Will be interesting to see how this PANS out (pun FULLY intended ...) for the Glos schools. Will it be an equal share (as suggested in the article - but what do they know) or will it be location dependent and we know that Glos schools have historically had a worse deal than other areas in the country (not just Grammar schools - all secondary state schools).

https://news.sky.com/story/controversia ... s-11367137

If they wanted to increase choice, then a better option would be to perhaps invest in more grammars away from Gloucester and Stroud. We live in a large county yet the majority of grammars are located in Gloucester. Some people in the Forest and Cheltenham and elsewhere are lucky enough to be able to access transport, but for many it can be either a logistical or financial barrier.

Was anybody else throwing things at their radio yesterday (radio two lunchtime) when they were spouting nonsense about grammar schools lowering the standard of the local eduction? Please can somebody explain how this is so? ALso I am interested to know how grammar schools can undertake to take a proportion of children form deprived backgrounds? if the parents of these children can get their children enrolled and to the test then how are they missing out - and if they can't how will the schools know they are of high enough ability to qualify?

In my day everybody sat the test. There was no fanfare, no build up, no coaching and it was sat at school in normal school time and the places were offered on the results. Surely that method didn't leave any child out? Once they are offered a place the logistics of free travel and meals can be dealt with? The only problem left then is that of cramming in public schools which apparently is prohibited in state schools. Dont get me started on that as that truly does perpetuate the social inequality into grammar schools - but nobody ever seems to mention that....

OK rant over - I need to step away from the laptop now

Where are you Amber?

I think long gone are the days where it is just public schs that cram pupils. State schs do nothing to help but the rise in the number of tutors & mock test centres says a lot. Many state sch pupils are now crammed up to the eyeballs sadly Nothing against mocks, I used 1 for each of my dc so they were familiar with a test setting but some dc literally sit mocks all summer long, that amount of pressure can’t be good for a child’s mental health. Over the years I’ve been involved with 11+, the pressure seems to have increased year on year

I suspect not. Most folk on here will have seen previous discussions about this.

Maybe, just maybe they can't afford tuition & mocks so tend to score lower?

Enjoying real life, I hope

And maybe just maybe the parents are less educated and/or live in deprivation where there is limited educational resources at home (eg books) limited discussions and conversations that improve language and limited money to arrange visits to museums and art galleries and zoos and...... These children are deprived BEFORE they even get to thinking about sitting the test! Perhaps have a proper peruse of this site and a good think about the implications and maybe you will have a better understanding of where they are coming from.

I believe Full Fact is one of the better independent fact analysing orgs.

For those interested

https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools/

Facts stated here are probably as reliable as you can get.

As scary suggested, I was indeed doing real stuff. But if you look below the line (beyond 11+) there is a whole thread on this in which my well known views get another airing!

I like Full Fact too - haven’t read what they say about this topic but it’s usually pretty ok.

I have had a look at this full facts page and dont see anything that changes my opinion. I should probably just fill in some history to show where I'm coming from.

1/ I was from a poorer background and went to Pates.

2/ I have five children. One has gone through Pates, three through comprehensive and one is now at Ribston. At the time when my first four were going through primary school I was on benefits and we still live in an area which is considered deprived.

3/ I have been told by two different primary schools that they are not allowed to prepare children in any way for the 11+ but I work with people who have children at private schools. They are prepared thoroughly IN school time. The remark about state schools contibuting to the increase in tutoring can only mmean that concerned parents have discovered this inequality and taken action.

4/I am no longer on benefits and my youngest had a small amount of coaching because the school admissions policies where I live have altered and I didn't like the school she would have almost certainly have been allocated. I had to make many sacrifices to pay for it even though she only had about 10 hours total.


I still cannot see how having a selective system will lower the standard of education in an area. I still cannot see how the powers that be are going to pick up children from poorer backgrounds to fulfill their quota. Clearly I believe in the selective system. Yes I agree that all children should have a chance at taking that test so that brighter children get the chance they deserve - but they will still need to be selected somehow. How is that going to happen if they don't sit the test in the first place? I'm not even sure how many are actually missing out as my experience was that parents with brighter children were able to manage the test attendance/application process. In my opinion (again my opinion only) is that the problem is more that pupils who attended private school take more than their fair share of places and that is where the social inequality is more prevalent. At Pates in particular I wonder what the percentage is of pupils who had private primary education? In my day it was about 20% I would say came from Pates junior or Berkampstead. Sure, everybody has a right to pay for their child's education but then in the selection process it pushes the children from less priveleged backgrounds off the list. If we add quotas from deprived backgrounds we squeeze the list from the other end too and lots of socially average to middle class children will begin to miss out. How is that fairer? I see an even stronger upturn in the amount of coaching.

The bottom line here is that the state has pushed parents into being the ones that decide whether their child should have the chance to qualify to go to grammar school. The whole system is set up so that only parents who pay attention will bother to apply on their child's behalf. It is often a very poorly advertised process and completely escapes some parents. Of course there are also parents that pay attention but actively dont want their child at a grammar school. So which ones are we worried about and hoping to help with this new directive? Unless ALL children sit the test we dont know just which ones are missing out.. and unless ALL children are prepared it will never be an level playing field.

Many thanks all for the patronizing comments. The chip on my shoulder has been well and truly activated. I wonder how many of you actually live in deprived areas rather than glass towers?