Difference in grammar schools vs high schools

[winkywinkola]

So once your child is in grammar school, what is the difference in their education?

Surely they follow the same national curriculum as all high schools?

Is it more demanding? Faster pace of work? What exactly?

Can anyone explain please?

We're in a town with 2 superselective grammar schools (a boys and a girls only), both with a massive catchment so local non-grammar schools are barely effected. Not every local child takes the 11+ for a grammar place, many prefer going to the local comps.

My DD's grammar school is piss poor, they have been for many years and it's only getting worse. They've asked for a voluntary contributing from parents for +5 years and it's desperately needed. The buildings are quite run down, some sports have been cut back due to lack of funds, parents have to contribute financially towards text books (I've been told about having to buy GCSE English texts and Geography textbooks for example).

I admit I have no experience of comprehensive schools other than my own experiences back in the dark ages, but so far the positives of our grammar school have been high academic expectations, inclusivity, pastoral care (the school is quick to act on bullying), focus on a well rounded individual (not just academic achievement), encouragement in sports and music. There seems to be a high number of long standing staff, so that provides stability for the students. Latin and two modern European languages, support classes for core subjects as needed.

My impression is that staff work hard for the students and expect the same strong work ethic from students.

My dc's grammar is pretty much like think fast's school regarding lots of financial contributions, inc textbooks.
Pastoral care has been shocking though.

I went to a Grammar School, 11 years since I completed GCSEs though so I don't know how much things have changed.

I was at secondary the same time as all of my cousins, 7 of them split between two different high schools.

I would say there was negatives and positives to both choices: my school would move through the curriculum at a faster pace so we had more time to go back on things right before end of year exams and have everything relatively fresh in our minds, whereas I remember a few of my cousins panicking for GCSE exams as they couldn't remember too much from things they'd been taught at the beginning of the year.

Also we could work to higher exam levels e.g. our top sets in maths took the Higher paper for GCSE (grades were A-C or a fail) and the bottom sets took the Intermediate paper (grades achievable were B-D or a fail), whereas the other school had top sets take Intermediate or Foundation (grades were C-F), I think one of the schools had a couple of pupils they considered to be exceptional so these kids took the Higher paper but still only got a C as the school didn't have the time or the staff with the skills to teach the children anything more than Intermediate level.

Also both the other schools allowed pupils to drop subjects in favour of taking an NVQ or foundation BTEC course in things such as hair and beauty or culinary or motor mechanics etc. whereas my school didn't give that as an option as it was expected that we go the more academic route.

I think the Grammar school was much more suited to the academic children and those who struggled to keep up just got left behind, whereas I think the other schools couldn't keep up with the more academic children so those kids weren't able to reach full potential in a non Grammar environment.

As I say, things may have changed, I've certainly noticed changes in schools now my sisters are in secondary, although they now live in a different area to where I grew up; 11+ doesn't happen and no Grammars in the area.

Both DDs at a girls' grammar.

When we went to the Open Day the HT opened his speech by stating "Here at XXX, being 'clever' is just the begininng..."

All students take a minimum of 11 GCSEs.
Student exchanges are slightly more exotic e.g. Japan.
Team sports slightly more exotic e.g. water polo.
In sport, many girls compete at County, National & International level
Very little, if any, classroom disruption - so lessons progress quickly and keep pupils engaged
Very few incidents of bad behaviour
An expectation that vast majority of girls will go on to university
Not doing homework isn't an option
All pupils take Triple Science
A choice of MFLs
Further Maths
Excellent exam results
Fantastic networking opportunities
Teachers seem relaxed and able to enjoy their work because they're not stressed by constant bad behaviour
Single sex, so girls not getting all angsty over boys - instead they get competitive over exam results, merits, House Awards etc.

Our DDs love their school - and, like another poster upthread said, it's so nice for DD2 (who is fiercely academic) to be lauded for her ability and not made to feel nerdy

Depends on the High School. The local high school my child is going to has everything above and more.

Bilingual forms. Choice between GCSEs and A Levels, or the International Baccalaureate. Amazing sports facilities. It's own outdoor education centre, that other schools pay to use. Amazing facilities, amazing staff.

The discipline is outstanding, they are very much a "smart" school. And yet, in my DSs year, you have everyone from children of the local land owners and front bench MPs to children with learning difficulties or from lower income families.

All are supported to achieve their best. No one is excluded because of their abilities, or lack of them. All are supported.

It's absolutely ideal as the children there all have a wonderful educational experience and lean to work with and celebrate differences without being streamed off.

We have local grammar schools. The comprehensive is the one that is massively oversubscribed.

Ds has experienced the following at High School (we don't have grammars around here)

He's had lots of enrichment activities available including sports, music, drama, cooking, chess, DofE, science, history, languages clubs, public speaking etc. He's been on theatre trips, field trips, outward bound trips, university experience days etc

In terms of curriculum he will get to do triple science. I think the only thing he's missing is exposure to additional languages. The school selected his language in year 7 and that's the only language he gets to do.

The whole "high schools are shit and grammars are fabulous" is a bit outdated. A good school is a good school regardless of whether it's comprehensive or not. The idea that high schools are a hotbed of shit behaviour and low attainment is old fashioned - and I say that as a grammar girl myself .

My son's at a grammar and I wish they had the option to stick with only one language. I think you can spot fairly early on whether a child has the desire/motivation to do more than one language, and if it's not there then spending extra time on one language is a much better idea. The level of a GCSE A or A* is currently not great, and the GCSE is about to become harder.

We have 1 state grammar in our LA; whilst they offer fabulous opportunities (via a "voluntary donation") they are still not able to gain 100% Englush and Maths on the league tables whereas as a lowly comp we get 82% for English and Maths.

In the schools I've worked at in this LA we have often said when the press are drooling over the school that we would love to see them teach at our place

keemanaan
Any school that has had the top 25% of achievers skimmed away to another school will struggle
that is just reality
sadly the tests are so flawed that the cutoff is grossly inaccurate

Grammar is all girls or all boys here.

Grammar results at GCSE and A Level 75 per cent A or A star, comprehensive about 50 percent 5 A to C. Grammar 95 percent Asian, comp mainly white. Grammar intakes 180 from area covering 400 schools, comp takes from about 3 or 4. Slightly different curriculum including Latin. Magnificent but run down building at grammar. Girls very studious and quiet and kind. Comprehensive much more varied in interest in studying, some very loud.

Daughter just got into grammar so we haven't started yet.

I don't think it is as simple as some of these posts are making out. Our local town has two schools, one a GS and the other an Academy, both 'outstanding'.

The GS is in the top 4% of state schools in the country results wise but the Academy has a progress 8 score of 0.51, 8% higher than the GS.

Not everyone is destined to gain ten or whatever it is, straight A's. Not everyone would thrive at GS or at the Academy (both academically and otherwise).

Not all children are the same. I went to a GS nearly 40 years ago, it was great for me academically because it pushed STEM subjects and that was what I was good at. It is still going and is a STEM specialist school or whatever the term is.

I think that the GS local to me has different extra curricular activities and the point about not being picked on for being studious is absolutely right. Being picked on for being a geek on my walk home was enough for me at secondary age.

I'm interested that grammar schools take more GCSEs - I thought they'd be more likely to do fewer.

We're not in a grammar school area so I haven't had to make the decision. DS is at local comprehensive and DD will go there in September. He'll be doing 11 GCSEs I think and says that from his experience, it is considered a good thing to do well at school.

Grammar schools exclude the non GCSE kids, so of course they do more GCSEs

but their entrance exams are deeply flawed and gamed by tutoring
I'm glad I like in a Comp county

Depends on the school. Our local girls grammar does french and Spanish in year 7; whilst dd1 high school 2/3rd do Latin and either French or Spanish. 1/3rd do a mfl plus extra literacy. High school good inclusivity (has national level wheelchair sport team) and good pastarol care. Local girls grammar terrible pastarol and students managed out if not performing.

My niece did 11 GCSEs at a comp. All A* to C.

It's just not as simple as x is x and y is y.

Sure, cream off the top 25% as tested at 11, but that doesn't mean the remaining 75% are badly behaved low achievers, as amply demonstrated by our local high schools here, even though we're in a grammar area.

I think it largely comes down to area.

If you go to a normal school in a posh area, you're unlikely to face the same thing as someone going to a normal school in a poverty stricken area etc

DS's Grammar has it's own rifle range!

Ds is at a super selective grammar. He is working at least 2 years ahead in maths (he is year 8 and is at GCSE c/b level). There is an ethos of hard work. On parents evening his maths teacher told me 68% was "disappointing " the English teacher said the boys "shouldn't have a weak subject". There is very little tolerance of anything except excellence. It suits my son, it would destroy some other kids. Oh yes and lots of sport, d of E. CCF and all that.

Here, the boy's grammar is called the Grammar school, the girl's grammar is called the High school-very confusing!

My grammar school had its own squash courts . And it was a boarding school. So felt very much like a private school.

Still has, and still is btw.

My son went to a high achieving mixed secondary school .15 gcses , 4 A levels .Combined cadet force ,Duke of Edinburgh scheme.Lots of opportunities .Just didn't get that feeling from our local grammar school

I have worked in a few grammars around the country. I also have been to quite a few for visit and interview. They range from two in a small town, top 10, top 2 in the country to middle of the road grammar in a fully selective county. They are all different. Some of them receive much less funding due to location and they have less pupil premium so less money. They all have problems like any normal school but on a lesser scale. However, as they have less funding, problems are not dealt with as well.
In the two superselective girl grammar, that are regularly in 2nd to 10th in the league table, there are still cases of school refusers, bullying, poor (normally uninspiring) teaching. It is not something that the schools see very often so they don't deal with it very well so it led to many other problems. The middle of the road grammar is good but too much staff turn over, very uninspiring teaching from too many teachers as they seem to rely on the students to get good results than the other way round.

I think you need to go into schools, ask questions, do your research to find the best school for your DC. Don't rely too much on stereotyping and other people's experience. It only gives a snapshot of what they know. I have no experiece of comp apart from my training year, which was years ago so I can't say anything about comp and will never claim to know anything other than the very basic info.

*Huge difference here (Midlands) I can only compare the schools that my children have attended to this is by no means guaranteed to be the same across the country. I have 1 in Grammar school and had several through high school.

The students are expected to go to University from the Grammar preferably a Russell Group Uni or Oxbridge instead of just being expected to get a few GCSE's and do anything upon leaving school as long as its not 'nothing..

School exchange trips appear to be to more unusual places so Iceland, Japan instead of the standard France or Germany.

I don't know any Grammar student who doesn't represent the school in some way. Either sport, music, STEM events, public speaking etc

Better access to national events at the Grammar. STEM/young engineers/Young Musician of the Year entries etc This does not happen at all at the local high school. There are no out of school activities other than football (boys team only) and netball (girls team only).*

All of this describes our local high school 😀

Trips to Vietnam, India, Iceland, USA. Extra curricular includes sailing etc, lots of stem activities, ditto engineering and English. High expectations, many go to Russell group, a few to oxbridge and the majority to university.