Right. Tell me what to do here- key words- 11+, g&t, University, widening access......

[BertrandRussell]

Ds is at a secondary modern school. 7% high ability, of which he is one. Letter home today inviting him in a visit to our local (excellent) university because he has been "identified as talented in one or more subjects"

Fantastic thar the school is arranging visits- it has only just started to send any kids to university at all. The school's catchment means that there are very few parents with more than a basic education, and they are pushing hArd to raise the aspirations of the kids- which is fantastic.

Dp and I have 4 degrees between us. Dd is at a Russell group university. Ds will definitely, if he wants to, go to university. It iseems ridiculous of the school to waste a space on this trip on ds. Should I say something? He's not particularly bothered- except that it means a day off school. If he doesn't go, they could give the space to someone that it might actually make a difference to. Surely they should have thought of this? What do I do? And is it depressing that even in a secondary modern school, privilege attracts privilege?

TWF - "Nor do we need a self appointed umpire thanks."

TWF - "why in God's name did you start a thread"

The OP is right to feel aggrieved concerning negative comments directed at her son. Frankly, I don't some of the comments directed at the OP are in keeping with a friendly, understanding and constructive forum either, but the OP is happy to take that on the chin.

I'm not sorry to be a "self appointed umpire" and to point this out to posters. If you get defensive about it then tough, because I will continue to point out behaviour I don't like or regard as unjust whether it suits you or not.

You can point out all you like MN but no one has to listen .

And they clearly haven't...

The reality on here is that if you ask a supposedly genuine question, then you will get genuine answers. If that question details your family ( and you have made a habit of detailing this in the past) then posters will use that as context.

They will be bound to mention it!

bertrand I really don't understand why you're shaken by people's comments.

They're total strangers to you!

So what if they haven't formed a good opinion of your DS! How could that matter if they're wrong?

Betrand, you've already said your son will go, so to some extent this post is redundant and I think a pp has made a similar point. However, if it were me and my son, I would probably be a little concerned he would prefer to do double PE than a trip to a University (which is one of the ones he is considering). Maybe prefer is too strong, I think (without scrolling back) you said "not bothered" If I'm honest that would be more my concern than whether I felt he 100% fitted the criteria you believe they are using. To me my son passing up such an opportunity would make me think perhaps he could do with a nudge on the aspiration/motivation front. That's me though. Once it gets into the real nitty gritty of UCAS applications I have heard more people complain about lack of time / opportunity for visits than not. Also as a pp said and a friend of mine has experienced with her son, visiting a place can change a DC's mind about whether they want to go to it. I appreciate this is not directly answering your question. However, I do agree with a pp that whilst your support and family culture will be extremely important to DS, he is in school 5 days a week with friends, a lot of whom, as your post implies won't be aspiring to university. I would be taking anything going to stop the potential of that affecting him.
I hope he enjoys the trip.

But then what do I know - I'm the kind of nutter who sewed in woven name tapes up until the end. (except socks, I quickly drew the line there).
Summerends I think your sharpie / sewn in tape theory also needs to include number of DCs. If I had more than one I could well have been all sharpied up years ago.

I suspect that if you had couched it in more impersonal language Bertrand, you would have got different replies: i.e. "do you think a child in the tops sets of a Sec Mod, with graduate parents is the sort of child appropriate to be selected for a widening aspirations scheme?"

Because, Word, I expect people, even strangers, to behave in a civilised manner.

By the way OP as i've just noticed! i never said your son should act as interpreter on the visit , i said he could come back and share his what it all about with his mates, a concept you don't seem to grasp. Please do not put words into my mouth.

Sorry about the typos, I'm sure you grasp my message.

word I very quickly took the decision not to label anything.

That way, anything unlabled in lost property could legitimately be ours!

Yes that was what we did throughout primary. For clothes anyway. It's always been a bit more prblematic for the musical instruments (and as we have recently found out, the shoes).

Bertrand First child had embroidered Cash's name tapes sewn in to everything, including socks. Second child- lucky to have his initials scribbled in with a Sharpie.

I SO wanted to be Joey Maynard. But it turns out - I'm so not. :(

" suspect that if you had couched it in more impersonal language Bertrand, you would have got different replies: i.e. "do you think a child in the tops sets of a Sec Mod, with graduate parents is the sort of child appropriate to be selected for a widening aspirations scheme?"

Yep. I suspect if I had done that I would have got lots of people saying "No, of course not- what a ridiculous idea!"

It would also have been fun to post that I was outraged that my child was not picked for the trip, and read all the "How very dare you try to grab extra privilege for your already privileged child - you are so arrogant and selfish" posts

Summer Of course there has also been a general decline in standards from previous generations

I still have a school jumper, which I wear frequently, often to work, which has a lovingly sewed nametape inside it (well, I say lovingly. My mum loved me. she did not love sewing. But she put nametapes in everything when I statred secondary school (never again after that though)). My colleagues don't really see the nametape though. They do, in the winter, see the name tape on my old school scarf. And they notice when it's my suister;s scarf I've picked up instead of my own (I have both of them). Lovely scarves they are, soft and warm and a sensible colour scheme (which matches my footy team). I bloody love those scarves. Even though they do have prominent nametapes saying 'UhtredOfMaidenName' and 'Sisterof UthredOfMaidenName'. It's a talking point. (It's really not).

bertrand MN is incredibly civilised compared to much of the internet!

But it is still the internet.

The fact that people feel able to tell the truth ( even though unpalatable) is part white/ part dark magic.

It is hugely interesting to know what people actually think. But the fact is we might sometimes get a shock.

TBH I don't think it's selfish or lazy or whatever for your DS not to want to go. But I do think it's odd given it's on his hit list.

nobody would enjoy hearing their child criticized on MN, however much they knew it was unfair.

Of course not nit

I've had all sorts said about my DC.

But if it's hurting you, then it's easy to avoid; simply make all posts impersonal. Loads do that.

Yes, and because I wouldn't care for it I do largely do that. And perhaps not doing that is unwise - I'm just saying that however it comes about, I don't think you can say it's not unpleasant, if that makes sense.

I hint your upset as you feel it's beneath him. A friend of mine chose a 'less regarded' uni to piss off his mother. He turned down Oxford! Beware.

I think about 2 people were possibly rude about the OPs son - and that was couched in terms of response to things the OP had said about their responses to the offer of the visit and attitudes towards other children who could have gone instead.
The vast vast majority have not been rude but expressed concern about the message turning down the place so more needy children can go will send out, as well as concerns that the boy at sec mod would benefit more from the visit than from doing PE, irregardless of his parents' degrees.
However the OP disagreed with almost every poster. The only one she referred to as 'at last making sense' was the only one who fully agreed with her. There seemed no willingness at all to acknowledge the validity in what very many people were saying - or to recognise that even if her intention wasn't to appear condescending, it could well come across like that.

I wonder why the OP has devoted huge amount do time now to complaining about criticisms of her son - the couple of posts, rather than really considering the validity of the comments made by the vast majority of posters.

And I agree, that if you ask questions you need to be prepared to hear the answers, including ones you don't like - perhaps when the majority are things you don't like, it should make you consider if your own view is correct. And if you reveal personal information and couch your questions in personal terms, the responses will be personal too. It is important not to take any negatives as a personal attack. None of us know the OP or her son. Any comments can ONLY EVER be about the theoretical situation expressed, be use done of us know the OP or her son or their situation fully - an Internet forum is different to the discussions we would have in real life - people will express their views more baldly and less sensitively perhaps than in a face-to-face discussion - and the OP needs to bear that in mind and be a bit less sensitive. Is what seems like hyper-sensitivity to the comments of perhaps 2 posters just a way to avoid acknowledging the value in what the vast majority are saying?

I thought this thread was too weird to participate in but I am drawn into it like a proper rubber necker.

I am at a loss as to why such a highly educated person would phrase his/her OP statement in such a manner in the first place, given how emotive the subject matter was.

It just all smacks in the face of how lucky this OP's school should be to have such a superior family in the midst, but conversely, that one must not treat the son as 'the same', because he clearly is not.

The criteria in the opening post was that his selection was because he was "identified as talented". Not from an under-privleledged background. Nor from poor academic family stock. No one argues that the latter 2 are also worthy reasons, although we may hope that the school would never position it in such a crass manner.

I understand the altruistic steer the OP has tried to steer us down, but this is the worst kind. Irrespective of whether the school has access to the parents' education background, to use it as a single metric for selection is just plain weird. I guess all of us that did not access further education are, what...brought up in a family which had no other values instilled, or had aspirations in life?

Classic case of academia does not always = intelligence. From the get go the OP has been aggressive defensive in most responses, and actually, most of the posters look to have been responding back with rational considerations that the OP may not have considered. Not sure why they need defending on that basis...

OP - I also do not like anyone casting any negativity towards my DC but I think you need to re-read your original post to understand why you are getting the responses that you are. Most are actually thinking about the impact on your DS even though it may not appear to you as such.

DarklingJane it did! I also included laziness which has been the greatest prompt for me (except when DC particularly cares about an intem of clothing, then my maternal label sewing instincts jump into action.)
I did label socks for the first few years .

Well said ealing

Kent University is ok, but to put my snob hat on, if ds had been specially selected to go to a vist to a particular "university" near to us, my nose would have wrinkled. It has the dubious honour of being awarded "worst university in country" title (for several years).

Yes, well said ealingwest.

Bertrand, I am definitely not criticising your DS. I am criticising you. I am criticising you for putting your son into a particular environment and then sending him a load of confusing mixed signals about how he should perceive/value that environment. It's not good for a child.

If you cannot afford to flounce off and go private, I understand. If moving just isn't an option, I understand. But, if you have to stick it out, I don't understand your lack of self discipline/self control for the sake of your son. It may make you feel better to score intellectual points with the school, but I cannot see how it is in your DS's interest. After all, in the final analysis, shouldn't he be the most important thing?

"It may make you feel better to score intellectual points with the school,"

Please could you explain to me how I am doing that?

Oh and by the way, I have not talked about this to my son at all. Why on Earth do you think I would? Presumably you have conversations about your children in which they are not involved?