Why not make grammar entry fairer?

[belladonna22]

My kids are still young so I have no direct experience with entry exams for grammar schools, but why is it that the exams seem to cover topics that children haven’t yet covered in most state schools?

If their (stated) purpose is to enable the best and brightest to attend, why do they make it more or less essential to obtain private tutoring, thus tilting the scales in favour of better resourced and informed families? If Labour were serious about improving access to education, wouldn’t one policy be for grammars to limit exams to topics most children will be familiar with at that point in their schooling?

The grammar school system is built on unfairness (I say that because I went to one, not because I didn't get in). If Labour want to improve educational outcomes for everyone, they'd finish the job of phasing them out.

It’s a two tier system personally I think they should be scrapped, however the more Affluent families will always find a way to help their children

Disagree here. CSSE difficulty is Y7/8.

They are a filter and only want the brightest children. I didn’t grow up in a grammar area and neither have my children. Filtering of sorts took place when I was a child because only the top 20% of children took O levels. But we were all still in the same school.

I studied educational outcomes and income levels at University, the educational level of the Mother is the biggest indicator of outcome though there are always outliers. My mother did not go to University but was born in the 1920’s and left school at 14. She did however end up in a job where she was the first woman manager in the country of the global firm she worked for back in the 1970’s and a great example to me.

You have raw genetic ability and parental input which includes a stable environment for the child. That’s the best advantage you can give your child. Then there is peer group, this really can affect your child. Money always helps to an extent one of the quotes about outcomes I read was a teacher who wrote ‘how can I expand my pupils minds when they have never been further than the end of their own road’.

Allowing top performers to go to a school where the other children will also be academic and motivated is a good thing in my book.

If schools were perfect environments where the academic students were challenged and celebrated instead of being given work that is too easy for them and asked to help their peers in the classroom, then maybe it could be argued that grammars are not needed.

And honestly, the tutoring won’t get a child into a grammar if they don’t have the ability. Ressources can be found for free at public libraries and online!
Let’s stop dragging everybody down or insist it is unfair that non-grammar schools are deprived of the good influence of these pupils - that is not what they go to school for.

I've heard the same about our local ones. Would say though that, whilst I am not thrilled to need to tutor my child, I'm more annoyed that the vocational schools my other child would benefit from have all shut down. We're shoving all kids down the same (narrow) path and complaining it's unfair to them instead of creating several options and letting them all thrive.

I personally think grammar school places should be available for state school kids only. So many prep schools spend years coaching the kids to pass these grammar tests, usually alongside 1 or 2 tutors on top. Ridiculous.

11+ is a blatant piece of social engineering to make sure the middle-class kids get to go to a 'better' school and keep the riff-raff out.

And @Ifailed - Not in mine.

The whole small city and some surrounding villages are in catchment.

Property is cheaper here than a neighbouring town.

We have a whole range of housing.

Single parent of DC’s who attended.

Kids on FSM are generally less able so it's hardly surprising.

Wrong. With respect, both you and your son/s took the exam ages ago. Things are different now.

I studied educational outcomes and income levels at University, the educational level of the Mother is the biggest indicator of outcome though there are always outliers.

This. I read this in a number of research articles. Also that hereditary intelligence is linked to mother.

Then of course it's not a hard link, but highly intelligent and well educated mothers /parents are less likely to be in the lowest socio economic group so the fact that higher socio economic groups children are more represented in grammars is not a consequence of their families having money but other factors. And vice versa re FSM

as brilliant as the mom and dad are, teens are heavily influenced by other teens. no one wants their teen to stray off the beaten path and end up smoking/drinking and exposed to sex before their time due to the cohort of students. the huge drive to access grammar schools is the behavior and disruption at some schools (which may be perceived vs actual) and trying to limit exposure to antisocial behavior.
at the same time balancing a reasonable approach to management styles and mental health.

I don't think you can make grammar school selection fair. I think that is why the system was changed to comprehensives in the majority of the country. DC1 took the 11+ and didn't even come close to passing and yet got 4 Astars at A-Level and a 1st in one of the world's best unis. Obviously DC1 should have sailed through the test. I was very glad they had a decent comp to go to !!!

People saying a bright kid can get through without tutoring are not considering schools in challenging areas where the poor teachers are spending most of their time managing behaviour.

it’s all very well to say a bright kid who paid attention can pass but not all kids have actually been taught.

My dd had a year of substitute teachers who just read from Twinkl PowerPoints used twinkle worksheets and watched videos. Dd said she was finding English hard that the teacher never explained because the boys always messed about so the ones who wanted to learn just had to read the PowerPoint themselves and work it out. I was having to teach her at home. School told me she’s doing great don’t worry. Then her SATs came back working towards. I raised it with school that clearly she’s not doing great she’s struggling like she says but the schools respond was she’s one of their best students they literally cannot help her other kids have higher needs. I pulled her out to home educate and covered 18 months of the NC she had missed while at school in 6 months at home. Practice 11+ papers she’s doing amazing likely she will pass but at school she was behind the national average and would have had no hope of passing. Even with this she’s more privileged than many kids because I’m able to home educate and have the education level myself to do it well. Side note: I’m home caring for my disabled son who the LA refused to find a school for- do we still say any child can pass if they pay attention then there are many disabled kids out there not given school places?! He doesn’t have a school place because all the schools for disability locally need the child to have severe and multiple learning difficulties, but my son is bright so can’t attend.

all this said I still don’t see how we can make it fair. Even with a decent school I would have been supporting my child’s learning at home. I have the knowledge and skills to do that and if I didn’t I would prioritise paying for a tutor over a family holiday etc. So many kids don’t have parents able to do this

@Burntt all this said I still don’t see how we can make it fair. Even with a decent school I would have been supporting my child’s learning at home. I have the knowledge and skills to do that and if I didn’t I would prioritise paying for a tutor over a family holiday etc. So many kids don’t have parents able to do this

I think one could try to make it fairer by actually not pretending one cannot be coached to pass the entry test and allowing schools to at least give information and run a couple of mock entry exam sessions, so that every pupil can try and see what it looks like. Currently as it stands if there is no strong parental drive to acquire materials or organize tutoring the barrier is insurmountable for children lacking educational support.

Abolish grammar schools. Problem solved.

Yes fully agree.

And only test on content covered. I don’t know about other counties but algebra is on our 11+ which is only covered at the needed level in year 6. Kids sit the 11+ in October of year 6 and won’t have been taught it in time.

same for non verbal reasoning. Without home tuition kids will not have seen it before and it’s weird pictures and spotting patterns etc that you need to be told the trick of to understand what is being asked if you

Not really, my DD passed last year without any tutoring …

Agreed!

But from your previous post it looks like she practiced? I think people use 'tutoring is necessary' to say that some degree of additional preparation, not provided by school, hence depending on parents, is needed.

Seriously? Do you have any evidence to back this up?

But most of the country don't have grammar schools, and it's not the job of primary schools to prepare children for entry to a few selective schools. Grammars are irrelevant to 95% of children and their parents, so why would anything be changed to accommodate them?

How are you measuring their innate ability to be able to prove this? It sounds like you are suggesting that just being on FSM means that children must be less intelligent.

I think what you meant to say is that statistically, children on FSM are more likely to face barriers to learning, that may impact their attainment.

How? Sounds correct for what they're like in Gloucestershire...

How exactly are labour on the side of any children? Their send policy is appalling and they have no real vision or direction for education more broadly. They are all about dismantling bits of education that are working because ‘privilege’ but none of that helps children in need of more support. Levelling the playing field ends up being levelling down.