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?

So you don't actually know?

2StripedSocks I'm quite intrigued about this SS school your DC goes to given they found the SATs test far worse than the entrance exam for the SS:

2StripedSocks Wed 14-Sep-16 17:06:43 We've done both types of 11+ and both types of Sats. All did v well in all of them...

Sats were far worse...All of my DC found the 11+ easy,even CEM

2StripedSocks Wed 14-Sep-16 17:34:00 Why don't you post the whole of my post on that other thread instead of cherry picking, it might make more sense

OK, as you've asked...

We've done both types of 11+ and both types of Sats. All did v well in all of them.

Sats were far worse and the primary were at were ridiculously laid back.The going on over the course of a week is too much though and the new content v demanding imvho. Also nearly all kids sit S
ats and they can be really hard for some who are climbing a huge mountain. Kids sitting the 11+ by choice are by and large pretty bright so not climbing as big a mountain.

All of my DC found the 11+ easy,even CEM and the kid with Sen.2 Saturday mornings and it's over with a week in between and a second go on the second Sat( they take the best score out of the 2).

They were very successful in both- level6s/5s and their equivalent in the new Sats.

Out of interest what are the equivanet L5/L6 scores?

2StripedSocks Wed 14-Sep-16 17:45:11 Why do you want to know?

Because my DC1 did the new graded SATs earlier this year.

s3.amazonaws.com/kettler-images/table%20tennis/indoor/life-style.jpg

(Sorry, it's probably a huge MN faux pas to comment on other posters' spats.)

My children go to their local catchment school which has no streaming and no setting. They can at particular points choose an easier/more practical option for maths and for English but not until Grade 10 for maths and Grade 12 for English. If you fail a class then if it's required for graduation you have to repeat it, but a very small number of children have to do this (you have to really fail). Trades type classes are offered from Grade 10 on which are taken alongside academic options and not considered as being for 'thickies' - trades careers can be very lucrative here.

All of their classes are mixed ability and yet they still manage to be engaged and perform highly. ds had a very spiky profile when he was younger (he is dyslexic and had behavioural issues but was also given extension opportunities) so I don't know if he would have got into a grammar back home, but really got things together in Grade 9 (second year high school here so aged 14) he is now consistently at the top of all his classes, expected to get grades good enough for the best university in our province (and looking at Oxford requirements he would easily get in there too as I was surprised to see that they are asking for 10% lower than his current crazy 95% average).

I really don't get why there is such a focus on selection when the issue is much more about whether children are engaged and learning. Both my children say that they have no problems supporting other children who want to learn but are struggling and that it does help them with their own learning, they just object to the lazy/disinterested children, which you can find in any system (I went to an English public school at sixth form and some of the behaviour was atrocious, boys clearly believing that they were far superior to their teachers and very little discipline going on).

As a piece of theatre, this thread is more hugely entertaining than watching a Christian throw themselves at the Lions.

From either a political or a philosophical debate standpoint I am afraid proseccocino has failed to make the grade.

Firstly, to ask for a response, but then to try to limit that to "but your response can only fit within my tightly defined parameters, considering it only through the lenses I provide and ignoring any evidence" means it can not be considered philosophically - or they have changed what philosophy is since I did my degree.

From a more political, real world evidence based pov there is no comparison between the 2 items you have raised. It is like comparing apples with stepladders.

Sadly, you have now failed and will spend the rest of your life marked by that decision, with it being almost impossible to undo.