Should we take DS out of grammar school?

[dobedo]

Our DS started at a grammar school in Sep 14 and is in yr7. He was very close to passing the 11+ exam and got in on appeal. DS went to a state primary up to the end of yr4 when we decided to move him to a local prep for the last 2 years as the state primary had really gone downhill due to a new head. When at primary school he hated maths as the school didn't teach it well however at his prep school he came on so much and enjoyed learning again.

Basically we thought that by putting DS back in the state system into a grammar school would be fine and a great idea as it wouldn't cost us anything and he would be getting a good education.

However, since being there for 1 term his confidence has gone down, he moans that children just talk in the classes all the time and he can't hear everything and that the other children aren't interested in learning. Also, especially in maths the teacher never gets to him when he puts his hand up for help in a lesson and when everyone is talking he gets confused.

There is an independent school in the area that gets fairly good grades but not as good as the grammar school obviously, however, he would be back in classes of 20 rather than 30 and get more attention and help from the teachers.

Would you remove your child from a grammar school to put them back into the independent sector for the additional help and attention? I'm so confused, I never thought we would consider taking our DS out the grammar school.

But does it MATTER? There is more to life than being top at Maths surely? If you are not a Maths champion then there are plenty of other paths to follow. I was more for Languages, History and English. I was As all the way. It has done me no harm in my business career.

"But surely they take the same exams at the end? It is better to be a group that suits your learning speed? An A is an A and the end of the day."

But grammar school As are somehow better than comprehensive As. In some indefinable, if you don't know I can't possibly explain to to you way.............Or so I have been led to believe by posters on here. Private school As are even better than rammer school ones..........

But laqueen - the top sets of a grammar school and a comprehensive school should be the same.

If an area has comps (and no grammars) then the top 25% will be in comps. The most able children will be in the top sets of those comps.

If an area has grammars and secondaries then the top 25% will be in grammars. The most able children will be in the top sets of grammars.

The spread of ability in the top sets should be the same.

The top set in a comp is highly likely to be lower ability than the top set in grammar. If there are 5 sets in the year, roughly speaking all of the children at grammar would be in the top set at the comp if they went there instead, whereas only 20% of that grammar school year group will be the top set at grammar. At my DC's grammar the top set in maths are supposedly GCSE level (this is Yr 8). The bottom set are apparently expected to get As when they take GCSE in Yr 11.

Some people just don't understand the concept of differentiation. Even in the top set of a grammar there is still a spread of ability. No class in any decent school consists of everybody doing the same thing at the same time.

It could work either way depending on the sizes of the schools, how much setting both schools do and how selective the grammars are, surely? Not to mention how effective the grammars are at getting the brightest kids rather than merely the most highly tutored.
I went to a smallish grammar that didn't set very much, while the local comprehensive in my town was nearly four times the size. In that set-up you could imagine quite a similar spread of ability for the unsetted classes at the grammar and the comprehensive top sets. Whereas if you had a grammar and comprehensive of similar sizes, the grammar setting as much as the comprehensive, and the grammar managing to operate an exam which was good at identifying the brightest rather than the most well-prepared (whole can of worms there, obviously), you would expect quite a difference.

Haklut - No class in any decent school consists of everybody doing the same thing at the same time.

Yes teachers should differentiate work where possible. But one teacher who's explaining to a class how to do something only has one voice and can only be explaining one thing at a time. It's rubbish to say that all learning can realistically be differentiated at all times - a lot of learning does happen with the class all learning something together. And that's going to leave some children bored and others struggling in a subject like maths unless they are all at least a roughly similar level.

I'm fascinated by the number of people saying the 11+ isn't a reliable indicator of ability. Surely you can't simultaneously believe that and be in favour of grammar schools?

We don't have grammar schools where I live (Wales), only comprehensives, so I don't have a view on comprehensive v grammar. I can comment on maths though, as I teach it to adults and also work in an advisory capacity to schools. The way that our local comprehensive works, is that there are indeed a multitude of maths sets. More than for any other subject. I think at present there are 8 sets per GCSE year. It's not an equal spread of numbers throughout all the classes and the top set only has pupils who are predicted A/A* grades. It works very well and there are a certain number who sit their Maths GCSE in one year. If differentiation is resulting in the scenario outlined above, then the teacher is not planning for it properly.

I also think that even with wonderful differentiation of work, children are aware of others in the class who are super bright at maths and that isn't always great for their confidence. Last year my DD was one of the best in her mixed ability primary school. This year she's about average for her very selective secondary. For the first half term they weren't set for maths and she found out quite intimidating being in class with a few kids who were just brilliant at maths. They're now set - she's in one of the middle sets, and is happier.

So it's not just about whether the work is the right level, it's also about feeling confident to ask if you don't follow something without feeling stupid compared to the others, and not being constantly aware that no matter how hard you work some people are always going to be leagues ahead of you.

Now this is a new twist. Selective education is better for the ones not selected! Who'da thunk it?

Well, it's not a very popular view or one often expressed here, but I have heard it said, too, by pupils who were the 'top' of their secondary modern, including my own stepfather who often talks about how chuffed he was to be one of the best pupils in his sec modern, rather than boringly in the middle (as he would have expected to have been in a full ability school), also a teacher I work with who was delighted to have been Head Girl at her sec modern and "wouldn't have stood a chance of standing out in a grammar or comprehensive" ( she's young - an NQT). There are more examples.

Funny isn't it. Clever middle class children need to be with their academic peers, but clever working class children are better off as outliers.

Eh? How do you know the "class" of the people in my stories?

Now this is a new twist. Selective education is better for the ones not selected! Who'da thunk it? - I don't think I'd advocate a divisive system that the grammar school system is - just setting by ability (for maths at least) within a school as being good for everyone.

A child who's kind of average or really struggles with some subjects needs to be taught in a class with similar children - for those particular subjects - they don't need to be segregated into an entirely separate school and never speak the brighter kids. Not good for the bright kids either to live in an insulated world like that.

There is a point to the suggestion that some pupils can benefit from being "a big fish in a small pond". I know DD1 enjoyed being the "Brightest" girl in the school . DD1 enjoyed other pupils/ teachers looking up to her and being commended in assemblies. I actually think this one of the reasons why she refused to move in year 9 to a grammar school.

It is great for your self "confidence " to be praised regularly rather than not being noticed . I think she believed she would not have been noticed or praised at a grammar.

Hmm- because we all know the social class of the majority of grammar and secondqry modern kids!

Hakluyt. What social class was DD1 ! Single Mother, Unemployed (No Income ) ( did not take any Benefits) Entitled to FSM