The Politics of Grammar Schools

[GiftedPhoenix]

I thought some mumsnet readers would be interested in my latest post, which is about grammar schools, especially their record in admitting high-attaining children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

giftedphoenix.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/the-politics-of-selection-grammar-schools-and-disadvantage/

The selection issue has been bubbling away in the media and this looks set to continue next week, as the Conservatives come under increased pressure from within their own party to include a commitment to new grammar schools in the Tory Election manifesto.

I wanted to explore what progress our remaining 163 grammar schools are making towards 'fair access', so providing a benchmark against which to judge political claims that they might be engines of social mobility. I'm not concerned with research on their historical record in this respect, but with evidence of recent reform.

Hak
It stops in 1905 as the Empire started to decline My kids were given a copy - its cringingly dire.

Word
And the thing is that your DD feels supported and stretched without feeling pressured so will probably end up doing better than many of the hothoused kids - tee hee

I didn't d anything (well - I fretted a bit). They each did about 4 independently organised 'mocks'. They didn't do any extra homework or prep or anything like that. They wouldn't have had time. EC stuff every day after school and most weekends. They do 'puzzle' for fun though, we all do, so that may have helped a bit possibly (but I think their facility for number puzzles - sudoku, kakuro, Ken ken, suko etc - comes from their ability in maths rather than the other way round. Same with logic problems. The jury is out on the crosswords because I try to keep them to myself and am thus less than delighted when one or other of the kids decides to help. I suppose they have helped them think laterally and spot anagrams and anagrinds and wordsums - but we do them because that's what we do to stave off the tedium of life's turgid trudge. They've been 'helping' me with puzzling since they were tiny and stealing my puzzles since they were not that much bigger.) If I could target one thing that I did that helped them I'd say spending all my disposable income on books. But again - I've been doing that ever since I've had an income. And they aren't necessarily the sort of books that people recommending strategies for 11+ approve of, anyway.

Actually I tell a lie. The best thing I did for either of them was leaving the country while they were doing the exams. So it was impossible for me to wind them up with my worrying. Obviously that's a strategy that only works if you have a job that makes/lets you do that and a partner/spouse/whatever to stay at home and be CALM. It was a scheduling snafu that I was away for DD1's exams, and at the time I was pissed off but she thought it was brilliant and it's an approach we've adopted ever since for exams and music exams.

DCs prep school advised repeatedly against tutoring for 11plus.

Of course some parents ignored this!

One girls mum instilled a regime like portico but it was unnecessary. Said girl was wildly bright! A shoe in IMVHO.

Shoo-in!

If you need to do 2 hours work a night to prepare for the 11+ then automatically your child should not be doing it.

It also gives the message that the only thing of value for the child is to pass an exam and that parental approval is dependent on this. A loathsome system.

Trouble is, I had a shoo-in too! The level of panicky preparation in our social circle was noticeably increased the next year........

My daughters aren't into logic puzzles or crosswords, more likely to be on trampoline or playing withtheir littlebrother when not out for ec stuff. In light of that I don't think 10 mins a day is excessive. The tutoring was ina little group with friends and they both saw it more as another club.

Prep schools are in the business of ensuring DC get a secondary school and it is perfectly reasonable for them to advise parents of DC at their school not to tutor.

However, to extrapolate from advice given by prep schools and to take that as meaningful advice for families at state primaries would be incorrect and indeed quite contrary to principles of fair access.

I would agree with you Bonsoir if the prep schools were doing the job of tutors, but I really don't think they are.

There is no way prep schools round here are getting year 4/5s sitting down to familiarise themselves with the tests. It's just not necessary! And of course, for part of the cohort, pointless, as they're not going to leave at 11.
Perhaps prep schools are different in grammar areas?

State schools could very easily replicate what our prep schools dis in terms of preparation for exams in year 6. It wasn't remotely onerous.

Special exams set by some public schools and the dreaded CE are, I accept a different matter.

I'm not sure how a state school parent could cover those without some experienced tutors.

There is a private primary- I am old fashioned enough not to call it a "prep" but others do- which sells itself almost exclusively on its 11+ pass rate. Which is usually 100%.

I can see that would be a selling point in Kent.

I don't think your analysis of your local situation (and who am I to do anything but take your word for it) works at a macro level. It is hardly news that the USP of prep schools is ensuring pupils get a place at the secondary school that is right for them and their parents. It is not news either that state primaries are in principle opposed to preparing DC for any form of 11+ selection, even in grammar areas (I am incredulous about this, btw).

The massive, institutionalised tutoring and 11+ prep industries attest to the need for state educated pupils to cover academic ground and familiarise themselves with test formats. To pretend otherwise is to cut state educated DC off from a realistic shot at 11+ tests. Why would anyone do this unless to reduce competition for privately educated DC?

"It is not news either that state primaries are in principle opposed to preparing DC for any form of 11+ selection, even in grammar areas (I am incredulous about this, btw)."

I'm not sure they are, actually. Certainly in Kent they are expressly forbidden to offer more than a couple of familiarization papers, although many do more. The problem is that while the received wisdom is that the 11+ is a test that all children take from a level playing field because it is tutor-proof, obviously LEAs are not going to allow schools to offer preparation. If they did they would be giving the lie to the publicity.

Hakluyt - the very principle of English state education is that it is non-selective by ability until 16. Remaining grammar schools are an exception. State primaries are non-selective by ability and must not enter the "grammar exception" game.

Bonsoir of course prep schools are in the business of preparing their pupils for secondary, but for lots of prep schools, the 11 plus for grammar schools barely registers.

For one thing, three of the biggest round here go right through to sixth form. I'm not sure how much effort goes in to prepare those pupils for any exams, let alone for GS. Why would they?

Second, we're not in a GS area. DD applied to one in the next county. She was one of 4 out of 60 in her year. No one else bothered. It would be quite far to travel and there would be no school bus.

Third, most people want private.

In areas where parents do want to apply to GS, then yes, an industry has been born. This doesn't mean it fullfills any necessary service. It just feeds into fear and desire and markets itself accordingly. Likes lots of other industries that offer us the pleasure of buying shit we don't need .

Perpetuating the myth that only tutored kids can get into selective schools doesn't help widen access, it just keeps the old cycle going...

TheWordFactory - I disagree vehemently that state educated DC do not require top up education (which may take many forms) if they are to have an equal stab with privately educated DC for selective secondary education (if whatever sort). Why would parents pay fees to private schools if their DC were not receiving a better education than their state educated counterparts?

Well first, a lot of people will cheerfully say that private school is a complete waste of money .

But leaving that aside, don't we need to unpick the general education being offered at a good prep school, from the fairly narrow things being tested at a n 11 plus for GS.

French, Latin, music, science, art, sports may all have been superior at a good prep school, but these are not tested at the 11 plus. In fact you might say that the breadth of education offered at a good prep could be a hindrance, because it certainly takes up a hell of a lot of time. There is almost no time set aside for verbal reasoning and wotnot.

I'm willing to accept though that there are 11 plus factory preps in Kent. It seems such an odd place, I'm willing t believe almost anything about it!

Tutoring is an interesting issue - even the tutors vary widely and the types of tutoring required are different depending on the school you go for. In areas where you have a catchment for the grammar school and mainly local children are taking the test, very bright kids probably don't need tutoring. For super selectives with vast, or no, catchment, even the kids at prep schools are tutored! It's that competitive. I don't think the prep schools cater much for 11+, their focus has to be on CE. You can be 'selective standard' for one or two schools and not judged to have met the standard at others. It's not consistent and it depends absolutely on how a child did on one or more exams. That's fine - they have to select somehow. But I think there's a danger of judging a school by the hoops parents have to jump through - these schools aren't having to work as hard as comprehensives in improving outcomes for a wide range of children because they've already carefully selected the top 5% of the intake. Parents are supportive because they have made often considerable efforts to get a place. Behaviour is usually less of an issue as a result.
I have no vested interest either way - I am delighted with my DS1's comprehensive; I know other people are very happy with their alternatives!

In areas where parents do want to apply to GS, then yes, an industry has been born.
This doesn't mean it fulfils any necessary service.
It just feeds into fear and desire and markets itself accordingly.
Like lots of other industries that offer us the pleasure of buying shit we don't need
With bells on

Surely Portico is (if genuine) just demonstrating why the grammar system is so damaging for children, and not just those who don't get in.

Her poor kids are spending huge amounts of their time desperately trying to prepare for an exam that will shape their whole future, imagine the expectation riding on them in that exam! If they fail it will be crushing, plus it leaves them with the apparently undesirable school as the only fallback unless they can pull some cash out and go private.

Clearly not all children have access to either huge amounts of input from their parents, funding for a private education or indeed above average ability at age 11 so this is not equitable, the only equitable system is a good comprehensive school available to all, where all children are taught according to their ability.

This is not a judgement against individual parents who have no choice but to operate in the system they find themselves in, but an argument about the system as a whole as being wrong.

I really don't want to sound too critical Portico, it does appear you have already stirred up quite strong emotion on this thread.

However, I think it is important to present an alternative and perhaps (as I see it) more rational approach to sitting exams for the super selectives ( my ds is at a super selective in Barnet..bit of a give away).

Notsuretoday is absolutely correct in that the schedule you describe is not something all families embark upon. Some families take the view that a small amount of prep (2 hours a week, spread over the week) will suffice, if the child is naturally bright enough to gain entry to the school. If they don't 'pass', so be it. It was entirely my sons decision to sit for the school, he loved it and knew he wouldn't be able to go to our local school (not of the required faith).

What I have come to realise is that those parents that talk of grammars being 'hot houses', tend to be those parents that tutored their children so heavily, the momentum needs to be continued once the child was at the grammar. Homework that is supposed to take 30 mins, takes that child 60 minutes.

I do actually agree with some of your comments Portico, however I'm afraid you lost me when it became obvious that you are not actually in support of grammar schools, as they were originally intended, but what some have become.

Whilst Portico's schedule is completely bonkers, I do disagree with those who say 'no tutoring' is needed when said by parents with children at a private/prep school. If your child is a class of 15, mostly academically above average children then surely that's a form of long-term tutoring in comparison to my children in a class of 30 with some very tricky kids. I often hear prep/private school parents bragging that their children had 'no tutoring' apart from a 'few hours' of past papers with their parents as if they're morally superior when all tutoring in our case is trying to do is to even the playing field a bit. And then there are the prep school parents who are tutoring on top, sometimes at the recommendation of the schools themselves.

My ds is doing some independent school exams in January. I'm now terrified that, despite his hour a week with a general tutor, he's going to fail because he doesn't do 45 mins every morning with a word list and then working from 4 until 9.30 (with some breaks, the slackers) every night. He doesn't even do that total in a week with under a month to go...

farewell to arms

I think you will find the level of ability required in the exam, differs between Independent schools and super selective grammars. Just a matter of numbers, the thousand sitting pushes up the level of ability required to get through the exam.

I think you should be wary of the phrase 'he's going to fail'. If he doesn't get in where you would like, is that how he will feel?