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.

Or, top set forced to do triple science whether they want to or not....

"Or, top set forced to do triple science whether they want to or not...."

I can't imagine circumstances where top sets shouldn't. They certainly do in grammar schools- or "the top sets of comprehensives" as the same children are called in rational LEAs

curlew That'll be because you did triple science. (Your lack of imagination, I mean).

At DCs school only those who were in the top science sets are forced to do triple science

those who are arty or musical or sporty are most certainly NOT forced to do triple science : it would be a waste of the school's resources

they all do double (except for the lowest set)
but only those with a science mind do the triple

PS Thornden does not set at all ... but it is very unusual

also - I don't believe all grammar schools do force everyone to do triple science. Although they do at DD1's school. I know grammar schools where they don't force triple science on the unwilling.

Talkin you do realise it is possible to be arty, musical, sporty and top set science?

of course .... DD is

It's also possible to be "academic" and "good with your hands"

But whatever, if the lab can hold X pupils and there are X+2 who want to do triple and are capable of it, you're still usually going to get 2 who aren't allowed to do it. Its the same sort of problem as selective schools in miniature. (and, to be sure, decided at 13/14 not 11)

I think they are better in areas where there are grammar schools because they are with like minded kids. However you do get the same impact in areas without grammar schools - my DD's school divides each year group in half with a mix of abilities in each half. They are then divided within the halves into 7 sets according to ability, those in set one are only with other really bright kids and they all motivate each other, it's not unusual to see them getting high level 7 and 8s in year 9.

It helps that the school also don't hang about re moving children down sets if they don't keep motivated and do the work - they can and do move children up and down if they aren't pulling their weight.

curlew It's also possible to be "academic" and "good with your hands" Did anyone say it wasn't? Not me, certainly.

Talkin So what did your DD do - did she want to do triple science (hence no problem) or was she forced to do it at the expense of eg Drama? And if so do you agree with Curlew that that is the right thing to do, regardless of her wishes?

Russian- it's what people usually say about selective schools. The system is wonderful because it allows academic children to be academic and the others to be "good with their hands" and do metal work.. It's like people think blind people have super hearing- if you're not academic you must be "good with your hands"

Russians
she is doing double English, double Maths, triple Science, Spanish, Latin, Geography, History and Textiles. She does music lessons and plays in the school Orchestras and is at grade 6 in her dancing

many of her friends are doing very similar stuff : not doing Music GCSE because they play socially and do the grades

those not doing the triple science are doing extra languages or Art subjects

she's top 1% bright but I know that she is not top 0.1%

That sounds good...but you need pretty huge schools to do it. I started secondary in the year my school was transitioning from GS to comp - it had to double in size, which had a lot of downsides.

The OPs title was 'Are grammar schools better for above average children' - DD is in a school which consists of essentially 4 'top sets' , I've very little doubt it is better for her than the local comp - which is a very good one (we don't live in the GS area so it's a true comp). I know we're bloody lucky to have had both options available for her.

Thinking of the OP question , why?
Grammar schools are the only affordable alternative to public schools.

The two tier system distorts the chances of those who are not in top 30%. But if you abolish GS, there still will be two tier system with private schools that would give an advantage in access to good universities and jobs.

In places like Kent, if they were to abolish GS, desperate parents would set up selective free schools or scratch the bottom of the barrel to pay day fees in expanding private schools.

Curlew - as far as DD1's school is concerned it's not a difference between being academic and good with hands. It's a difference between being one type of learner, and not. I said there were probably up to 30 kids each year (from the massive area feeding the school) that might do just as well there. There are loads loads loads more who will do really well, better maybe in some cases, at different schools but who wouldn't suit the way they do things at DD1's school. I don't for one minute think my destined for triple science quite happily, super good at maths son, who goes to the comp, is not academic (although he is better with his hands than any of the females in the family since we all have dyspraxia). But I do know that DD1's school is not the right place for him hence we never even considered it.

It's very easy for people who live in Kent to view things through a Kent prism. BUT Kent is not the world. Kent is in fact a strange place, and I agree with many Kentish people that the Kent system is a bit poo.

Talkin Well, if she's happy then great. What about a similar kid who wanted to do arts subjects instead of triple science?

Russians. You are pro Super Selective but anti the type of system in Bucks/Kent and other fully Selective areas, i find this odd. Why do you only want a tiny percentage of DCs educated in an Academic way and do not think the other 25% with the required Academic abilty should not recieve a Grammar School Education. Im guessing the super selective school that your DD attends is "COLYTON GRAMMAR" what COLYTON GRAMMAR does is get A Students A passes, what Grammar Schools should do are get the students who would be C/B students A grades and guessing from previous posts from you have said i guess your DS would have benefited from a normal Grammar with a top 25% of abilty range intake. I hear people saying how bad the Kent/Bucks system is all the time, as i have mentioned at other times there are other fully selective local authorities that achieve great results for all thier students, but time after time when the name of these two high performing areas come up, i am not going to name people say" AH BUT THESE ARE DIFFERENT" Kent/Bucks have no excuses for poor High Schools except in the case of Schools like the MARLOWE ACADEMY in RAMSGATE where problems could be have particular problems linked to SEASIDE Towns. On a personal note its great that DYSPRAXIA SUFFERES like your family have achieved very highly within education and means you and yor DCs must have worked very hard to overcome difficulties and the perception of other people and suffering from DYSPRAXIA myself i know how difficult it can be.

The MARLOWE ACADEMY. Which could have particular problems linked to SEASIDE Towns . Sorry i tongue twisted myself there.

A positive bit of news this morning in the Times was that KELMSCOTT SCHOOL in Walthamstow east London had introduced LATIN on to its Curriculum. Only for a chosen 14 students but a start and great on the school for trying to offer something that is not offered in many other schools in more salubrious areas "WELL DONE TO THEM".

Beatback Please don't SHOUT AT ME I'm NOT DEAF.

25-30% Grammar schools are neither fish nor fowl. That's why I don't think they are a great idea. The sort of Grammar school you describe (which I am not sure exists anyway I do not think most kids going to a catchment GS are C students) would not solve the problems that kids at the extreme end of the ability range have in comps. And they probably create more problems for other kids, both in the Grammars and in the local comps.

I don't think I have ever worked particularly hard, I'm lazy, me. Bare minimum. Life's too short.

Could it be argued that Buck/Kent system is good for middle ability students as well?
In high performing selective LAs secondary modern type of schools do better at GCSEs then most other fully comprehensives.

Once the most academic students are gone to GS, the remaining pupils in the secondary modern comprehensive get more attention and help to get good results. So the top 50-30% ability range kids get good GCSE that they wouldn't have if the most academic stayed in the same school.

Russians. When you say extreme end, do your also mean the problems the bottom 20% of the academic range suffer from, who have to work "VERY HARD" just to achieve Ds and Es in their G.C.S.Es then.