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.

Most bright, well supported children will do well in any school that’s not actually a disaster

Do well yes, do as well as they possibly could ? Not so much. I have skin in this game, a highly academic DS at a superselective grammar school where he has just been predicted 4 A*s at A-level and is hoping to do a STEM subject at Oxbridge. In our local comp I think he would have done fine but I don't think he would be the stellar sucess he is shaping up to be. As I mentioned his school is superselective so takes more like the top 5-10% not the 25% of "normal" grammar schools, so slightly different but being surroinded by bright equiring minds has brought him on massively.

Are the Dcs in the comprehensive missing out by having the 5 highest performing boys (it is single sex) "missing" from their top set ? possibly.

But woukd society miss out if one of those boys didn't fufil their potential and for example discover the next treatment for corona virus ? Almost certainly.

Also he can spell unlike his mother

I think one question here is whether a good comprehensive can truly cater to a range of ability supporting those that Need it while allowing the academically gifted to flourish. Theoretically comps should do this but with limited resource is this achievable?

One thing I noticed at uni back in the 90s was that there must have been 30% of children educated privately with 20-30% from selective state. Only 50% ish came from non selective state. Things may have changed a little.

Jalapa not to live in an area with grammar schools. I think it's an awful system.

Last time I had a discussion about grammar schools with a friend who is pro selection, I actually found myself getting teary.
The memories of fifty years ago came back to me so strongly. The sheer unfairness. My pleasure at opening my envelope to find that I'd passed the 11+ turning to something entirely different when I watched all my friends discover that they'd 'failed'.

It's an appalling system..it really is. And what it does to those children who don't pass, after the pressure that's been put on them, is terrible.

But of course those whose children win places, couldn't give a stuff about those other kids.

*It's an appalling system..it really is. And what it does to those children who don't pass, after the pressure that's been put on them, is terrible.

But of course those whose children win places, couldn't give a stuff about those other kids*

Everybody cares about their own DC, round here in Kent the 11+ is opt in so nobody needs to take it. I could equally say those opposed to selective educatiin don't care about highly academic DCs reaching yhier potential (with as I say perhaps some ramifications for wider society).

I think one question here is whether a good comprehensive can truly cater to a range of ability supporting those that Need it while allowing the academically gifted to flourish. Theoretically comps should do this but with limited resource is this achievable?

Well that is one question.
A different question could be whether a grammar/sec mod system can truly cater to a range of ability supporting not only the brightest and least able but allowing the middle 50% to flourish

It is clear I think for those of us who live in areas with a selection of good true comprehensives (eg Hants) that we think the system works well across the board.

It is unclear to me whether the grammar-advocates in grammar areas would be truly happy with the non-grammar offers as so many tutor and push for the 'better' school (ie the grammar), rather than just going with the flow.

People with kids in areas with generally poor schools think a grammar might solve all their woes, well it might, but only if their child gets in, and sorting out the poor schools might be better all round.

We have 2 good comps in our town. One is more 'pushy' than the other, but ultimately they end up with similar results. You can't have comps saying 'top grades are the be all and end all' and only celebrating 8s&9s, but you can have comps saying 'do the best you can do' and celebrating the 8s&9s for the most able, but also the 3s&4s for the less able.
My eldest had a formal 'target' of a C for maths based on her y6 SATs. By the end of y11 they were optimistically predicting her an A (which she narrowly missed). Good comps can push everyone.

My eldest had a formal 'target' of a C for maths based on her y6 SATs. By the end of y11 they were optimistically predicting her an A (which she narrowly missed). Good comps can push everyone

A good comp is really good at doing this. Less good at absolutely making sure those aspiring Oxbridge candidates,medics and vets don't miss a single point, having shining personal statements, revelevant work experience (a selection of boys at DS's achool go to NASA). I say this having got into medical school by the skin of my teeth from a "good comp". They simply didn't know what they were doing with my application. This made the whole process so much more stressful than if I had been one of a cohort of 20+ aiming high.I got there and no doubt would be touted as a "sucess" of the comprehensive system.

No. I also disagree with selective schools. We live in London and there are some grammars/selective some people go for a little further away. The amount of tutoring is ridiculous. State funded schools shouldn't be able to be selective whether it be from tests or religion.

highly academic DCs reaching their potential

That is what A level and university are for surely. Or if particularly keen they can study extras out of school.

However in a comp within a comp system all the highly academic will be there too, so the top sets will be very similar to the grammar. However it also means that 'highly academic but didn't get to grammar because of no tutoring or other reasons' kids still get the same opportunities. It means kids who are ace at maths but were undiscovered dyslexics at 10 can still be taught with the other able mathematicians.

and I still can't spell

I went to a selective school, my kids to a comprehensive.

I think the grammar system stinks, there is no need to segregate kids into different locations based on a test at 10.

In a good comp my maths genius Dc could be in top sets for maths and not be in a ‘high school’ lacking other maths high flyers because of ‘average’ ability / engagement in English lit.

Our local London comps are good. Kids go to the Kings’s Maths School, Oxbridge, Brit, RG Unis…and my friends Dc who could not read in Yr 7 due to dyslexia was supported in the slower learning support classes, read a HP novel by Yr 8 and got really creditable GCSEs.

My sibling and I lived in a grammar school area, one of us went the other didn't. We had completely different educations, friends and life experiences.

Something to bare in mind if you have more than one child

@traumatisednoodle The interesting thing about the Hants system, is our comps don't have 6th forms. So after GCSEs everyone makes active choices as to what to do next. There are colleges specialising in A levels, some 'mixed' colleges, and those specialising in vocational courses. So by the time you get to uni applications you are in 6th form with specialised advise.

However, we should also be aware that these days universities are more aware of educational differences and hopefully are better at making contextual offers to those applying from weaker schools (which of course doesn't include people coming from Thornden followed by Peter Symonds). Not perfect yet, but improving.

However in a comp within a comp system all the highly academic will be there too, so the top sets will be very similar to the grammar

This shows a fundemental lack of understanding. My son's school takes the top say 10% (I actually think it might be 5% but lets keep the maths simple) most top sets contain the top 20-25% (10 form entry is unusual). So in a year group of 150 in a comprehensive he would be in a set with 15 DC who wouldn't make it into his current school. The SS has 150 boys who would all be in the top half of their top set at a comprehensive school of the same size. These boys are then set, so DS ( in the top set of his SS) is with 29 other boys who would all be the brightest 1 or 2 in their year at a similar sized comp.

and it's not only about exams, being the brightest kid at a comprehensive can be a miserable experience, some teachers are great, some resentful, very few have the time to set truly challenging work.

www.unz.com/jthompson/the-7-tribes-of-intellect/

This helps explain it, I could better with some graphs, but off for my run right now.

TraumatisedNoodle, you are basing your support of a whole system on a dataset of one (or maybe 2 as you seem to thubj everything is exactly the same as it was for you some decades ago?) and completing ignoring all the other discussion.

I don't just care about my DC and their exam results over and above caring about what kind of society I want them to be part of, and how I want them to relate to others within it. I don't want to support and perpetuate a system that says to 10 year olds that their future abilities and oppprtunities should be decided by an assessment made on one day. An assessment that is grossly skewed in favour of the most advantaged and in which bright but unsupported dc have no chance whatsoever of gaining a place.

It is great that your decisions have worked out for your ds, that he has been happy and is achieving well, but you have to see that is within a system that didn't work overall and does a lot more harm than good? And you can never prove the opposite - that he would have achieved, been happy and gained a HE place of choice from a fairer system.

In a truly comprehensive system there are very bright dc doing very well. One of my state comprehensive secondary schools (I went to state and private - I'm not an advocate of private schools) had amazing top sets with students now in high flying careers in the civil service, medicine and law BUT also had very very damaged and disadvantaged students who were equally part of our form time, for whom we had to make special arrangements and allowances in breaks, in trips and residentials and who were giving functional and vocational skills support etc. Being alongside them, understanding their challenges and not just leaving them behind was an important part of my education too.

traumatised Super selectives are a bit different from grammars in a full grammar system such as Bucks or Kent.

I can understand a potential benefit for SS in areas of high population density and good travel links as they pull from a wide range of other schools so any individual school is only deleted by a handful, not a whole set.

No I am basing it on the 2-3% (or 5%) of the population. That's about 5 or 6 DC in each school year. These DCs are your future Steve Jobs and society fails them at it's own peril.

Nope, I’m relieved I don’t live in a grammar school area so the comprehensive schools can be excellent. Some are crap, obviously, but others are excellent and wouldn’t be so if we were in a grammar area.

@traumatisednoodle

No I am basing it on the 2-3% (or 5%) of the population. That's about 5 or 6 DC in each school year. These DCs are your future Steve Jobs and society fails them at it's own peril.

Steve Jobs went to a comp style school ...

I don't like the idea of selection at 11 as a routine thing for the majority of children.

I don't mind so much the 'super-selective' grammar schools to cater for children who are really advanced and come from a much wider area, as it doesn't have as much effect on local schools. And some children really do thrive in that environment, in the way that there are special schools for those who excel at dance or sport etc. If parents and children want that environment, and are willing to travel the extra distance to go there, then I think that's OK.

My DD did go to a selective girls grammar and I bitterly regret it as she was badly bullied. The girls came from far and wide with long commutes to school. Almost all had been privately coached to pass the exam. I was proud she hadn’t been coached but on the other hand she struggled to fit in as we didn’t have the same sort of lifestyle as her classmates. I don’t think it is a fair system to be honest. I wish I had put her in an ordinary school like my other two DC. It was our nearest school, and the selective system does definitely affect the surrounding schools. I wish they would do away with grammars.

‘Steve Jobs went to a comp style school ...‘

That’s a little disingenuous. According to Wikipedia Steve Jobs went to an engineering focused school with special ties to Silicon Valley and his parents used their savings to move to a more expensive house to get him there. Your average local comprehensive it was not.