Things you wished you had known about the 11 plus process

[Goposie]

For me, that the numbers applying are crazy and the sheer odds stacked against getting in.

“I must say there seems to be no argument against selective schools on this thread apart from moaning about how unfair it is because all the children don’t end up the same. Well who would have thought it?!“

That’s certainly not what I have said. I live in a wholly selective area. The social divide that happens in year 6 in the primary schools is depressing. The children who go to grammar school are almost exclusively those from middle class already privileged families, while the less advantaged go to the school with 37% PP children and a high % children with additional needs. This means that the grammar school has most of the parents who have the time, money, confidence, ability and inclination to be involved and committed. Parental involvement is important to a school. Starting secondary school is easier when you wear a uniform shows you are a success than when you wear in that shows you are a failure.There is Inevitably more challenging behaviour both in and out of school by the non grammar kids, so you are viewed with suspicion in shops and assumed to be the instigator of any trouble. I could go on- but that’ll do for a start!

“Surely with your views you would rather have sent your clever DC to one of the Secondary Moderns in your area to benefit the DC in those schools by not having the so called clever DC creamed off.”
Why? I don’t like secondary moderns either!

Abolishing the social marker that is school uniform would help.

Your area is different to my area though and you are advising that people shouldn't send their DC to Grammar Schools, whilst using them yourself, which is a bit dishonest.

In my area 1 or 2 DC if that get in from each Primary School. None of the DC in our local Comprehensive think that they are less clever than my DD who goes to the Grammar School. They regularly chat about the work they are doing at each school, and they are proud of their school the same as my DD is of her school.

I can understand in your area that it is divisive. I guess that it is an issue in Yr 6 at your DC's school but does it not change as they go to Year 7 and do well in their Secondary Modern schools despite not going to a Grammar School? Your DS must have done well enough in his school to go to the Grammar Sixth Form. I say this because the Sixth Form requirements at our Grammar School are higher than the Comprehensives requirements.

The reality is that all DC should have supportive parents and the same opportunities, sadly this isn't what all children experience.

“Your area is different to my area though and you are advising that people shouldn't send their DC to Grammar Schools, whilst using them yourself, which is a bit dishonest.”
No i’m not. I’m saying- and have said consistently- that state selective education should be abolished in the pockets where it remains.

Maria, sorry, but I find picking on someone by highlighting the fact that one of their children failed the 11+ ("Ya boo sucks, nany nany nah nah, you got told!!") appallingly infantile.

If you know that information at all it's only because Bertrand chose to share it on an earlier occasion .. . . Attempting to use it to shame her is frankly revolting; is this how you are raising your children to behave? Next you'll be laying into to those with SEN kids . . . ('My kid's brainier than yours, na -ny na- ny nah nah!!')
And incidentally, this is a bit how grammar school kids treat the secondary modern ones - I remember it well.

Bertrand’s repeated that information again and again in MN. It’s hardly a secret!

But that is a bit like the Doctor who smokes telling you not to smoke or the fat Nurse telling you to give up chocolate and cake.

So I get it, you don't believe in Selective Education, it should be abolished, its not fair, but you are going to use it for your DC.

Until PP said that your DC went to Grammar School I had seen many of your posts about Grammar Education on these threads and presumed (wrongly) that you were dead set against Grammar Schools and didn't use them and fair play to you. But as you actually used them yourself that is the bit I feel is a bit dishonest. But if you disagree fair enough.

Just a question though, where will your DC send their DC if they have them in the future? Do they agree or disagree with Grammar Schools?I would be interested if their opinion is the same as yours.

The crab mentality stuff is interesting.

No i’m not. I’m saying- and have said consistently- that state selective education should be abolished in the pockets where it remains.

But that then just brings up the old argument that some DC are privately educated and therefore have a better education that most state school children, at least with Grammar Schools some DC have a chance at a similar education without paying for it.

“So I get it, you don't believe in Selective Education, it should be abolished, its not fair, but you are going to use it for your DC.”

Well, I suppose I could have home educated them. Or sent them private. Apart from that-I had no other choice!

I am sorry you didn’t realise that my children went through the selective system. I arrogantly assumes that anyone posting on the Education boards would know- i’ve been posting about it for long enough!

But your DS went to another School and did ok? Then moved to Grammar School Sixth Form.

As I have said before my area is different, not many go to Grammar School. Is that ok? Or should Grammar Schools which take DC from a huge area be abolished too?

Bertrand has always been clear in these sort of discussions that she lives in a grammar area, that her children attended both the selective and other schools because that was how the system operates, and that she disapproves of the selective system. That’s neither dishonest nor unreasonable. I said upthread that my experience as a teacher in such a system (albeit a super selective one) was that children of similar ability do as well in one sort of school as the other - that’s so long as they have good teaching at school and good support at home. I repeat that it should be possible to provide a suitable education for all within a properly funded comprehensive system, in the way that many comprehensive schools actually do right now.

I haven't been around that long and don't read old threads really. Only just worked out how to use the advanced setting.

I repeat that it should be possible to provide a suitable education for all within a properly funded comprehensive system, in the way that many comprehensive schools actually do right now.

Come back and tell us when ALL comps do that, not just "many" and we can have a rational debate about grammars and privates then, and only then. In the meantime, lots of people don't have such a comp - the reasons why need addressing, and no, it's not all about money, it's about poor quality management, poor quality teachers, etc just as much as impoverished children and so-called austerity. If some schools can manage it, why can't others who are dealing with exactly the same type of cohort, same social demographics, same funding etc? That's what needs to be discussed and addressed if we want to move forward.

I feel I have to butt in as well. Bertrand Russell is clear that she's not anti grammar schools, she's anti the selective system. You can't tell her that she should just send her kids to secondary moderns instead when they are as much part of a selective system as the grammar schools themselves. She's always been clear, regardless of her children's own success or otherwise in the 11+, that she'd rather send them to a comprehensive. And whatever, non grammars call themselves in Kent or elsewhere, they're not comprehensives.

It's a perfectly logical and ethical stance and it's unbelievably obtuse not to understand and to see why sending your child to a grammar in Kent is not any more hypocritical than sending them to a secondary modern.

People do realise that the offspring of bright parents are usually bright themselves, don’t they?

And they are not “privileged” they are bright!

That’s just life, deal with it. Trying to drag them down isn’t going to make your kids any brighter. And intelligence isn’t the be all and end all.

Failing the 11 plus: The whine is “the kids will feel like failures wah wah”. They are in terms of passing the 11 plus. They will be good at other stuff be it being kind, making a cake or kicking a football.

The social divide: The clue is in the word “selection”. You can mix with anyone in the street if you think school is too small a social circle. Nothing stopping you.

Engaged parents: Well the comp parents need to do something other than sitting on a messageboard moaning then. Don’t have to be bright to be engaged, just motivated.

What I didn’t know about the grammar school system? That there were so many bad losers.

I said it should be able to provide such an education. It requires an honest debate about the purpose of education, how it benefits the individual and society, how it can be funded and how it can be prevented from becoming a political football. There is plenty of good practice with regards to management and teacher training that could be implemented throughout the system, given the political will to do so. And making politicians do sensible things is down to all of us.
BTW I certainly wouldn’t criticise anyone for making any decision that they think would benefit their child, it’s just a shame they feel they have to. With regard to poor management and poor teaching - I suspect these are as common in selective and private schools as otherwise, except it’s easier to get away with it with a more able and committed student body.

Bertrand Russell is clear that she's not anti grammar schools, she's anti the selective system. You can't tell her that she should just send her kids to secondary moderns instead when they are as much part of a selective system as the grammar schools themselves.

Well I obviously misunderstood this as I haven't read a lot of threads about this. I thought that being anti the selective system meant that BertrandRussell didn't believe in Grammar Schools for anyone. So really it is just the areas where there are a lot of Grammar Schools which affects the other schools in the area?

Not the areas with a single Grammar School and many many Comprehensive Schools. So Super Selective Grammar Schools are ok, normal Grammar Schools not ok?

“But your DS went to another School and did ok? Then moved to Grammar School Sixth Form”

Yes-he failed the 11+ and went to a secondary modern. He did well. He moved to the grammar 6th form because a) the secondary modern offered a limited range of A levels b) he was ready for a change and c) he had found failing the 11+ pretty demoralising and he got “closure” from going to the grammar.

“Not the areas with a single Grammar School and many many Comprehensive Schools. So Super Selective Grammar Schools are ok, normal Grammar Schools not ok?”

There is, of course, an argument for super selectives. And I don’t know as much about them as I do about “ordinary” grammar schools. But I am instinctively opposed to them too-I am unhappy with the idea of segregating children in this way at 10. And the more “outlier-ish” you are in one area of your life, the more, in my opinion, you need to mix with non outliers in other areas.

Super selectives have less impact on surrounding schools, it’s true. Where I worked one could argue that the other schools had to work harder to try to keep up, so they had a leavening effect - possibly.
The two most corrosive impacts were that some parents at the non-grammars would never accept that their children were getting an adequate education, despite clear evidence of (sometimes remarkable) achievement, and the tendency for some students and parents, and some teachers, at the local grammars to believe that they were so much better intellectually than everyone else, when that really wasn’t the case.

“That’s just life, deal with it. Trying to drag them down isn’t going to make your kids any brighter. ”
Can I ask who you think it trying to drag anyone down?

There is also the constant battle to convince people that the secondary modern is doing very well by it’s pupils despite results that look far from stellar if not considered in the context of the cohort.