Who saw BBC 2 Grammar schools - who will get in " last night?

[Foxy333]

Watched this last night with interest. We're not in Grammar school area and generally I think it was / is a bad system that works for the top abilities but not for the middle and lower ones. However I've seen my daughter suffer in years 7 to 9 or a comprehensive from not being stretched and teachers concentrating on the most demanding pupils who need lots of help and ignoring the quiet well- behaved pupils who going to pass GCSE's anyway. Often some pupils disrupt the class and the whole class gets punished.

They only set them for 2 subjects and I've heard that's changing in future to one. so I see why a Grammar would suit some. But why cant all schools be good. Is it stricter discipline that's needed?

Felt for the children in the program, so young to face this divisive test.

Why so bitter and negative. Did you have a bad experience of one

Yes BertrandRussell, why did you choose a Grammar School for your DC, if you hate them so much?

Kitty,

Bert has gone into this many times before.

If you live in a wholly selective county, you have to send your children to the schools that exist. You can't say 'I want to send my child to a comprehensive' if there isn't one.

Bert did not WANT to send her child to a grammar OR a secondary modern. But as those were the only schools available, she had to send her children to them.

It would be like if I, living in mid England were to have it demanded of me why I, of Welsh ancestry, don't send my children to a Welsh medium school. Am I to be criticised for sending them to an English medium school because no Welsh medium school is available?

It's probably worth clarifying, as well, that those who dislike the bipartite selective system aren't 'against grammars'. We are 'against the bipartite selective system', so we would seek to abolish selection, thus removing BOTH grammars AND secondary moderns.

It is interesting [somewhat depressing][ that it is ALWAYS characterised as 'the grammar school system', even though by far the majority of children will actually end up in the never-mentioned secondary moderns.

i wonder if you created 2 surveys

1. 'Do you support the creation of more grammar schools' and
2. 'Do you support the creaion of more secondary moderns'

and asked statistically identical cohorts each question, whether you would get very different results? I suspect so, though in fact they mean EXACTLY the same thing in practice.

It also masks good teaching! One can never truly la y claim to successes!

Very true! I just find tge whole business very unsettling and then people think they should tutor because x y and z are and it whips up a certain panic (I’m sure much the same can be said about 11+ tutoring). I don’t teach btw and admire those who do. I just work on the pastoral side of things.

So earlier on in the thread, as a local person, I said that the grammar school in the programme is taking over the management of the comprehensive in the programme, and how I thought that was going to be a good thing because as a local person, I do know that a lot of "chair throwing" type behaviour goes on in a few local schools and that the majority of parents are sick with worry about it. I know that similar arrangements in other areas have worked well - this remains to be seen of course with these two schools but I think its a positive thing.

Either no one had the slightest interest in what was shown on the programme or they think this arrangement is not worthy of discussion. But I am really surprised that the comment was just ignored. Maybe some posters just want a grammar vs comp dust up?

“Yes BertrandRussell, why did you choose a Grammar School for your DC, if you hate them so much“

I live in a wholly selective area. I have a child that went to grammar school and a child that went to high school. Their GCSE results were broadly similar. Reinforcing my belief that bright supported kids do well wherever they go. Kids like mine aren’t the issue.

I'll get me coat.

“I dont think there is anywhere in the country that has comprehensive schools. After you take out the privately selected, wealth selected and faith selected all you have left is secondary moderns. Where are the so called comprehensives?”

In my area of London we have many good (as in ‘Outstanding’ ) proper comprehensives. Even the one in the poshest area also has a council estate in catchment on each side. High density social housing, big houses divided into smaller rental flats and private housing all exist crammed in next to each other in London so although there are schools that have a less balanced intake (more often all poorer families in inner city areas) many have a mix of poorer and wealthier pupils. And all-ability, with good results. ( even allowing for the London average being higher than the national average).

Staples I mentioned it too, also largely ignored, your last comment is spot on imo.

Absolutely understandable cantkeepawayforever but I don’t see why she has to be so aggressive in her posts to other posters including me. She can get her point across without getting personal and rude.

Scrub you still have private / independent schools mucking things about.

“She can get her point across without getting personal and rude.”

If that was directed at me, I wholeheartedly apologise if I was personal and rude to,you. Please show me where I was and I will ask for the posts to be deleted.

Bertrand. In a utopia you could spend four times as much money on many of the kids you talk about and make little discernible progress on results !: Their families and themselves are not interested in education (you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink ) There are also contrary to your opinion quite satisfied with their lives.

Conversely why is that so many second generation Asian and an increasing number of Black African children are making it to grammar school. Simple the families and their cultural identity values education.

Staples there are not comprehensives if there are grammars - there will be secondary moderns. These are not comprehensives. V different things.
Comps have kids from every social background and every academic ability. And properly funded comps work really well for EVERY child. However no comp is currently properly funded - money is in short supply so not enough teachers and support staff. It's so easy to teach kids who are naturally bright and have parental support. Teaching the kids who have chaotic lives and are angry at the world is much harder.
But hey, let's give what limited money there is to create better schools for kids who have engaged parents and are clever - at the detriment of kids whose lives are a bit crap.

THEY !

I went to a grammar school and am so pleased I did and would like my boys to sit the 11+ when they come of age.
However I found that I was at the top of my primary school year 6 class and did well on the 11+ but academically I was pretty average in my grammar school class. I had to work a lot harder and apply myself to keep up than I did to be top of the class in year 6.
I was one of only two students from my primary school that passed - the other girl was privately tutored to pass the exam and then when she was accepted and started she really struggled and then resented the whole system and had an awful experience. It's certainly not for everyone and I don't think it's right for those who need extra tuition just to pass the exam. Unless that tuition will continue through the secondary school years so help them keep up.

it would be good if the government could invest some money that is sorely lacking in specialist schools before even thinking about grammar schools.

You don't need lots of tutoring- my son had 13 hours over 12 months and in between he did the practice books. They went in the bin half done. Passed the test with a score of 225 - pass mark was 217. So safely got in. On the day of the test there were kids crying and parents getting upset with their kids because they didn't want to do the test but was clearly being made to. Some of my sons friends were tutored for 2 hours every week for a year plus homework and only 2 out of 6 got in. You have to find the school that fits your child not make the child fit the school you want. My daughter would have never liked Grammer School so we never entered her. You have to know your child and do what's right for them not you. It's hard though.

Some of the posts on this thread make me feel physically sick. The sense of entitlement, the looking down your nose at uneducated parents..the ones whose kids aren't bright enough to pass the 11plus. Some of you really should take a look at yourselves and your own uneducated opinions.

Firstly, no one gets the monopoly on hard times. I was a victim of DV. My parents died in my early 20s, I don't have any other family. My eldest DS has never met his father. Not sad enough? Ok then what about the girl on tv who failed her 11plus is a child from an immigrant family whose mum works for minimum wage? Or the boy my DS went to school with, who is a refugee (having seen all manner of horrors in his home country) and taught himself English, which his parents still don't speak?

Lots of people don't have perfect lives. But none of that should stop anyone from seeing the absolute unfairness of the grammar system. And that for every kid with a difficult life it might benefit (bloody few in Bexley due to the massive numbers coming from private school) there's 3 times as many kids not getting that benefit in the non selective school.

Some of the kids at non selectives have nice home lives, some don't. Some have sad back stories and some don't.

But none of those children are inferior to, or in any way less important than, the GS kids. And none of them deserves an inferior education. But that's what they get.

Some of the above posts seem to suggest that it doesn't matter because a better school won't make any difference to the kids who didn't pass the 11plus. Maybe that's the case - I don't agree - but even IF it is, that's still not right is it? I don't want to come over all Dead Poets Society but why aren't we trying to inspire kids rather than it being a race to the bottom? Vocational training makes me uncomfortable - at DSs school they were pushing kids into bricklaying courses at 14. Having barely ensured those kids could read and write.

As for it not mattering to kids if they don't pass the 11plus, the poster who said that very clearly has no first hand experience. I can tell you it really affected my DS. All his peers thought he would pass. I had parents coming up to me after telling me how shocked they were. We told him it wasn't the end of the world and he could do well but we knew that given how bad the local non selective is (worse than Erith School fwiw) that wouldn't happen. I am angry that he and all the kids at his school, Erith School and all the other non selective in Bexley and beyond have been condemned to a second rate education all because of an assessment of their intelligence at 10.

And there is no way to justify that. None.

I don't live a selective area but thought that the Secondary Modern they showed in the programme looked great. Perhaps that is why all but one of the children who did n't get selected for grammar seemed quite ok about the result.
I presume that secondary moderns offer more choice of technical subjects than grammars? If the secondary modern is a good school what does a bright but nor supported at home miss out on for academic subjects?
I don't think brightish DCs whose families have low educational aspirations fulfil potential in the comprehensive system TBH.

I would have thought that it was the near misses or 'had a bad day for the exam' due to nerves etc that suffered the most from being divided by the eleven plus. Interesting and reassuring therefore what was said by a previous poster that bright and supported DCs do well at either grammar or secondary modern.

The German, Austrian and Swiss system are equally divisive at about the same age as the eleven plus.

I live in Kent, with a son in Y5, and we are looking at the whole range of SM/grammar/independents. I agree with many others that the ideal system would be excellent comprehensives for all, and I wish that was an option here. I'm not arguing in favour of grammars, but I
think there are a couple of points worth making.

1. SMs are not/do not have to be as bad as they are painted here. I have friends with kids at places like Skinners KA and Hayesbrook whose kids are thriving there and really rate the schools. It only makes the hysterical scramble for grammar schools worse if we claim that SMs are worse than they actually are.

2. There will always be a 'pecking order' of schools in the eyes of some parents, whatever system you have. I knew people last year whose children passed the 11+ but they were gutted because their children got into grammar school A rather than grammar school B. I know people this year who will send their kids private if they 'only' get into grammar school B or C. This is not an argument in favour of grammar schools, but I do think it indicates that a utopia where all schools are 'equal' would be very difficult to achieve, even if you got rid of all grammars and independents.

moreshitandnofuckingredemption - Staples I mentioned it too, also largely ignored

To be fair there isn't much to form a discussion on really. If you or StaplesCorner would care to elaborate on the advantages that you feel have been gained from such an arrangement then perhaps others will be able to comment.

Partially watched Ep1 of the programme. Watching it now. I am full of admiration for the mother of Juanita (think that’s her name). She appreciates the value of education, is on a low income, lives in challenging conditions but is determined to INVEST an inordinate amount of her income to support her eldest child. Yes, she did invest and not squander.

Your 2nd point is really well made stircrazypie. Even in a fully comprehensive system, different school will have different Headteachers with different visions and different teachers. This will lead to different outcomes. Over a long period of time, this will create divisions of school. Even within grammar schools in the same county, there are top ranking grammars and middle of the road grammars. Schools like Tiffin, HB, QEB or St Olave’s wasn’t the most competitive to get in from day one, was it?

I am a supporter of seletive system in its principle but defenitely not in the format in the UK. It is too rigid and the inconsistent approach under the illusion of choice makes it a system not fit for purpose.