Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Original poster

If you're anti grammar schools, then please answer me this:

785 replies

Proseccocino · 09/09/2016 18:02

If your child had a gift for music, then you might send her to a school which excels musically.

If your child had a talent for sport, you might send him to an academy which excels at sport, one where he can really focus and develop in the area in which he is better than his peers.

And so on....!

So, if your child is intelligent, academically gifted... Why is it bad to say you would send her to a selective school where she can study along with other bright students?

If it's OK to separate children according to ability in sport or music or drama or technology, and send them to specialist schools which excel in these areas - why is it a different story if their talent with their academic ability?

OP posts:
AnguaResurgam · 09/09/2016 18:10

You can't actually choose to send your DC to a school that excels at sport/music/whatever - you can express a preference for one and might or might not get in. There are some which are partly selective, just as there are some which are partly selective on academic potential.

But there aren't schools of that type in every area.

sandyholme · 09/09/2016 18:13

Good Luck Proseccocino !

Fortunately in the real world , there is support for grammar schools !

OldJoseph · 09/09/2016 18:13

I'm not sure what schools you're talking about in your list.

Our local comp. is a music and technology academy but it's a school for the town and the surrounding villages. No child is admitted on the basis of a particular talent. However if they enjoy music there are some good opportunities at the school.

I think most state secondaries put the children in sets for some subjects -this is their opportunity to study with bright kids. Why do they need to be with other bright kids all day for every subject?

SpeakNoWords · 09/09/2016 18:16

There are no comprehensive schools that select or specialise in those things in the area that I live in. So I don't recognise the choice that you are claiming exists.

SlightlyperturbedOwl · 09/09/2016 18:19

Just asking, but if your child was at the 21st percent point for the most 'academically gifted' at age 10, would you be happy with them trogging off to school with the 80% who weren't going to grammar school? What if they were a summer baby and had extra potential? What if their excellent top 1% maths skills were outweighed by only being just above average at English? Would you be in favour of grammar schools then? Just asking.

situatedknowledge · 09/09/2016 18:19

^^ What OldJoseph said. The sorts of schools you are talking about really only exist in the private sector. State schools don't operate like that.

bibbitybobbityyhat · 09/09/2016 18:19

In reality the vast majority of parents cannot choose to put their children in a school with a particular specialism over another school. The 6 choices is a myth.

Very academically gifted children can be educated quite brilliantly in non-selective state schools. There is no need to completely separate them from the less academically able. I don't know of any comprehensive schools that don't set most classes.

MandMand · 09/09/2016 18:21

There may be support for grammar schools, but is there support for secondary moderns?

If your child is academically gifted at maths, but hopeless at English, or vice versa, that's where they will end up. If your child is bright, hard working and well behaved, but not quite bright enough, that's also where they will end up.

If you wouldn't want your child to be go to a secondary modern, how can you justify being pro-grammar?

MirabelleTree · 09/09/2016 18:24

None of those schools locally here either. As I said on another thread there is a downward trend of children here going to the Grammar as the local school has upped its game whilst the Grammar lost its outstanding status and now 'requires improvement'

Original poster
Proseccocino · 09/09/2016 18:25

Slightly, grammar schools tend to have 13+/14+/16+ entrance (or some combination) so they could sit the entrance test again at those points.

OP posts:
SlightlyperturbedOwl · 09/09/2016 18:25

Exactly Mandmand, I suspect newspaper headlines shouting 'bring back secondary moderns for 75-80% of pupils' would get short-shrift from voters

alwayssurprised · 09/09/2016 18:26

If my DC is 21% at eleven plus frankly I would rather send them to be top students in the non selective reaping all the benefits than to be the bottom of the pile in a grammar. To still go to a grammar right at the threshold of getting in only suits very driven DC with robust character at that point of life.

Twunk · 09/09/2016 18:26

I went to a grammar and I do not support them. Yes it was great for me! Fantastic in fact. But the secondary moderns were mostly awful.

Caryfakes · 09/09/2016 18:29

More support and differentiation in secondary moderns is required not more segregation in society. I foresee better off families using private tutors to hothouse their offspring through the 11+, yet the bright children from poorer backgrounds won't have this advantage

maddiesparks · 09/09/2016 18:30

Locally we have a high school that specialises in sport, one in media and arts and one in maths and science. We also have a school which offers more vocational options such as NVQ's and BTEC's. I don't think grammar schools would add anything much to the area I live in. But in principle I don't actually disagree with them. Schools do actually sort out pupils according to academic ability anyway - surely that's what sets are?

Haggisfish · 09/09/2016 18:30

State secondaries used to be able to specialise but that has stopped. It's not that I don't support grammars per se, it's that I know the same resources wouldn't be put into vocational education. Which would suck.

Caryfakes · 09/09/2016 18:31

Sorry when I write secondary moderns I meant state high schools

Caryfakes · 09/09/2016 18:31

Write= wrote

Chippednailvarnishing · 09/09/2016 18:32

grammar schools tend to have 13+/14+/16+ entrance (or some combination) so they could sit the entrance test again at those points
None of the grammar schools near me do this.

SlightlyperturbedOwl · 09/09/2016 18:33

Yes they always did allow some transfer, but let's face it moving schools is a major step. We had one girl transferred in later and it was not easy for her. I went to a grammar, it was not a good experience (some are fine, I'm sure) and I would not want to send my DCs to one. I had one friend who kept it secret where she lived as she lived in a council house (I knew her from primary) and eventually dropped out with no O Levels.

AndNowItsSeven · 09/09/2016 18:33

Summer borns get extra point added in the 11plus.

OldJoseph · 09/09/2016 18:34

So if my dc passed a test later in her school career which meant the grammar school would let her in, would another child have to leave the grammar for not passing the test?

How would the parents of the leaver feel about that? Would they perhaps contest the decision? Surely that's an administrative nightmare.

Twunk · 09/09/2016 18:34

Maddie

If someone is in the top 10% for maths but doesn't do so well in English - and they don't get to grammar because of it - there's no way they can be taught with their equally mathematical peers because they're in separate schools.

Streaming within a comprehensive school means that pupils can move between streams, but crucially can be in the higher streams for classes they excel at.

AndNowItsSeven · 09/09/2016 18:34
  • points
BertrandRussell · 09/09/2016 18:36

"Slightly, grammar schools tend to have 13+/14+/16+ entrance (or some combination) so they could sit the entrance test again at those points."

No, they don't.