Non grammar school areas - do you regret not having had a child have a chance of grammar school?

[mids2019]

I live in an area with no local grammar school but am aware of other parents that have made decisions to move into grammar school areas with their children gaining successful entry.

Does any one else sometimes feel they would have liked their child the opportunity to take the 11+?

I sometimes feel my children are vaguely aware of grammar/private schools where the 'bright kids go' and dont want them to feel educationally less esteemed.

‘I understand the point that a child likely to do well at GCSEs will do so at any good school and it seems perfectly sensible.’

I just don’t think this is true.
At the grammar school I went to they squeezed every drop of exam success possible out of us. There was loads of pressure and some people were very unhappy. I really don’t think it was good on all round development but by God we got the best grades we were capable of.

The local comprehensive where my kids go has the edge in a lot of ways. It’s happier, more inclusive, the kids grow up with a more independent attitude that will hold them in good stead for the future but the teaching is very hit and miss. Nobody is encouraged to get 9s, the only language is French and that is taught so badly most kids are put of languages for life, girls seem to be discouraged from maths and science…

Ultimately if you prioritise academic performance you will get better results, it’s not just the intake.

Anecdotal evidence is never going to prove whether a child would achieve higher grades at a grammar than a comprehensive. At our grammar, I got As, my brother in the middle and my sister towards the bottom (and was asked to leave before sixth form). Neither my brother or sister worked hard.

But, as someone else said, grammars are usually set up to get the best exam results and the aspiration for pupils was to get As. I don't think I'd have achieved this at a different type of school as our school did a great job of exam preparation. That said, the sports and music provision wasn't great so it really depends whether you want the best exam results or a rounded education.

Our local grammar is probably top 10 in terms of results. Not every pupil has been tutored intensively for the 11 plus. They've recently changed the papers to make tutoring less effective. I'm sure parents get the books to practise and house prices reflect the catchment areas to some extent, but the grammar schools are not full of "rich" kids by any means.

No.
Grammar school wouldn't be an option for DS.
He has ASD and he's very very clever where his "special interests" are concerned. Everything else, not so much.
There was a time when I assumed that because he could rattle off the Chinese dynasties, he would easily learn to read and write. Nope.
I'm home educating him for now. In the future I'm hoping for a nice comp with an autism unit.

As there are none in my area it's not even on my radar and didn't give it a second thought. However I do feel that middle of the road kids can do better in that environment where they will be pushed more whereas high achievers tend to do well whatever the setting. I strongly agree with the PP who mentioned the benefits of community and being close to school and friends, this would always be my first priority.

The grammar has exceeded all of my expectations. It really has been like a free independent school.

This is exactly what I'm not OK with. Why should the tax payer fund this for a very small select group of children who would be well supported and high acheving elsewhere? Is this a good use of tax payer money or should we be putting that extra resource into those who struggle and need the most help?

We have an active thread elsewhere criticising anyone who has more than 2 children and needs additional state support, but there's no issue with those who take extra educational support and enhanced opportunities for their dc and use their wealth, education and influence to get there.

To sa that grammar schools aren't full of 'rich' kids is nonsense. The pens nearest me have incredibly skewed numbers on socio-economic measures etc. Just look at pupil premium and fsm numbers and it shows that these grammar schiols do not in anyway enhance social mobility.

I’m not convinced it’s a missed opportunity.
My neices had the opportunity to sit exams for selective schools. The older got in. She is enjoying school, and has a wider curriculum in terms of languages etc. The younger one didn’t... that must suck.
but I know they are all concerned about the relatively poor A level results. The GCSE results in that school are great, but they expand for A level, and the results are nothing to write home about. My kids comp with a very mixed intake gets better results. Not that it’s a great school. But it doesn’t expand at 6th form.
So which one will get kids into RG university?
I would say finding a really good fit for your kids at 6th form is more important than going through the whole 11+ experience.

@Gemma2019

I sent mine to independent primary and then moved house specifically to be as close as possible to the grammar school (we were already in catchment but I wanted to be walking distance in case it went to the wire).

The grammar has exceeded all of my expectations. It really has been like a free independent school.

This post sums up exactly what's wrong with grammar schools, and how they don't help the bright but poor. They just save the well off middle classes, money.

[quote spookycookies]@JoyOrbison perhaps the local comp is awful because all the bright kids with the pushy parents sent their kids to the grammar. If there was no selective education the school might be better. Research suggests that bright kids mixed with less able pulls the whole class up and improves overall attainment for both able and less able. It is why many schools are opting for mixed ability groups over sets or streaming. [/quote]
Yep.
If you leave the children that struggle behind and cherry pick the bright then don't be surprised that results are better at the selective school....bit obvious really

The main problem is the complete postcode lottery of state schools.

Richer parents can play the system by moving into exclusive catchments, tutoring and by using private schools.
Other families don't have the same opportunities.

On the anti-private school threads, there are always people boasting about using their local 'excellent' state schools, which they have paid for by moving into expensive catchments. But not all state schools are like that.

And as usual, it comes into lack of funding.

I would never live in a grammar school area. Both my DD would get in but I disagree with the whole concept. The stress on the children is unbelievable and totally unnecessary.

No I have no regrets. Both of ours did well in the comprehensive system. Might depend on the area though.

@Maggiesfarm

There are probably grammar schools not too far away from you, op, and grammars do take pupils from outside their catchment area.

I get what people mean who say they don't believe in selective education but what we all want for our kids is good schools where they will thrive and are happy. If a grammar fits that bill, better to let them go there than to a school that isn't very good.

My two went to a grammar school as did I and their dad. It worked for us. We're quite ordinary people, nothing remarkable about us, at least that's how I see us.

There's no point in worrying about it years later; as long as your child has done reasonably well, why worry? Some kids do dreadfully at a grammar :-).

Why do you think everyone has access to a grammar? They are very rare in the North. The closest one to me is 70 miles away.

I'm delighted we don't live in a grammar area. Our local comp has a full range of backgrounds and gets a full spectrum of results from all 9s to full Us. (And the latter not for trying hard to get the kids to engage.)

Pearly Adriatic

30% sounds very low for passes in English and maths. Is there an identifiable factor in this?

Didn't a renowned former Ofsted chief state that grammar schools are stuffed with middle class children?

@saraclara there are plenty of bright but poor girls in my DD's grammar school as the catchment covers a vast area.

Currently I've only got one child in grammar, another in independent school and another at a specialist school as I always choose the school to suit the child. My DD2 is extremely bright but very reserved and anxious, and grammar is perfect for her, where everyone is on a par intellectually and behaviourally.

I paid for independent primary for three of my children, so didn't use the places they were entitled to at our local outstanding comp, and I also pay a huge amount of tax, so feel no guilt whatsoever about sending my child to grammar school.

I agree with school to suit child. Although I recognise there’s some privilege /luck in saying that.

We’ve used both sectors and have found comp really good

I would move if I was in a grammar area. I like the diversity at comps, I like that a whole group of kids isn’t essentially written off at 11, and I like that all my kids can go to the same school and have roughly the same opportunities. My eldest would almost certainly got into a grammar, my second, not a chance, the others possibly with tutoring and luck but a good chance they wouldn’t. My year 10 child has really come into her own this last year and is predicted quite a few 7-9 grades. She would never have passed the 11+.

Grammars used to be great for social mobility before all the tutoring started but they just aren’t now. You have to be exceptional to score in the top 20% without tutoring. Less bright kids who are tutored take a lot of the places. They are still bright but it’s a way of getting a more rigorous academic education for middle class kids, while working class bright kids go to the secondary modern.

Thank you all once again for your comments.

One interesting point above was that comprehensives were more holistic in their ethos and not solely focused on academics.

While there are some powerful arguments against the grammar system it is slightly concerning that comprehensives may not have that academic focus (at least for certain cohorts).

Also and there will be disagreement with this I am sure but does getting into grammar not feel like a first major academic achievement with a certain kudos with it?

There will be other achievements at 16 and 18 obviously but does a successful entrance to grammar bolster self esteem and increase assurance that you are on course for a certain academic path?

I just don't see how if a grammar school is a choice that your local comp is a proper "comp".
We are lucky enough to live in the catchment of an amazing true comprehensive which takes all the local kids (or nearly all, anyway!)
The minute you have an option in the area which creams off kids then you don't have a proper comprehensive school in the area either in my opinion

But then most areas that don’t have grammars will have kids creamed off by privates.
And areas are enormously different anyway.
In a densely populated area where a lot of people commute to jobs in the City you can have grammars but still get more academic children left in the comprehensive system than somewhere like the rural area I live in now where there are no grammars.
Certainly more people used to go to Oxbridge from my local comprehensive when I was growing up (the one I was selected out of and went to grammar) than the school my kids are at in a non grammar area, even though Mumsnet would argue that the former was really a ‘secondary modern’ and the latter is a proper comprehensive. That’s just the difference between Essex commuting territory and rural North Yorkshire, though.

does getting into grammar not feel like a first major academic achievement with a certain kudos with it?

I guess it depends what is made of it at the time but it is the opposite impact of this that worries me more, and I would argue has the more lasting impact. If you tutor your child for years, and place a lot in store by them getting in and then they don't, willy why have a negative view of their abilities that impacts on their self esteem and willingness to see themselves as capable gong forward. That is something I would be much more anxious to avoid than the possibility of a boost. Above and beyond I would do anything to avoid my 10 year old being out under pressure and for one moment linking their current performance in assessments to later life opportunity and success.

Wow no. I went to a grammar school (everyone sat the 11+ and passed or failed, yes indeed). I would have been very upset to think that my DC faced the prospect of being consigned to a sec mod as a failure at 11. I have too many tales of how bad it was for some people to want that for my kids.

Of course in MN land everyone's dc are so super clever that they will get to the grammar but in the real world not so much.

OP GCSE pass rates do not really compare with grammars in other parts of the county well they wouldn't would they? How could they possibly? 100% of kids go to one school, best 10% go to another. Not really comparable.

does getting into grammar not feel like a first major academic achievement with a certain kudos with it?
Getting straight 120’s for your SATs could be just as good?

does getting into grammar not feel like a first major academic achievement with a certain kudos with it?

But then the flip side is worse? The first major failing in academic life