Money for Grammars

Eleven Plus (11+) in Gloucestershire (Glos)

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

scary mum
Posts: 8841
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:45 pm

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by scary mum »

Many thanks all for the patronizing comments.
My comments weren't intended to be patronising, and if they came across that way, my apologies. It's just that these arguments have been discussed many times on here, and in my view, the evidence is conclusive. I'm not from your area, I am from Buckinghamshire where all children sit the 11 plus unless they are withdrawn from it. It is clear that background & tutoring has a massive effect here.
scary mum
boris
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by boris »

In Gloucestershire one has a shortish window of time to log onto the appropriate site and apply to take the test. I thought I was posting onto a regional part of the forum where all would be subject to the same system. So in Buckinghamshire, nobody misses out if they pass the test? That is a far better system... and what should happen everywhere. Can anybody tell me which county is the exception to the rule?

Can you tell me what you mean by the evidence is conclusive? Evidence for what? My comments were related to the news on Friday of more money being made available to grammar schools provided that they take this quota from deprived areas and the arguments made against grammar schools in that programme.

For the record I am not arguing that background and tutoring dont have an effect. What I am saying is, how do we select these children form poorer backgrounds if they dont get the scores they need in the first place? Are you actually making a stand against selective education completely? It will cease to be selective if we ignore the tests.....

Laastly, telling somebody that the arguments have all been had already and that they should look through past postings to better understand the situation they have been in themselves, I consider to be patronising as well as dismissive. I know only too well how bad the primary education is in poorer areas. This is where the problem lies rather than insisting that grammar schools are to blame and should take children who haven't scored high enough under other circumstances. That is my point along with defending parents who feel forced to tutor because of the poor choice offered to them other than a grammar school place but have to compete with private schools. This is probably worse in my location because we have a huge number of fee paying schools...
Watermelon8
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:46 pm

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by Watermelon8 »

boris wrote:In Gloucestershire one has a shortish window of time to log onto the appropriate site and apply to take the test. I thought I was posting onto a regional part of the forum where all would be subject to the same system. So in Buckinghamshire, nobody misses out if they pass the test? That is a far better system... and what should happen everywhere. Can anybody tell me which county is the exception to the rule?

Can you tell me what you mean by the evidence is conclusive? Evidence for what? My comments were related to the news on Friday of more money being made available to grammar schools provided that they take this quota from deprived areas and the arguments made against grammar schools in that programme.

For the record I am not arguing that background and tutoring dont have an effect. What I am saying is, how do we select these children form poorer backgrounds if they dont get the scores they need in the first place? Are you actually making a stand against selective education completely? It will cease to be selective if we ignore the tests.....

Laastly, telling somebody that the arguments have all been had already and that they should look through past postings to better understand the situation they have been in themselves, I consider to be patronising as well as dismissive. I know only too well how bad the primary education is in poorer areas. This is where the problem lies rather than insisting that grammar schools are to blame and should take children who haven't scored high enough under other circumstances. That is my point along with defending parents who feel forced to tutor because of the poor choice offered to them other than a grammar school place but have to compete with private schools. This is probably worse in my location because we have a huge number of fee paying schools...
This year, hsfg pledged to take 30 pupils in receipt of pupil premium(might have my figures slightly wrong) but they are the 1st glos gs to do this. The girls still need to reach the qualifying standard but have been given priority places. I know of 1 local girl who has benefited from this. The Crypt head is also trying to have more dc from the local schs (some of which are in special measures). This is part of the reason they may open an on-site primary or takeover a local primary as lots of bright local pupils do not have the same access to tutoring/mocks.
Amber
Posts: 8058
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:59 am

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by Amber »

scary mum wrote:
Many thanks all for the patronizing comments.
My comments weren't intended to be patronising, and if they came across that way, my apologies.
Ditto, though I don't really see what you mean.

I don't intend to wash my dirty laundry here but I come from a very much less than privileged background and have spent a great deal of my life working with children who also don't have much going for them in material/cultural capital stakes.
stroudydad
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:25 pm

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by stroudydad »

Amber wrote:
scary mum wrote:
Many thanks all for the patronizing comments.
My comments weren't intended to be patronising, and if they came across that way, my apologies.
Ditto, though I don't really see what you mean.

I don't intend to wash my dirty laundry here but I come from a very much less than privileged background and have spent a great deal of my life working with children who also don't have much going for them in material/cultural capital stakes.

Boris I think actually you may find that quite a few have similar backgrounds to yourself..
And are here for similar reasons to yourself. I like you came from a poor area, and still live an estate that is considered deprived. You make or may not know that I run a martial arts school, of which 40% of my students are in receipt of benefits, most of them train for free..in essence I am not only teaching them for nothing but also paying out of my own pocket for their licenses and grading fees. That is my choice - but I do it because I love my art, and want those not so lucky as myself to be able to access it too. Yet only yesterday I was pretty much the antichrist in here. It's easy to judge and be judged places like this..
doodles
Posts: 8300
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:19 pm

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by doodles »

boris wrote:In Gloucestershire one has a shortish window of time to log onto the appropriate site and apply to take the test. I thought I was posting onto a regional part of the forum where all would be subject to the same system. So in Buckinghamshire, nobody misses out if they pass the test? That is a far better system... and what should happen everywhere. Can anybody tell me which county is the exception to the rule? ...
Kent is also an opt-in system which requires parents to register their child for the test. So it's another county where parents need knowledge of how the system works.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad !
Amber
Posts: 8058
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:59 am

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by Amber »

boris wrote: Are you actually making a stand against selective education completely?
I can't speak for scary mum - but for me, the answer is yes.
boris wrote:Laastly, telling somebody that the arguments have all been had already and that they should look through past postings to better understand the situation they have been in themselves, I consider to be patronising as well as dismissive
I really do not think it was patronising at all. There is a long thread on the same topic further down the forum. One of many, many threads on the forum going back several years. Nor do I think anyone was suggesting it would help you to 'better understand' your own situation. It is kind of a given that if one posts an opinion on here, it is going to be up for discussion and debate and not everyone will agree with you. I have a lot of experience of that, for sure! As long as everyone is polite and respectful, as they were here, I do not really see why you can object. :)

In terms of seeking examples from other areas of the country, remember that most areas don't have grammars at all. Bucks is as far as I am aware the only area in the entire UK where there is an opt-out test.
tiffinboys
Posts: 8022
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by tiffinboys »

Only conclusive evidence is that most of the research is done by left leaning organisations, like Sutton Trust, and that most of the people speaking against grammar schools went to grammar or private schools and/or send their own children to grammar schools or private schools.
Amber
Posts: 8058
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:59 am

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by Amber »

tiffinboys wrote:Only conclusive evidence is that most of the research is done by left leaning organisations, like Sutton Trust, and that most of the people speaking against grammar schools went to grammar or private schools and/or send their own children to grammar schools or private schools.
I think given what has happened to the thread below the line, and what has happened in the past to similar threads, it is unnecessarily inflammatory as well as irrelevant to the Gloucestershire thread to post that here. It is firstly inaccurate, and secondly there is already a thread on it. And I don't think the Sutton Trust would much like your description, either.
tiffinboys
Posts: 8022
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Money for Grammars

Post by tiffinboys »

I am amused. Are we restricted to respond to posts in Gloucestershire?

As to inaccuracy, just check for facts. Tony Crosland, who moved to abolish grammars, went to private school. Shirley Williams, another Education Secretary, who claim pride in this matter, went to private schools and sent her daughter to top grant maintained school (lot about it some other time, as she was not resident in that school's catchment). Ruth Kelly, another Education Secretary, son went to private school, and Dianne Abbott, grammar educated, son went to private school (famously, she is mother first) and then Harriet Harman, privately educated, son in grammar. Jeremy Corbyn, grammar educated, was probably the one who opposed to send his son to grammar, but Mrs Corbyn would have none of it. :wink:

Grammar is bad only for ordinary citizen, great for those who oppose it.
Post Reply
11 Plus Platform - Online Practice Makes Perfect - Try Now