• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Grammar Schools

LutonSpurs said:
difference between Grammar and private is that they have to pass an exam regardless of how well off they are. At private schools you get some rich talentless kids but grammar has generally very bright kids.
Click to expand...
Not all.

The private school where my son will be going kicks out all kids that don't achieve C or above in all subjects. They make it very clear that there is no amount of money that can circumvent that rule.
 
scaramanga said:
Not all.

The private school where my son will be going kicks out all kids that don't achieve C or above in all subjects. They make it very clear that there is no amount of money that can circumvent that rule.
Click to expand...

I looked at a few that were viable in terms of distance but the Grammar school we have gone for is as good if not better. The one private school I would have jumped at is 15k a year and I have 3 kids, I would have to send them all and affordability would be out of the question. Lesson learnt: Have less kids.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I looked at a few that were viable in terms of distance but the Grammar school we have gone for is as good if not better. The one private school I would have jumped at is 15k a year and I have 3 kids, I would have to send them all and affordability would be out of the question. Lesson learnt: Have less kids.
Click to expand...
Fewer ;)

Seriously though, the wife and I had the choice of one, maybe two at private school or more at state. We decided on one with maybe another depending on whether we want to give up another £4-5k per term.
 
Bullet said:
Yes, fewer clams would have helped with the "too many kids" thing :D

Only joshing. I'm just sitting here imagining Scaramanga in tracksuit bottoms, Crocs, and a THUGLIFE tattoo on his midriff, berating his wife for over griddling his salmon
Click to expand...
Is that a euphemism?

If so, the wife's had a few Bordeaux tonight - might see if she'll griddle my salmon.
 
scaramanga said:
Fewer ;)

Seriously though, the wife and I had the choice of one, maybe two at private school or more at state. We decided on one with maybe another depending on whether we want to give up another £4-5k per term.
Click to expand...

The daughter is at Oakwood.

Which private is 4-5k more a TERM....eek?!
 
scaramanga said:
fudge, that's ridiculous.

So with all the extras, you'd be looking at getting on for £30k a year?
Click to expand...
I'm not really looking at it! There are lots of pretty good schools around here.
My friend sends his kid there, but that is a bit of a pose I think, likes to show he can afford it.
 
My tuppence worth LutonSpurs, do what is best for your child and where he will feel the most suited to his skills.

My daughter was at a Denomination (Church) School here in Oz until grade 4. While it had a great all-round feel about it we found she was actually struggling with the almost too relaxed, school is for fun and not learning attitude. This was probably due to her having been in an excellent Prep School back in England (Rexton in Elstree) which was very learning focussed and strict on routine and manners etc. We moved her in Grade 5 to an Independent College (equivalent of your Private School) and she absolutely thrived there. She is in year 11 now, only one year left and she is currently on a full academic scholarship and is loving it.

We are not overly "rich" but we did decide early on that as we only had one child we would make sure she got the best education no matter what the cost, but that also meant if the local state school was going to give her that education then that would be the one she would go to.

In short, your beliefs and politics should not unduly affect the decision that you as parents want what is the best for your child. If the right school is the Grammar School then send him there, if it's Dunstable High School that best fits his needs then send him there.
 
I think that the big thing with good schools over bad ones isn't so much the individual grades your child can get, but the guidance of what to study and what to do next at college and university. I went to one of the worst schools in my county (I didn't know it at the time) but I was an 'A' and 'B' student at GCSE. What my school lacked was proper guidance as to what to do afterwards. My parents didn't really know, nobody had ever been to university in my family before, they just knew that I should try and do well at school. It was largely the same amongst my peers. Some people worked it out later in life, others (myself included!) never really worked it out.

Also, at my school, the main subjects (English/Maths/Science) were all done in 'sets' ('set 1' being the clever kids, 'set 2' the slightly less clever and so on). Is that not standard at all schools?

All I can say on Grammar Schools is that the evidence produced, by both those on the left and the right of politics, is that they produce worse educational outcomes for the kids who don't go in areas where they exist currently. I don't blame any parent for wanting to send their kids to the best school that they can, but it is surely the government's job to get the highest standard across the board, rather than higher for some and much worse than others (which is what the evidence on Grammar Schools suggests).
 
the dza said:
I think that the big thing with good schools over bad ones isn't so much the individual grades your child can get, but the guidance of what to study and what to do next at college and university. I went to one of the worst schools in my county (I didn't know it at the time) but I was an 'A' and 'B' student at GCSE. What my school lacked was proper guidance as to what to do afterwards. My parents didn't really know, nobody had ever been to university in my family before, they just knew that I should try and do well at school. It was largely the same amongst my peers. Some people worked it out later in life, others (myself included!) never really worked it out.

Also, at my school, the main subjects (English/Maths/Science) were all done in 'sets' ('set 1' being the clever kids, 'set 2' the slightly less clever and so on). Is that not standard at all schools?

All I can say on Grammar Schools is that the evidence produced, by both those on the left and the right of politics, is that they produce worse educational outcomes for the kids who don't go in areas where they exist currently. I don't blame any parent for wanting to send their kids to the best school that they can, but it is surely the government's job to get the highest standard across the board, rather than higher for some and much worse than others (which is what the evidence on Grammar Schools suggests).
Click to expand...
It's not all about best exam results for all kids.

Plenty of kids (and it's teachers who have told me this) are just not cut out for academia. Some of them would benefit from learning that you don't wear sportswear to job interviews and what the safety signs on a construction site mean. Some of them are better off spending their time learning the trades they'll be using when they leave school.

If you restrict your measurement to grades achieved in subjects that have no relevance to many people's life outcomes then grammar schools probably do lower the grades for those at comps. I've never seen a longer term study that shows whole-life outcomes, but I suspect the results will be very different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back