Best way to prep for grammar school entry in Year 3

Davesnave

Madmel said:

Davesnave said:

Madmel said:

I can't believe this.  Your child is in Reception and you are already stressing about grammar schools?  Poor child!

I teach in a state grammar school that both my DCs attended so I do know something about it.  I can spot a tutored child easily.  They are often inflexible in their thinking and reasoning because they have been drilled in how to answer particular types of questions.  It doesn't do them any favours, and as a previous poster has said, they quickly develop feelings of inadequacy because once they have passed the exam, the tutoring stops.  My DCs were not tutored.  We worked through some off-the-shelf books from WH Smiths before the exams to get them used to the types of questions, probably for about 9 months once a week until the exam.

If you really want to help your DC, read with them every day.  When they read to you, ask them questions about the text.  Are they simply reading the letters in a formulaic manner or do they understand what they are reading?  What do they think might happen next?  Ask them about something that was described 2 pages ago.  Can they remember the details?  Do age-appropriate number work with them.  It's a long time ago now but when my DC were young we used to play number games, first using number bonds up to 5, then 10, then using times tables.  I'm not saying it was down to this, but both have top grade A levels in Maths & Further Maths so it can't have done them any harm.  Take your DC out to places.  Look at the plants.  If you & they don't know the name of it, look it up.  How many petals does the flower have?  What colour is it?  How tall is it?  Basically spark their curiosity about the world around them and foster a love of learning.  There is plenty of time for cramming later.

I wish I could thank this 100 times. As a former teacher with 35 years of it on the clock, I agree with all you say and suggest.

Dave, that has made me well up.  Thank you so much.  I'm not a million miles from you and often agree with your advice on the House Buying, Selling & Renting thread.  It's nice to see positivity on here.  Much appreciated!

Thanks. I wanted to make similar points, but there was no way I could have done it so well at 07.20!

maman

Ibizafan said:

Maman, I agree with you, and in an ideal world grammar schools wouldn’t exist because all schools would be excellent, but we have to do what’s best for our children with what we have available. I don’t regret giving them a chance to go to a grammar school (and they had to pass the 11 plus without me doing it for them). They had an excellent education and have done very well in university and subsequent employment. I understand if people think it’s an unfair system, but I’d do the same thing again, and don’t condemn anyone else who wants the same chance for their children.

Yes, I understand exactly what you mean and I'd even go as far as to say that if parents choose to spend their own money on private education, that's their choice for their child. 

BUT the government needs to be acting on behalf of all children. The policies they have are divisive and unfair. We only need look at the current situation which is exacerbated by some of the largest primary school classes in the world to see that. There won't be problems like this for Eton when they return in September. ☹️

fred246

I went to a comprehensive school. I was in the top form of 8. We were in the top 12.5% We all did very well and went to Oxbridge and studied the top courses. Exactly the same as any grammar school. The people in the bottom class would know they were but they had the opportunity to be in the top class. The presence of those in the bottom class didn't hinder our learning at all. It was a great school but it's results were average because it didn't exclude anyone. If we'd have thrown the bottom four classes out to another school our exam results would have been fantastic.

fred246

I think you have to class Eton and the other top boarding schools differently to your local private school. I think some people pay privately thinking they are sending their child to Eton. They aren't. They are paying for something that's very similar to that on offer at state funded schools.

Fireflyaway

fred246 said:

I think you have to class Eton and the other top boarding schools differently to your local private school. I think some people pay privately thinking they are sending their child to Eton. They aren't. They are paying for something that's very similar to that on offer at state funded schools.

This may depend on the area in which you live. I'm against grammar schools so it may seem hypocritical to some that my child attends a private school. The reason we went down that route is because our child didn't achieve the pass mark for the grammar schools and the local upper schools are not good. I'm talking something like only 24% of kids in the upper school near us achieve 5 or more GCSE's. There is an issue with drugs, the school has had maybe 5 different head teachers in as many years. Attendance, discipline and academic achievement are  all poor. If we can afford to pay to avoid this why wouldn't we? My child is happy at school. Discipline is good, the school instills good values, class sizes are small, facilities are good and there is extra support for those who need it. I do feel annoyed that we are paying because I think every child should be able to access a good state school. I also feel fortunate that we are able to avoid the local school. I would be happy for my child to attend a state school if it was providing a good education / environment. It's not about being snobby or expecting our child to be a high flyer. I think schools would level out a lot more of the 11+ was abolished. 

onwards&upwards

Fireflyaway said:

fred246 said:

I think you have to class Eton and the other top boarding schools differently to your local private school. I think some people pay privately thinking they are sending their child to Eton. They aren't. They are paying for something that's very similar to that on offer at state funded schools.

This may depend on the area in which you live. I'm against grammar schools so it may seem hypocritical to some that my child attends a private school. The reason we went down that route is because our child didn't achieve the pass mark for the grammar schools and the local upper schools are not good. I'm talking something like only 24% of kids in the upper school near us achieve 5 or more GCSE's. There is an issue with drugs, the school has had maybe 5 different head teachers in as many years. Attendance, discipline and academic achievement are  all poor. If we can afford to pay to avoid this why wouldn't we? My child is happy at school. Discipline is good, the school instills good values, class sizes are small, facilities are good and there is extra support for those who need it. I do feel annoyed that we are paying because I think every child should be able to access a good state school. I also feel fortunate that we are able to avoid the local school. I would be happy for my child to attend a state school if it was providing a good education / environment. It's not about being snobby or expecting our child to be a high flyer. I think schools would level out a lot more of the 11+ was abolished. 

The state school has the problems it has because of the system that you prop up.  The parents who are supportive and/or have resources make sure their kids don't go, so the kids who do go are the ones who are disadvantaged before they even get there. 

silvercar

onwards&upwards said:

Fireflyaway said:

fred246 said:

I think you have to class Eton and the other top boarding schools differently to your local private school. I think some people pay privately thinking they are sending their child to Eton. They aren't. They are paying for something that's very similar to that on offer at state funded schools.

This may depend on the area in which you live. I'm against grammar schools so it may seem hypocritical to some that my child attends a private school. The reason we went down that route is because our child didn't achieve the pass mark for the grammar schools and the local upper schools are not good. I'm talking something like only 24% of kids in the upper school near us achieve 5 or more GCSE's. There is an issue with drugs, the school has had maybe 5 different head teachers in as many years. Attendance, discipline and academic achievement are  all poor. If we can afford to pay to avoid this why wouldn't we? My child is happy at school. Discipline is good, the school instills good values, class sizes are small, facilities are good and there is extra support for those who need it. I do feel annoyed that we are paying because I think every child should be able to access a good state school. I also feel fortunate that we are able to avoid the local school. I would be happy for my child to attend a state school if it was providing a good education / environment. It's not about being snobby or expecting our child to be a high flyer. I think schools would level out a lot more of the 11+ was abolished. 

The state school has the problems it has because of the system that you prop up.  The parents who are supportive and/or have resources make sure their kids don't go, so the kids who do go are the ones who are disadvantaged before they even get there. 

The disadvantaged kids are always going to be there, so all abolishing the grammar schools will do is alter the proportion of disadvantaged kids. You will have a postcode effect, where those that can afford to do so, move to areas where the proportion of disadvantaged kids is low. If you stop propping up one system another takes its place.

Mrs_Ryan

I went to a high performing single sex state faith school. We were streamed and I was in the top stream. I was lazy when I was at school but I was also suffering from what I now know is severe dyscalculia. I struggled in Maths and Science because of my issues with numbers but back in the 1990’s it wasn’t heard of and so I was labelled lazy and stupid. 

We were constantly told that we must uphold the school in the league tables blah blah but the problem was the school was only interested in results. They didn’t want to know about those who weren’t going to get them those results. Among my peers were a future dentist, a future vet, a future Cambridge-educated doctor.. you get the picture. It was them that they were bothered about not the ones who would land up either a) pregnant before they were 16 which was most of the lower sets or b) in any job that was going to make them look bad. 

The problem is they have now shot themselves metaphorically in the foot as the school is a bit of a laughing stock because they are so desperate to be seen like a private school for high achieving girls (not the case)

Until I began my OU degree I honestly believed I was stupid. I had spent basically 5 years of senior school with them trying to move me classes (mum refused to allow it as I was already being bullied and she said it would make it worse) and being told I had no chance of getting any sort of professional job as I was so stupid so they weren’t interested. 

A 2:1 Honours degree, an MA with Merit with a stupidly complex thesis, and working towards First Class Honours in a second undergrad (ironically in a Science degree but I still refuse to believe my tutors when they tell me my work is excellent) later and I’m just starting to get over that. This is why I don’t believe in all this. The bright kids get it all and the less academically able are left to fall by the wayside. 

fred246

Every area is different. When I was young we only had a large comprehensive and a small private school. The top 2 classes of the comprehensive were superior to the private school so we found it very confusing why someone would pay. The only reason seemed to be for people to say "we paid to go private". When we had our own children a lot of my peers paid for selective private schools. The effect of that was to make the local comprehensive look worse that it was. We looked at it and at the top end it was doing very well. I asked colleagues that paid a fortune why they were paying but none of them looked further than league tables. A few whispered about "no riffraff". So we decided to go comprehensive and made sure they went on every school holiday and trip they could go on and paid for lots of extra after school activities. They have all done really well. I certainly have no regrets. And it has saved a lot. I think the presence of grammar schools does seem to cause mayhem. I suppose a free grammar school is best. The people who don't get in and can afford private do that. Whoever is left goes to the state school for failures and the poor.

Spendless

Fireflyaway said:

fred246 said:

I think you have to class Eton and the other top boarding schools differently to your local private school. I think some people pay privately thinking they are sending their child to Eton. They aren't. They are paying for something that's very similar to that on offer at state funded schools.

This may depend on the area in which you live. I'm against grammar schools so it may seem hypocritical to some that my child attends a private school. The reason we went down that route is because our child didn't achieve the pass mark for the grammar schools and the local upper schools are not good. I'm talking something like only 24% of kids in the upper school near us achieve 5 or more GCSE's. There is an issue with drugs, the school has had maybe 5 different head teachers in as many years. Attendance, discipline and academic achievement are  all poor. If we can afford to pay to avoid this why wouldn't we? My child is happy at school. Discipline is good, the school instills good values, class sizes are small, facilities are good and there is extra support for those who need it. I do feel annoyed that we are paying because I think every child should be able to access a good state school. I also feel fortunate that we are able to avoid the local school. I would be happy for my child to attend a state school if it was providing a good education / environment. It's not about being snobby or expecting our child to be a high flyer. I think schools would level out a lot more of the 11+ was abolished. 

Didn't your child have to sit an entrance exam for the private school? They do here for entry to Secondary years including their own pupils that are in the Primary years. I have heard of their own pupils not getting a place in yr7 because they didn't pass the exam for Secondary entrance.