Grammar School - contextual offer time?

[Keepyourkidsafe]

In light of recent changes to make & increase use of contextual offers in order to level the playing field for Oxbridge entry, I am at a cross roads as I am considering what many public school parents have been contemplating for some time......stopping the endless struggle & sacrifices to pay school fees and divert the funds to buying a house in an eye watering expensive grammar catchment area.

This way we will not be affected by the impact of contextual offers and still have a higher disproportionate chance of securing a top/Oxbridge university.....we can spend the saved cash on luxuries like cars, holidays, regular visits to restaurants, designer clothes, etc....

It seems like an obvious choice, right?
However, I am in a moral dilemma as it feels wrong to potential take places from other less fortunate kids that would otherwise have got our places (which we would have secured via additional support of paid tuition).

Is it fair that I and many others like me can buy our way to grammar schools by paying through our teeth for houses in the right catchment areas and extra tuition?
This isn't a new phenomenon but there are many like me about to join the grammar system, making it even more competitive, so we do not suffer from the impact of contextual offers.

My question is should grammar schools also be treated in the same way as independent schools and have quotas applied as they are now more disproportionately represented at Oxbridge and leading universities.

When I went to private school during the 90s it cost about £5k for the year - same school is now £15k for the year. My dad and my husband are in the same profession (& the main earners), DH is not paid 3 times what my dad was paid in my childhood!

Hopefully Grammar Schools will be abolished soon.

OP, are you having a sideways moan about the ‘restrictions’ that privately educated pupils now face in getting into Oxbridge, or trying to maximise your chances of kids getting into Oxbridge, or some other convoluted point?

It’s all very simple.

Elitism (incl private schools) is unfair and created inequality .

Grammar Schools are unfair and actually even in their Golden Afe did not achieve the social mobility intended. And are now a joke in terms of social mobility while holding few educational credentials for doing more than reflecting their intake.

Your kids might not pass their 11+, might not want to go to Oxbridge, etc etc.

Do what you like. You are in a privileged position whatever you do.

You could even move to a less expensive area and send your kids to a Comprehensive and go on even more holidays

Our DC are at a grammar school but no catchment so no 'eye watering'. It's super selective and kids can apply from anywhere. We have children coming by train/bus from Swindon, Cheltenham, Bristol and Gloucester to name a few. Wildly different house prices across these areas. My dc went to a local village primary, and whilst they did have a tutor in Y5 it was pretty low key. I do understand that the likes of Kent grammars etc are far far more competitive.

We had 5 grammars to apply for within less than 10 mile radius so any would have been do-able. There are 4 grammars in Gloucester - 2 girls, one co-Ed and one boys. Gloucester is not an affluent area at all.

I live in a grammar area, would you like to buy my house OP?! I can happily come up with an eye watering price.

Getting your kids into grammar school doesn't guarantee any advantage in terms of getting to Oxbridge or Russell group unis - they have to be bright enough in the first place.
The teaching may not be that different in a grammar school. They tend to get brilliant results because they take in the brightest kids with the pushiest parents.
I went to a grammar school back in the good old days where it was a genuinely level playing field and there were plenty of kids from sink estates etc in the same classes with me (many of whom have gone on to very successful careers). The same school (where I now teach) is a monoculture of tutored middle-class kids, with a very high rate of mental health issues. It has a poisonous atmosphere and I wouldn't dream of sending my kids there. Just sayin'.

Ha ha. This is a great post.

OP, I spent years teaching in one of the most deprived areas of the country. For several years I was Head of Sixth Form, so my job was partly trying to get kids into university. Oxford and Cambridge used to phone me for chats. Other universities too. One time, Oxford gave us money to bring some of our students there for a personal tour with the head of admissions. They were super lovely. Anyway, I thought this was 'a thing'.

It was not 'a thing'. I moved to work in a nice independent school. I was shocked to hear they didn't get the phonecalls, they didn't get the outreach programmes.

To be fair, in the whole time I worked in the first school, we never sent a single student to Oxbridge (generally, they didn't want to go. Our brightest were confused about what benefits it would bring them). In the second school we sent several kids every year and pulled all the strings we possibly could.

OP, the best thing you can do to send your child to Oxbridge, is send them to a deprived school with no track record of getting kids into Russell Group universities ever. I can recommend a few if you like?

You ask should I move my children to a grammar school - what age are they? Are they outside of the normal admission schedule for 11+ ?

Curious to clarify, the deprived school had excellent outreach from Oxbrjdge but not a single dc went?
The independent had no outreach but dc did get into Oxbrjdge?

There are a lot of outreach programmes run by top unis; tours, talks, taster courses, free residential programmes, a lot are aimed at students from deprived area whose family have not been to university. Some activities take place at primary schools too, to "catch them young". A lot of state students are put off applying for Oxbridge because they see them as out of their reach or it is too posh for them. There are also less students applying from up North. The outreach programmes have been running for many years. The outreach doesn't directly help students get into uni, but encourage them to aim for it and apply, they still need to be top students to get in. Some top independent schools also run Oxbridge admission classes for their state counterparts, explaining how to apply and run mock interviews. I am not surprised there are more state students at Oxbridge since more are applying and more are ready for the process.

There is no need for independents or grammars to have outreach as the schools, parents and students know how to get there.

There is currently a real awakening to tackling the 'not for me' feeling in primary age children at state schools. A London primary head I follow on twitter just posted this;

Spent some of the holidays developing our careers curriculum - a strand of PSHE. Using the CDI Framework, we've 3 priorities: 1. Developing softer skills for inner confidence 2. Financial Literacy & responsibility 3. Options & Pathways. Governors, Parents & Staff all involved.

I just find it odd because our good secondary school has out reach to Oxbrjdge and yet pupils still don't seem to get there...

I think there are two separate issues here. Contextual offers are made to children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Great swathes of children in the state sector do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds so are not eligible for these. The second issue is where do you draw the line in trying to level the playing field? You talk about grammar catchments and advantages, but you get this in non-selective comprehensive schools too. Property prices are higher close to outstanding schools, kids in the top sets get more opportunities both in school and out because their parents are invariably in a position to support their education through tutoring, extra curricular or helping out themselves.

@EvilPea - you can appeal a bad 11+ day in Kent. There's head teacher appeals, that happen before the results get released and the parental appeals afterwards.

Our (state) primary school raised it as an issue for dc1, he had issues with his hands in year 4 and so didn't have a lot of written work. They said it could be an issue if we didn't get it sorted if we needed to do an 11+ appeal, as one of the things that's part of that appeal is the school producing evidence of working at a high level for some time.

With the current year 6, we know 3 children who's parents have successfully appealled a borderline result.

Borderline appeals here is within one or two marks. So a bad day of more and even with head teacher support, you won’t get it unless there is a genuine reason. Even within one Mark I’ve heard of the schools saying “you simply didn’t make the mark your childs not eligible” then the parent pitched their case with supportive evidence.
2 out of 60 got in at dds year, they had been tutored daily for a year and tutored weekly from year 4. That’s not a reflection on the primary. It’s a reflection on the lack of tutoring at hers and over tutoring at others or out of catchment. Kids get the trains to the grammars from miles away.

I was incredibly naive to the brutality of it and actually the confidence knocking of being the cleverest in the class but not clever enough to make it in. She should have passed, but on the day. It didn’t happen. I was fairly confident that being consistently in the top 3 in the class would manage it.

@Springisspringing2 - outreach doesn't actually give the students direct advantage or easier for them to get in.

@EvilPea - 11+ is brutal, the marks doesn't really reflect whether they are clever or not, it reflects on how they did on that particular test on that particular day. Don't be too hard on yourself.

Evil pea you can appeal there are two ways to do it and if heads disgustingly don't support their own students when they know they are grammar able

Most boards are aware of who they are

I'm extremely confident that no able child needs two years of tuition unless their school really is terrible..

You just need to be confident that the correct curriculum areas are covered.. And they understand non verbal reasoning.

From my own experience with dd I am confident that if primaries could support grammar able dc.. They would definitely get more in from diverse backgrounds, again.. Like they used to in df day!!

I know because my own dd had zero tutiton, I showed her some u tube stuff on non verbal reasoning a few weeks before.. And got her some books to practise the non verbal reasoning.
She just passed.

Wyd London... Yes I know I just find it really odd, why don't they get students in? It's suooswed to be a good school and yet most destinations seem to be polys
.

@EvilPea

I live in a grammar area. You won’t be taking a place from a “poor less fortunate” child. Only those heavily tutored get in, which means the score goes up so the tutoring gets more intense the next year and so on and so on. It is cost prohibitive with private schools also offering tutoring there’s already that advantage (or disadvantage).

However even tutoring does not guarantee a place on the day. Even a child who should walk it, may not on the day and you cannot appeal a bad day.

What? Well, my kids got in without tutoring. There’s a limit to what tutoring can do. Yes kids need to be taught to understand the question, but that can be fine with a couple of past papers at home with parents. You don’t need more than that. And extra tutoring doesn’t make any difference

I’ve tutored children for the 11+. If a kid hasn’t got it, tutoring won’t make any difference. I’ve come across parents who think they can pay enough to tutors to get their children in to grammar school. It doesn’t work like that. If a child has the ability, I will help them become familiar with the format, and practice a couple of papers with them. Nothing more

Plenty of students from single parents on the council estates at our local grammars

@Springisspringing2

I just find it odd because our good secondary school has out reach to Oxbrjdge and yet pupils still don't seem to get there...

Maybe they don’t want to? There are a CD limited number of subjects where the teaching at oxbridge is seen as superior to other universities. It wouldn’t be first choice for many biologists, chemists, geographers, business study students, doctors, nurses, etc. Languages seems to be their main selling point, also English literature, but even then, there is not much teaching in English. Significantly fewer contact hours than in other universities

Excuse the typos. On phone holding sleeping baby

Lots of assumptions about grammar schools and house prices too. My tiny city has a grammar school, admission is by 11+ and closest distance from the school ( apart from state boarding which is furthest from the school). All children who pass the 11+ within the city get a place at the school. House prices here are far less than our nearest town.

You can buy your way into catchment for an outstanding comprehensive too, so this isn't a grammar problem, it's a more general unequal society problem.

My view is that it is my responsibility to do my best for my children's education, keeping within the rules. The duty of fairness to wider society is a matter for public policy.

My parents who were Guardian reader-types. They would never push for any advantage for me. I watched as my friends' parents advocate and angle for theirs. It pissed me right off that I didn't have anyone on my side like they did. It made me feel unloved and unimportant.

Springisspringing2
The answer to your question is quite simple. The school simply does not have enough if any High achievers in it's cohorts. If a school sends the Vast majority of it's pupils to ex polys, then I am fairly confident the percentage of High achievers that attend that said school is quite negligible(full of middle and low achievers mostly). There must be a school in town or just out of town that creams off the majority of it's achieving pupils.

Wingdefender
Which area is that if I might ask?