Eleven Plus Exam

Excellent post, granjura.
When I listen to the Danish members of the family about schools over there, I sometimes wish my grandchildren were there, too. On the other hand, I also wish that our school system would change to be like the Danish one.

I have never understood why in this country secondary schools have to be so big. It's obviously a question of economics rather than education.

Of course I'll respect Kitty's choice too. Although it is not easy, as I taught for many years in the large Comprehensive I described presviously, where most of the best students were creamed off by the local private Grammar school and the Catholic school in the very town. And yes, our school, our students- would have benefited from the school being truly comprehensive, imho. And yes, i would have happily sent our children to that school- but they went to the higch schools and upper schools, all 3 comprehensives, in the catchment areas where we lived- one of which I taught at previously and was senior teacher/head of faculty.

Most of our family and friends sent their kids to private school, and some to top Public boarding schools. We've had to learn to agree to disagree- was not easy at times- especially when some friends accused us of sacrificing our children to our principles, which was very hard to take. Especially those who wer heads, deputies and senior teachers or state comprehensives- but who still sent their kids privately- which I felt was 'wrong and hypocritical'- as if those schools were not good enough for their children, why were they 'good enough' for other kids- including my own. if they believed in the schools they taught at, and the principles behind- why didn't they back them up. At least most friends and family who opted out, did so because they didn't believe the comprehensives were good (they of course had never been in one, and had absolutely no idea whatsoever about what went in in those sschools and how they worked, but based their opinion on hearsay, and 'class' divide)- but at least they were more honest about it. Many of my nieces and nephews are a public school, boarding, or top private schools (as you well know, there are many private schools in the UK which are dire, and staffed entirely by failed teachers, sadly- they range from the sublime to the ridiculous too).

I am so glad the society I grew up in is not entrenched in class warfare and stuck in its (wonderful) history- and wish my grandchildren could grow up here- from that point of view.

POGS, neither Ed Miliband nor Hilary Benn went to fee paying secondary schools. They both went to comprehensives.

Harrigran, at the age of eleven, you do what your parents tell you to, or at least you did then. I know people who passed the exams to go to Grammar schools but could not go because their parents could not afford the uniform, my dad and his youngest sister among them.

Kitty,I taught in open plan schools. Teachers just have to have more control that's all. My sons both went to open plan schools and got on okay in them.

All ours went to public schools, the boys following DH to his old school which had been direct grant, but only because those schools offered a good education at a time when schools were being used as political footballs.

I have related before how we lived in the worst catchment area of our small town and 'parental choice' was the watch word of the time. The school the children should have gone to was Open Plan, had no children in uniform and the noise coming from within was dreadful.

We applied to another school in the town citing those reasons and the reply from (the notorious) Director of Education was that, as all schools would be open plan within the next couple of years and there was a uniform that we were at liberty to make our children wear, he was turning down our application.

Luckily we were able to opt out and get a good grammar school type education for our three children (little did we know that we would have another two children or we might have thought twice!!)

Respect your choice, of course. But re the 'why not' did you read the whole thread? Because several of us tried to explain 'why not' in quite a lot of detail.

My DC went to private schools too but only from the age of eleven. Education is important and if you can afford it, why not ?
durhamjen why did you take the place at the fee paying school ? you could have declined and given someone else the opportunity.
I know people who passed for Grammar schools but did not take up the places.

Well both DC went to local private schools. They both got an excellent education. As for the network of important contacts... that is really limited to perhaps a dozen top schools where the great and good educate their children.

When DC put their school names on a form, I doubt that anybody even realises that the school was a private not a state school unless they come from the area. DS went to private school from 11 because both teachers at his state primary and an educational psychologist advised it, if we could afford it. Having done it for DS we had to do it for DD.

I think the main advantage it gives, especially if the school is not notable, is that all the parents want their children to get a good education, and even though some of the children may become disaffected and difficult (and DD was one of them) their is a unity of purpose between parents and school.

DD returned to the state sector at 16 and only really has intermittent contact now with one school friend. Most of her network of early contacts come from her further education college and the youth theatre group she belonged to.

DS keeps in contact with a network of friends, none of them of any use to him in his career, nor he in theirs. The most notable achievement of them all is not outstanding career success but that, although they are all now in their mid-40s, none of them has suffered a marriage breakdown, which is more than can be said of his non-school friends.

My two half cousins who went to Public school, boarding aged 6- to the UK when their parents lived abroad- totally rebelled when they got older- and always said he'd die rather than send his kids away to school. Don't think they ever quite forgave their parents.

Bil went to the same famous public school, about the same time, and despite his memories of it being very strict, and the awful days of being a 'fag'- has great memories and sent his own son to a boarding school, but nearer to home so he could come home week-ends. It can go both ways.

By pm J52- I wonder if your boys went to the same school as my girls- or did they go to LBoys and QE?

Just come back to this post. Totally agree with Granjura 's post yesterday 18:36. I too taught in a local authority comprehensive school and did not educate DSs privately, despite being able to afford it.

As parents we supported the schools our DSs went to and they provided a very good education, which was not always perfect. DSs and their friends did very well.

BTW DH was privately educated at a school where some of the 'old boys' are public figures and politicians. He definitely didn't want private education for our DSs. X

I was one who appreciated the song, although I have heard it before.

Of course it can be interpreted in many ways and apply to different types of snobbery - that's why it's funny. We are not all as lacking in self-awareness as you seem to think, Eloethan.

durhamjen, no teaching assistants in general, but in exceptional cases where there are, they have to be qualified teachers.

Some may prefer not to acknowledge it, but the government is, as compared to the total population, "stuffed to the gunnels with privately educated scholars."

A BBC article reported on a study conducted by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, which contained the following information:

Only 7% of the UK's population is privately educated.

36% of the cabinet went to independent schools.

Also: 71% of senior judges, 62% of senior armed forces officers, 55% of top civil servants, 43% of newspaper columnists, 44% of those involved in TV, film and music (including 22% of pop stars), 35% of the England, Scotland and Wales rugby union teams, 33% of the England cricket team, and even 13% of the English Football Team were educated privately.

All these people are no doubt intelligent and ambitious but are we really to believe that these traits are inherent and that their success was totally unrelated to receiving a private education and, perhaps more importantly, to the network of important contacts that such an education provides? And are we saying that these qualities of drive and intelligence are largely absent from the remainder of the population?

Incidentally, the Flanders & Swann song "Misalliance", which was posted earlier was described in the introduction as a "parody of narrow minded prejudices and class-consciousness". It seemed to elicit a great deal of glee from some contributors to this discussion but perhaps they hadn't considered all the possible interpretations of this song.

Nope still don't see it.

So on your reckoning if Labour get in at the next election I should be very, very, worried because Ed Balls, Ed Miliband, Tristram Hunt, Benn, Harmen et all are going to be shite because they are privately educated scholars.

I think they will be shite because they are i diots some of the time but I would never think their education comes into play unless they say say or do something that is full of hypocrisy.

So, working on your mind set re private education being the devils work, I go to see my doctor who had a private education, am I going to say, 'your an a-s hole mate' because I've been reliably informed anybody who has had a private education will affect me and my family in a negative way because you can't forget what you were taught. For one thing it doesn't make any ruddy sense to think it let alone say it. For another reason I would be assuming he had a private education and he may not have done so I would call myself what Gordon Brown called somebody.

I guess you and others can carry on calling me naive but I find that a shame to be honest because if all you can do is belittle then you don't have much to offer .

"Neither myself nor anybody in my family has received a private education but nobody in my family feels hard done by, jealous or think the fact private schools are there has had any relevance to our lives."

The majority of Tory MPs were educated privately and most of the front bench were educated at public schools. Do you think that once they get in government they forget what they were taught in school or at Oxbridge?

Private schools no relevance to your lives? Naive.

durhamjen your post 18.35 to me

"As I said POGS, you are NAIVE if you think that the government does not affect you and your family. It affects everybody else in the country, so how come not you"

What the hell are you talking about. Where have I said the government does not affect me or my family?

Granjura, do they have teaching assistants in Switzerland? It always seems to me that this is the way the schools get teachers on the cheap in this country.

Cameron and the likes opt out of the NHS when they can. Not all health services are available privately, which is why they always make a big song and dance about using the NHS. Thatcher always had her operations in private hospitals.

Your system sounds very much like the Danish system, granjura. I presume you have a more equal economy, too, which allows for the equal educational opportunities.

Do Cameron and the likes opt out of the NHS though? Or am I being naive.

Yes, I would still say that class sizes are of 30 pupils, or thereabouts.

Grand-children in Surrey are both in classes of 29.

The main concern for parents. Before kids were taught in groups of a similar level/nature. From this year, here not all over Switzerland- kids are only streamed for the more academic subjects, and together for the rest.
The Jury is still out- first term. I am on the education board and a Governor, so will report when we discuss this early in the year.

But the other huge factor I forgot to mention- is that class sizes here are much smaller- and generally, parents of all backgrounds have much more respect for the education system, and support the teachers mcuh better.
Primary class size is between 15 to 18- 22 absolute max. In the UK it can be more than 30- which teachers here cannot believe is possible. And about 22-25 max at secondary- and it makes a huge difference (I know I taught in several secondary schools in UK).

Not only politicians, but the rich- be they professionals and business people- re caring for the good funding and running of local state schools f their kids go to them.

And I totally agree about the NHS- the true Crown Jewel- and it breaks my heart to see it attacked and run down (OH qualified in 1969 in London, and dedicated his life to it).

As said above, exactly the same for education- the more opt out- the less it remains a priority and becomes run-down and marginalised, poorly funded, etc.

Oh I see. You mean that say when the politicans children are going to the same schools as everyone else, then money automatically is poured in? Good point.

Not sure I like the last paragraph though. Dont the disruptive pupils disrupt the others?

All systems have their strengths and weaknesses, of course.

The UK A'Level system is totally unique. It means that non academic students can continue their 6th Form education, in a very narrow field, and then go on to Uni. Designers, musicians, sports people, artists and performing artists, IT/design people, etc- which is wonderful,a nd why we have so many brilliant designers, musicians, etc, in the UK. But they do have a very narrow and limited general studies/knowledge base- sadly. And most people, aged 16, go on to either study all arts, or all science- meaning that half their brain development is 'arrested' at such a young age. Scientists who have the power to make such huge decisions for the world, should, in my opinion, have a much better understanding of history, for instance- and what happens when scientists take over. Just one example.

Yes, but the point I am trying to make- is that when the rich and those with influence go/use the same system, and do not opt out to private- they put priority on it being well funded- do you see what I mean? When the rich and those with influence can and do opt out- they do not care any longer what happens to the rest, consciously or unconsciously. Why should it be a priority for them- when their own kids are not affected?

Indeed, most counties do have selection at 11- not via an exam though, but the year's results. Many counties now are challenging this- 30 years late compared to UK. My local County (Canton) has stopped this now, and only stream for maths, German and English (I think).

Another big difference is that here classes are taught as a 'class'- in the UK in all the schools were I taught- a class was a social and administrative group, with a form tutor- but after registration and PSE, etc- then went on to different classes based on streaming- with a child being, say, in Set 1 for maths, set 2 for French, set 1 for..... etc, and mixed groups for, say, humanities and PE. Kids moved to the teachers- here the teachers move to the class, which is taught together for all subjects- so has to be more or less homogeneous/at same level.