Lights the blue touch paper...

[Amber]

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles ... r_outcomes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... -by-age-14" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I post this by way of providing information for those who sometimes ask for 'evidence' of the impact (positive and negative) of selective schooling both on those who pass the 11+ and those who don't. This study, which was vaguely covered in the media, may make interesting reading for anyone interested in both academic outcomes and also well-being/psychological ones, for both 11+ 'successes' and 'failures' (spoiler - you may be better off 'failing' ).

[anotherdad]

Thanks Amber. I've had a fairly quick read through the draft contained in the second link. I'll be interested to see the tables once they're inserted, particularly the one that shows the steps parents took to secure a place at a school because that will perhaps shine a light on the often-claimed social mobility benefits of selective education and see if they're genuine or not.

I think the conclusion is very interesting, even if it might appear out of place on a website such as this. Perhaps it should form a health warning, much as those on cigarette packaging.

"Many parents and families place great emphasis upon their child getting a place at a grammar school, in the belief that this will have a substantial impact upon their future well-being. However, our analysis has shown how many of the things parents hold most dear (their children’s well-being, aspirations and behaviour) are largely unaffected by going to a grammar. Consequently, getting your child into a grammar school may not be the make or break outcome that so many believe."