Selective Education - a LONG RANT!

[seeker]

We live in an 11+ area. My dd passed by 2 marks and went to grammar school - her friend failed by 2 marks and went to the High school. I would have been happy enough if dd had gone to the high school - results are fine if you take into account that 25% of the more able children have been creamed off. Behaviour is OK - it'a a generally OK school. DD and her friend have been doing homework together on and off and the work looks comparable (friend is in the top sets) DD does two languages in year 7, friend does one - and dd may be working at a slightly faster pace. I know that dd is heading for 3 separate sciences and friend will do combined. And dd will start Latin next year. But apart from that I couldn't see a huge difference. I was surprised - I expected there to be a bigger difference in the work but pleased.

But yesterday, we spent the day with friend and her family for the first time since they started year 7. It turns out that the huge difference int he schools is in the non academic stuff. The grammar school has 3 choirs, two orchestras, a jazz band, a swing band, a wind ensemble and 3 rock groups. The high school has no extra curricular music at all. Dd has completed 3 DT projects since she started in September - friend is still on the first one. Grammar puts on three plays a year - high school does one. Grammar school puts teams forward for every schools sporting event in the county - high school football and basketball only. The list just went on - even to how much cooking they actually do in Food Tec.

Does anyone know why this is? Am I incredibly naive in assuming that both schools get the same amount of funding? And WHY does jumping through a ridiculous academic hoop one January day in year 6 mean that you get to do more cooking? I could understand if it meant you do more Maths.......!!!!!

I think it depends on the schools. My boys' grammar does a lot of extra-curricular stuff but I know that the local high school does too.

In fact, the high school seems to push its pupils (regardless of ability) even harder than the grammar in some ways. I know that, in Y10, they seem to do some GCSEs, even entering pupils for some in Y9. This seems crazy to me because I don't really think most children are emotionally ready for those sorts of exams let alone academically by that age.

DS1 (Y9) will do one half GCSE in ICT this year, completing it next year and that's it. His GCSE courses start next year and will run for 2 years. I suppose the difference is that the grammar is expecting A and A* results, whereas the high school is just looking for passes.

It' not just the extra carricular stuff - it's the way they deal with non academic subjects on the curriculum too.

You would have thought that in a school that by definition will have a lower percentage of academically able children they would push the non-academic subjects in order to provide more opportunity for the less academic children.

That's a really rubbish paragraph - but you know what I mean!

Does seem odd that there's such a marked difference, considering both schools are good. I agree with Freckle that it's down to the individual schools. A lot of schools these days have a lot of extra curricular stuff going on. I teach in a fairly rural state school where nearly all the pupils are bussed in, and two nights a week we have 'late' buses because well over 100 kids stay on for all sorts of activities. Plus there's a lot going on at lunchtime.
You say there doesnt seem to be a huge difference in the work, which is the main thing. If 25% of the kids are being creamed off to the grammar school, then actually it sounds like the high school is doing pretty damn well doesnt it?
But really, what your post highlights is what a ridiculous system it is, that your dd and her friend can be separared like this because of 4 marks in an exam at the age of 11!!!!! Those 4 marks mean nothing and it just makes a mockery of the divisive system.

The only thing I can suggest is that those extracurricular activities are not about funding, they are about individual members of staff giving up their time to run after school clubs. Perhaps in the high school the teachers are unwilling to give up their time - perhaps their days are more exhausting than their colleagues and they just want to go home? It's just an idea.

We chose not to go to through the selective process and ds has gone to a very good state school. He is doing very well academically, (just had a parents evening), gets stacks of homework including various projects, does loads of extra curricular stuff during and outside of school hours (including weekends) and has opportunities to do stuff that he wouldnt have had he gone the selective schools.

We have no regrets at all.

But had we not lived near to this state school and had alternative choices then we would have gone the selective route.

I guess we select by house price.

Oh and we've been told he'll do three separate sciences already.

It sounds like the grammar school has higher expectations for the pupils, and are also serious about educating the whole child.

When it comes to UCAS forms and university interviews, the extra curricular activities become very important. If the school is enabling the academic achievement for Russell Group universities, it would be worthless without the extra-curricular activities to add weight to their applications.

Another factor is that they can put on clubs because their is enthusiasm amongst the pupils for them. It would be pointless to put on three productions a year if there weren't enough willing pupils to make them happen. The success of clubs depends as much on the pupils as it does the teachers.

OK, you've got me. What are Russell Group universities??

I?m not sure that you can make comparisons after only half a year. DD?s friend who goes to the Grammar was driven barmy by Year 7. She got there by her own merits and was ready to move on to new ground but a lot of the year was spent getting the others (who were only there because of intensive coaching) up to speed.

Aren?t the extracurricular activities the reason why Grammar school types get into Oxbridge? They learn to present themselves and have confidence in front of an audience. They learn the rewards of repetition and practice.

Our local bog standard also does very little extracurricular: it is symptomatic of their lacklustre approach to everything and why we got out of there as soon as we could. They send maybe one or two people per year to a ?good? Uni. Her new school does extraordinary amounts of extracurricular activities and sends nearly everyone to a ?good? Uni and has a handful of Oxbridge every year.

The proper ones, Freckle

University of Birmingham
University of Bristol
University of Cambridge
Cardiff University
University of Edinburgh
University of Glasgow
Imperial College London
King's College London
University of Leeds
University of Liverpool
London School of Economics and Political Science
University of Manchester
Newcastle University
University of Nottingham
Queen's University Belfast
University of Oxford
University of Sheffield
University of Southampton
University College London
University of Warwick

Russell Group are all large universities. There is a similar association for smaller research-heavy universities called the 1994 group. Prestigious institutions, such as St Andrews, are on this list.

I agree the extra curricular activities largely depend on enthusiasim from both the students and willing teachers ,not necessarily funding.
DD's state school have numerous choirs,music groups and productions (she's rehearsing today actually) ,the music departments teachers deserve a bloody medal imo for all the extra time they put in!

It is a shame that some kids miss out on these extra curricular activites as I think they are so important to the spirit and cohesiveness of the school.

Temporarily - yes, RG is just one way of measuring I agree. Also, a lot depends on whether a particular university is good for the particular course you want to do. IME that can be make or break as to whether students enjoy their University experience and get the most out of it. Always makes me chuckle when a student says to me 'I really want to go to XXX University' without having a clear idea of what they want to do. They're obviously swayed by the name and the prestige thing. I usually find the more switched on kids will have bothered to research the best place for their course - which isnt necessarily going to be RG.

I don't think it's a case of dd not being stretched - she is working hard, and so is her friend. The high school has a very efficient grammar stream. And it's not he extra curricular activities I'm concerned about - it's the factt hat passing the 11+ means you get more cookery and sewing as well as Latin.

I agree that it shows how insane the system it - 4 marks ffs!!!

DS has latin at his non selective school.

DS has more Art and Drama than at his previous selective school. And he can do GCSE Spanish rather than just having french.

But there has got to be a cut-off somewhere, and someone is always going to have scraped in/ missed out by 1 mark. You are confusing the differences between your two local schools as the difference between all grammars and all high schools, which isn't the case at all.

My DS3 does Food Tech at Grammar but it doesn't involve very much cooking, and certainly not to the level I was taught in the 70s.

These days grammar schools get the same funding per head as any other school, so I think the difference is per individual school, and like fooffi said, down to staff putting in the extra hours.

I don't think I am, evenhope - I was just asking!

I'm glad the experience here doesn't seem to replicated elsewhere.

I agree that if you have to have a system as unfair as the 11+ the cut off has to be somewhere - I just hate the system!

One thing that amazes me is that people know their marks in the 11+

When I took it several decades ago it was pass or fail. No marks were known.

Also the marks would have been (slightly) irrelevant as a certain percentage would have passed depending on the number of places available.

So it would have depended who the peers were that you were competing with in any given academic year across the whole country (and locally according to number of places in nearest grammar school)

Also boys were marked up as much larger percentage of girls can pass 11+ than boys. Does this still happen to even out numbers of boys and girls or are grammar schools full of girls nowadays?

Yes, I think it does still happen. A total joke really. Why anyone thinks you can place a child in the 'right' sort of school, depending on a fairly narrow type of assessment at age 11 is beyond me.

You are always going to get differences in one child's experience vs another's.

For example, I am thoroughly delighted with my boys' school, but DS1 did not get cookery lessons when he was in Y9, yet DS2 did because they tweaked the curriculum.

As for going to the 'right school', the primary school head could offer a lot of advice if only parents would listen. This is what happens in prep schools, and children are rarely placed in the wrong schools unless the parents refuse to listen.