Are grammar schools better for above average children?

[celticclan]

I'm talking about your bog standard Grammar in somewhere such as Bucks not Kent (not super-selective schools). Are they better for the top 30% than comprehensive schools? In what way?

I'm personally not keen on the Grammar school system but lots of people are and I'm interested to find out why.

[curlew]

There was nothing in my post that could be considered discriminatory. I find the implication very offensive. Or I would, if it wasn't so incredibly stupid.

[PigbinJosh]

Curlew I've explained why it was. The fact that you don't accept that demonstrates that you meant to use that term and knew what you were doing. The usual form when people use loaded terms unintentionally is to apologise. Even stupid people.

[PigbinJosh]

Although maybe not incredibly stupid people.

[curlew]

I am a Roman Catholic. I do not consider it loaded.

[paintandbrush]

I'll second that, pigbin, the Roman bit only really gets used by bigots here in NI.

Anyway, grammar schools are great for top sets because you don't get picked on for being clever, or having a nerdy interest in Mendelssohn or whatever. Also to everybody who says "oh but then comps will do worse", NI GCSE/A Level results are always about 30% better than England's. Fact.

I went to grammar and my dyslexic sister to a great comp, she did slightly better than me at A level bc she was in a school better attuned to her needs. Only anecdotal evidence, but still.

[Catmuffin]

Catholic schools in the England call themselves RC schools though don't they?

[Spandexpants007]

You need to google the schools value added score to see if the same child would do better in one school or another. It will varey and isn't dependant on the type of school (grammar or what ever).

Personally I'd avoid grammar if your child only scrapes in.

[Chewbecca]

Here in my part of Essex we have grammars with catchment areas so I guess the other schools must be classified as secondary moderns so we don't have the choice the OP quotes of non super selective vs comprehensive.

I have no doubt that DS is better at the grammar vs my local 'secondary modern'. He's middle of the grammar for many subjects, top for a few, bottom for a few. The differences in ability though are generally pretty narrow and the whole class is able to move at the same pace without spending time differentiating, unlike at primary school. The main things I think are working really well are the pace of work, the competitiveness and the general expectation of excellence. He's met a lot of boys who are 'like him' whereas there were few at primary school.

I do think at a large, good, well setted comprehensive he would be equally well served, perhaps better from a social angle, including that school & friends would be closer to home & this surely must be the ideal model.

I'd love to see big comprehensives, setted from the start in every subject.