Anger as poorer pupils with low 11-plus marks get grammar places

CHILDREN from poor homes are being given coveted places at top grammar schools despite scoring significantly lower marks than others taking the same entrance exam.

A group of schools have taken the controversial step of lowering the 11-plus qualifying score for children from disadvantaged backgrounds in a move denounced by critics as ‘social engineering’ that discriminates against the middle classes.

At one leading grammar, children whose family income means they can claim free school meals were admitted with a score of 26 marks below that of other candidates, and in another the gap was 24 marks.

The initiative is the latest attempt by the highly oversubscribed selective schools to counter criticism that they are dominated by children whose parents can afford to first send them to fee-paying prep schools, or pay for tutors to get them through the exams.

As thousands of children sit the tough exams for next year’s entry, it has emerged that at least seven grammars have lowered the 11-plus bar for children from poor backgrounds – five in Birmingham and two in Rugby, Warwickshire.

Figures from the schools, among the highest performing in the country, show that children eligible for free school meals who took the 11-plus last year for King Edward VI Five Ways School in Birmingham were able to gain a place with a score of just 206 marks, while the lowest needed by other candidates was 232. At King Edward VI Camp School for Boys, the gap was 24 marks, at King Edward VI Camp School for Girls it was 21, at King Edward VI Aston School it was 17, and at King Edward VI Handsworth School for Girls it was ten.

Both Rugby High School for Girls and Lawrence Sheriff School in Rugby say they save up to ten places for disadvantaged children whose scores are up to ten marks below the qualifying score. Many of the other 157 grammars in England are expected to follow suit.

Government figures show that about 60 per cent of them are allowing, or considering allowing, poor children whose schools get extra payments worth £935 per child under the ‘pupil premium’ scheme some form of preferential treatment, although only a handful have altered their exam pass marks.

Defending the initiative, Denis Ramplin, a spokesman for the Foundation of the Schools of King Edward VI, which runs the Birmingham grammars, said that 100 pupils now had places who would not have done so a year ago.

Mr Ramplin said the schools were aiming to fill 20 per cent of their intake with children from disadvantaged homes, but added that other youngsters were not losing out because they had created extra places. He added: ‘People with disposable income are paying tutors £30 an hour in the hope that their children get into the schools. But the Government is telling us to be more diverse and socially mobile.’

However, Chris McGovern, chairman of the Campaign For Real Education, said: ‘This is very worrying because it is using social engineering to make up for the failure of teaching in many schools.

‘The next step would be to say, “This child is from a poor background so let’s make it easier for him or her to pass GCSEs or A-levels”, but poverty should not be used as an excuse for low standards.

‘This discriminates not only against the middle classes but anybody who needs to get the normal pass mark, some of whom will be from pretty poor families that earn just too much for children to be eligible for free school meals.’

Robert McCartney, chairman of the National Grammar Schools Association, said: ‘The big danger is that it is social engineering.

‘If you were the parent of a child who has lost out to another child who has got fewer marks, you would feel aggrieved.’

‘If your child lost out you’d feel aggrieved’