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

[Proseccocino]

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?

Taking it to a new level

One for the team..

Sandy, I am in Warwickshire, not Kent.

We do not have county wide grammars but Rugby and Stratford Upon Avon both select 25% of the town/catchment area for grammar.

I have no idea what you're talking about regarding taking one for the team or otherwise.

It means they are prepared to talk down a 'non selective' school in order to promote their ideology !

Any way i was under the impression that most schools in Warwickshire are very good regardless of whether they are one of their '5' grammars or not !

The Stratford Grammars are 'tiny' the girls only admits 500 or so and i believe takes girls from miles away ! So hardly has any effect on a prosperous town...

Only has 500 pupils !

I'm in Rugby.

There are -

Lawrence Sheriff and Rugby High school as Single Sex Grammars

Ashlawn is a co-ed bilateral school. It has a catchment intake and is allowed to select a certain number from the whole area based on the 11+ and their own selection test. It's the closest thing to a comprehensive and DS's first choice. However, although we're in the catchment area, we live too far away to get in (this year it was a mile)

Harris school - this is a church school which was in special measures but seems to be turning itself round

Free school - this has only opened last week so have no idea what it will be like

Bilton High - this has just gone into special measures

Avon Valley - I don't know too much about this one as it's on the other side of town so we'd never get in anyway.

So no - all schools are not great and the 'choice' for those who don't pass is not all that it seems.

There are 3 Grammar Schools in Stratford taking a total of 350 children per year.

Just over 1000 children are divided among the secondary moderns.

So yes - Stratford Grammars take 25% of local town.

merrymouse

The origin of this work was a desire to consider whether some primary schools are better than others at assisting poorer children to access grammar schools.

The only way that some Primary Schools could be better at assisting poorer children to access Grammar Schools is if they strong-armed the parents into applying for their children to take the test.

The Primary Schools have no input whatsoever as far as the the 11+ process is concerned. It is made very clear that it is up to parents to put their children in for the 11+ if they so wish, and is no business of the school. The fact that many poorer parents opt-out of the process is sad and frustrating, but that is another debate. You can take a horse to water..........

It's going to be no use at all reserving places for FSM children in these proposed new GS, unless the application process is fundamentally changed, and the Primary Schools are once again involved, so that all children are given 11+ familiarisation in their school, and the exam is taken in their school by all children, unless they opt out.

I went to a Catholic school. You could only get in if you were Catholic or had an exceptional grade in science as it was also a "science college". I have no problem with giving those who are gifted extra opportunities that they can use to excel. All kids are different, they should all be allowed to concentrate on their gifts. My child will go to a grammar school if she is capable, if not then she'll concentrate on whatever else it is that she may be good at! Why would you not want the best for your child?

Whilst parents make decisions based on their own family's interest to their benefit, the Government should IMHO be making policy for the whole country (ie England).

The evidence (not anecdote or gut feeling) is that, over the whole cohort, a schooling system of 20-25% 11 plus selective/75-80% non selective schools will cause a deterioration in the performance of the 75-80% students (when compered to a totally non selective system) to give a marginal gain to a small number within the 20%.

Again, I ask, can we as a country afford that deterioration?

zzzzz Mon 12-Sep-16 12:04:54 Or perhaps you have no idea how schools around me work?

But it's not hard to work out how the operate simply by reading comments on here:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewforum.php?f=64&sid=f8141ed81a33bfaeafa166fcad819917

But as you rightly point out you're "not a researcher or a data analyst". so you likely have no idea what a true Grammar or sec. mod is. Yet you insist on telling those who do, Through first hand experience, that they are wrong.

Gooseygoosey12345 Mon 12-Sep-16 13:15:05 I went to a Catholic school. You could only get in if you were Catholic or had an exceptional grade in science as it was also a "science college". I have no problem with giving those who are gifted extra opportunities that they can use to excel

So being of a certain faith makes you gifted?

tomtherabbit Mon 12-Sep-16 12:50:24 So yes - Stratford Grammars take 25% of local town.|

I think you will find that a number of those children will move into catchment (or near enought to make the previous years cut off) just in time for the test etc. This will push the pass mark up which could mean that a number of children who would have otherwise qualified, no longer do. Does this really mean they are not of Grammar standard?

sandyholme Mon 12-Sep-16 12:24:15 I have heard about the London Centric media , but the Kent Centric education debate is talking it to a new level!

I agree, why is no one commenting on how successful the schools in Bucks are?

tomtherabbit Mon 12-Sep-16 12:31:03 Sandy, I am in Warwickshire, not Kent.

For some further reading, if interested:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewforum.php?f=37

Mum trying her best

In doing the research they included Bucks:

"Jesson looked at selective and non-selective local authorities and found that where schools in an area are organised on selective lines (as in 15 of the 152 local authorities) the overall impact is to depress the educational performance of these communities as a whole. He wrote ‘A government committed to raising standards for all must not exclude from its agenda those currently educated in ‘secondary modern’ schools – these pupils are currently seriously disadvantaged in GCSE performance by the way that their schooling system operates. Maintaining that disadvantage should not be an option’ (vii)."

vii Jesson,D (2006) Performance of pupils and schools in selective and non-selective local authorities Centre for Performance Evaluation, University of York in in Hewlett, M, Pring,R and Tulloch M (2006) Comprehensive Education:evolution, achievement and new directions, University of Northampton Press:.

user1471451327 a schooling system of 20-25% 11 plus selective/75-80% non selective schools will cause a deterioration in the performance of the 75-80% students, to give a marginal gain to a small number within the 20%

Can we as a country afford that deterioration?

Where is the evidence that the potential deterioration in 80% of pupils results is of greater significance to the country than the gain of the 20%. Are you referring to tax returns, GDP or something else. Can the country afford NOT to have a grammar system.

I saw a recent statistics showing approx 1/3 of graduates are in non graduate jobs, 1/3 are in jobs earning the same as others who didn't go to university and only 1/3 in jobs with a 'graduate premium' pay.

So what exactly is the point in having so many academics?

howabout Mon 12-Sep-16 11:31:50 It is not my experience that DC are exclusively academic, artistic, musical or sporty.

"What exactly is your experience based on?

I live in an area where tests are conducted for:

11 plus
Music
Sport
Technology

I can assure you, very few would qualify for a place under all these criteria."

I live in fully comprehensive Scotland and I have 3 DC of various ages mixing with literally thousands of other DC from various backgrounds with differing talents. My experience from their childhood, their parents childhood and even their great grandparents (all 4 were teachers) is that it is pretty standard for the school orchestra leader also to be best at maths and / or english and even also to be the sports captain. The characterisation of jocks and geeks or nerds and practical types is imho just that.

A cursory glance at MN would further demonstrate that it is generally the kids with spare academic capacity who are doing more extra curriculars. It was striking to see how many elite athletes in the GB Olympic team were also pursuing academically demanding careers. The same is true of young musician of the year.

I can see the point of selection at A level but I think other than for a very few at the bottom end of the selection criteria who may or may not benefit it does no-one any favours and certainly harms those who don't make the cut.

Should probably add DH is English and we both have cousins in the Kent and Bucks systems.

LetitiaCropleysCookbook

Generally girls do better at exams. If there are 100 places at a school, 50 for girls and 50 for boys then you can have two different criteria to get in to the same school.

As girls do better than boys (in general - not an exact science) then they may have to get 80% to get a place, and buys might only need 70%.

Mumtryingherbest: no that's not what I'm saying, obviously. It clearly says in my comment, and the most important part, that if you were exceptional in science you could attend as it was a science college! And it was only science that was taught at a higher level, the rest of the curriculum was standard, so no, having any faith does not make you gifted and I never implied that it did!

Mathsmum, your post terrifies me but at least your honest.

This is the point though.

The issue of whether too many children are going to university, whether there are enough graduate jobs, and whether there is a lack of training in other areas is a completely different argument.

So are you saying we can reduce university numbers by selecting at 10 and putting them on the road to graduation and hold the rest back?

No pressure on that test then.

So many jobs now need degrees which were never needed in the past.

Journalism for example. In the good old grammar days, journalists worked their way up through local newspapers etc. Now you need a degree or masters from a good university. Nursing is another.

So the question - can you decide at 10 who is destined for university and who is not? you would argue yes.

I would argue no. And it's a hell of a gamble to take and an awful lot of potential to waste.

you're you're

(Destroys own point)

tomtherabbit, no I am not trying to hold anyone back. Firstly I was replying to a comment about what was best for the country.

But on the wider point, if your trying to make everyone's life better, making them all highly academic isn't going to achieve that. Because we are creating massive numbers of academics with huge debts that they will never earn enough to pay back. So the tax payer has a higher and higher burden and we have a workforce who are trained for academic jobs that we don't have. We then have to import immigrants to do the jobs that these 'academics' are to qualified/don't want to do.

I am suggesting that we have all schools with an all round general good education, with more technical and vocational schools and yes academic specilised schools. We will then have children with excellent education in areas they excel at, and we end up with more people maximising earnings so the tax burden can be lowered and more resources can be put into the system to help those who cant afford them.