something unethical about this. You want the school to carry on catering primarily for underachieving disadvantaged children, so you can point the finger and say 'look, it's one size fits all and doesn't cater for high achieving children'. Honestly, supporters of comprehensives can't win!

How is it fair that a bright, academic student who can't afford tuition can be beaten to a place by one less able and academic but who's parents paid for a year of tuition?

Mine had some informal tuition on non verbal for the summer and did a little bit at school. He is exceptionally bright in school and no one thought he'd struggle with 11+ until he started trying some.
However, some of his friends have had tuition 3 times a week for 9 months!! They are trained 11+ machines!

Totally
That is my point. Your son might not have needed any tuition to get a place if his friend's parents weren't sending theirs for so much tuition. It should be a level playing field.

2stripes tuition is around £20 an hour. That puts it out of the price range of a lot of families.

Many private prep schools (up to 13) are non-selective and manage to cater for different academic abilities, mainly due to smaller class sizes, more resources, and streaming. Private public schools (13 to 18) often have a bias towards academics, sports, arts etc.

Shame the state sector can't be the same but I guess that's why people who can, pay to go private.

Flatcoatfan And what about the children who don't hit their stride until later? My daughter would never have passed an 11+ exam but by the time she was in year 9 she 'got it'

Bucks has a 12 plus and (I think) 13 plus. However, it is dependent on spaces being available.

Gillybeanz, Clitheroe Grammar is not reperesentative of the community because it takes less than half the percentage of children in receipt of Free School Meals than the Lancashire Local Authority average. It is a highly socially privileged school with just over 4% of children attending eligible for Free School Meals. That is extremely low.

For comparision, nearly 50% of pupils at my nearest comprehensive school are eligible for FSM; our nearest grammar school has just over 6% FSM pupils.

I am in favour of grammar schools. I was brought up in a poor working class family in a deprived inner city area. I had no tutoring. In fact I don't think my parents had heard of it and they certainly could not have afforded it. I never saw my father sober.
I got into my first choice grammar school and have had an excellent professional career.
Why stop other bright kids from having the same?
Of course there should be excellent provision for all kids but this is about grammar schools.
Bertrand, why not just say that you feel strongly because your DS did not get in.

MumUndone Many private prep schools (up to 13) are non-selective

Money for fees and interviews are one method of selection for private preps. What you mean is that they don't all have entrace exams.

Tryingtosaveup I got into my first choice grammar school are you sure you would have got a place at the grammar school if you were applying now. The Grammar schene has changed considerably:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewforum.php?f=64

I went to a grammar school and loved it but I don't agree with them. I'm a teacher. I think we should be modelling our education system on ones which are successful and egalitarian, even if that is at the expense of 'parental choice'. Parental choice ends up meaning choice of the haves over the have-nots.
Grammar schools may have created some social mobility in the past but they are now pretty much synonymous with wealthy parents, expensive areas and competitive tutoring.
It should be perfectly possible to cater for pupils of different abilities and ambitions on the same site. It a question of tailoring the curriculum and the range of available qualifications to society's needs, not of segregating children into either prestigious or sink schools.
There are a hell of a lot of things wrong with the education system at the moment, but a lack of grammar schools is not one of them.

Ontopofthesunset Gillybeanz, Clitheroe Grammar ... It is a highly socially privileged school with just over 4% of children attending eligible for Free School Meals. That is extremely low.

Not to mention
0.2% SEN vs National average of 1.8%
5% EAL vs National average of 15%
4% FSM vs National average of 29.4%

All publicly funded schools in the UK should be non selective. They should all be secular too.

This ^