Should I send my kid to a grammar school

[Mamahen999]

Ds1 is really bright high 11 plus score . Grammar would involve a bus journey but not too bad. I'm rural so would take a little planning. Family and friends are really against this. In fact I'm feeling quite upset at the negativity about it. Local comp was in educ dept intervention as a failing school until last couple years. Turning round and kids seem to love it but falling intake. As a kid I was offered a grammar place but the family decided I shouldn't go as bright kids do well anywhere. I was bullied year 8 and 9 but came into my own and was very very happy at comp. I got middling GCSEs but got notes from grammar friends and went to technical college at night to get me the excellent a levels I needed for the high level uni course I wanted. I succeeded academically in spite of the school but the life lessons in schooling with diverse pupils was invaluable . Family Nd friends are so negative via they all went comp. none of my family went to grammar. They keep saying he'll do well anywhere but I remember vividly the underachievement of boys. Even I had to hide the fact I was studying . it wasn't cool. Yet the grammar school is made up entirely of middle class parents ( my education has made me one too) sending ds1 to grammar is saying to them all I don't agree with your choices but my bright boy is telling me mum I'll have more opportunities there. Maybe he's the bright one . I dunno but I cannot believe the negativity and hostility . Views folks.

I don't think anyone mocks the children - the 'little Jocasta' thing is all about the ways in which some parents seem to see their children - and I don't here mean children with disabilities of any kind, but children who would be 'eaten alive', left to rot, bullied, whatever in a comprehensive - as better than, or in danger from, the oiks. I think that's quite an important distinction.

Toughasoldboots.

Like you i have 4 children (posted up thread). DD1 highly academic scored 44 on IB now at Cambridge DD2 year 12, IB hopefully will achieve 40ish...

However, nobody has recognised the fact that comprehensive schools are failing 'working class' children.

People go on about the unfairness of grammar schools and the social economic mix of their cohort. They do not answer or debate the reasons why comprehensive schools are failng the very children they claim are locked out of grammar schools.

This therefore proves it is not selective education that is the reason why such children are failing in education . There are a mutiple of reasons none of them are because some children go to selective schools.

The comprehensive school i went to in the 1980s was a school that i suppose many liberal minded posters on here would love. The school would regularly post pictures in the local paper of the 4 or 5 children off to Oxbridge with the grinning face of the head etc.

The reality of the school despite this illusion , was that is was failing the majority of its students. The school seperated 30 or 40 pupils out of each year group who they thought were University standard or 'holy grail' Oxbridge. The rest of us were allowed to drift though our education without any concern for standards or grades. This of course is 'selection' though not deemed so by the liberial thinkers. The pupils who suffered most from this approach though were the working class children (who were so lucky to go to this school).

These working class children though were more fortunate than similar children today. This is because they we able find jobs or careers, hey some of them have even managed to earn enough money to pay for private schools or move to grammar areas !.

The conclusion being that comprehensive education has failed poor children just as much (if not more) than any 'modern' school. This will not be acknowledge by supporters of non selective education.

Sorry . Meant to say DS High functioning Autistic ! very bright but a handful. That is well the non selective school is better for him.

I'm confused as was another poster near the beginning of the thread. How do you know OP that your son has passed the 11+ with a high score, unless the results are out and I don't think they are. You haven't come back on the thread to make that clear - are you talking about him going to grammar in September this year?

Jones: while I agree that still working class children are underachieving against potential, my very belief in comprehensive education is based in the way I have seen it work for children from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and families that do not have a history of going on to further or higher education.

A comp is NOT a 'good comp' if it does not support children across the board. A good comp is one that serves all it's ability groups well, identifies promising children and supports them , and has a really effective Pupil Premium programme. This can be monitored now on the Dept of Ed Performance Tables.

A good comp has the means, within it's own school and staff, to move a child who would not have been entered for, or not have passed a selective exam, into higher sets if they mature academically - just as children who need more time can be put in a slower paced set - and children who may be extremely strong in one subject but struggle in another can be setted as appropriate.

I see this happening in 'our' comp and in children of old primary school mates who are at another local comp. And I see it happening with children I am in contact with via work.

Improving schools so that everyone has a good option locally is key.

Op- go for it. I've somewhat bucked the local (lack of choice) custom for dd. The odd objection has been from either jealous twats who bought themselves into a good comp catchment and resent the fact instead of being condemned to the local sink school, dd is receiving a better education than they think becomes her station. Or people who for whatever reason just don't feel the same way about the value of a good education. Most people are very supportive. Either way it's irrelevant, dd's needs are my priority, not the approval of others.

blu in an ideal world all comprehensives would be great for all children. But until that happens, and we continue with a selective system, some of us believe selecting on ability is fairer than selection by parents address or religion.

jones spot on.

"some of us believe selecting on ability is fairer than selection by parents address or religion." I don't disagree. As it happens. On that particular issue.

OP - good luck - good for your DS, and good for you!

NanaNina, I know your question How do you know OP that your son has passed the 11+ with a high score, unless the results are out and I don't think they are. was addressed to the OP but I am in a similar situation. DD sat the grammar tests in September. Results came out mid Oct (before the CAF form deadline). We know based on historic scores that for the superselective DD would get in and for the neighbouring borough grammar - they tell you if you pass or not - and we are within distance so again should qualify. So yes you can pretty much have a good idea at this stage in many regions. On 1 March you get the actual allocation, so no one has seen it in black and white and you can always get freak years where more apply or more get very high scores etc.