Aaagh entrance test!

[londongirl1]

Was wondering what do you make of this? My daughter took the entrance test for a highly academic girl's school and hasn't been accepted. I rang up the headmistress of the school for some feedback and she said she did fine in the maths paper (more than 70%) but was let down by the English (30 something % which is obviously not good). Now my daughter's strength is usually literacy not maths (which she's more average at). So I'm baffled. We did concentrate on practising maths in the run up to the test (and didnt do any literacy), as I was aware she was weaker at it. Now I'm really confused. One option is for her to take the test again in January (I think it would have to be in both English and Maths) and obviously focus on the literacy. But I'm reluctant as it puts DD through yet more tests and she will have to prepare again. Part of me feels that if she hasn't got in this time, then its not the school for her. Does anyone have any thoughts or advice??

[Bink]

How old is she? (From what you say about literacy/maths I'm assuming this was a 7+ type entry - if wrong, the below won't perhaps apply.)

Can you get some more detailed feedback on what exactly went wrong with the English paper? - maybe their literacy focus is different from what your daughter's been doing? - unexpected vocab tests, different ways of approaching comprehension, maybe? I think many schools put a lot of weight on "story-writing", and if she doesn't do a lot of that she may not have shone in the test, however good she is at reading/spelling.

Doing the test again in Jan could be OK - but only if she really forges ahead in whatever it was that let her down this time. Otherwise, I wouldn't do it, especially if she is the kind of child to take failure to heart.

[londongirl1]

Hi Bink - thanks for your thoughts - yes, it was a 7+ type of entry. In a nutshell, she hadn't done much preparation for the literacy full stop, though she's in the top literacy sets at her current school. I know, I'm not sure about putting her through it all again.

[Bink]

I sympathise - have been there with ds - v similar situation - "one of our top few" candidates (they said) in maths; but English not near the standard - despite being the top reader in his (non-selective school) class.

I did put him through it a second time (at the school's suggestion, in fact, as they thought he might well progress enough), but he failed again - same thing. I guess the required standard in literacy moved ahead at the same pace (or faster than) he was developing. Luckily he was not particularly put out by not getting in.

Anyway, came to conclusion that if you don't reach the required standards easily then the school experience might well be a stressful struggle.

[frogs]

Dd1 did 7+ for City of London girls and South Hampstead, although that's now four years ago.

It sounds like your dd did really well in maths, especially since the expectations go beyond what a similar-age primary school child is likely to have encountered. I suspect the problems with English come down to very different expectations and preparation between private school and primary school children. IME 7+ English exams for private schools principally test the children's ability at extended writing, which tends to be sorely neglected at primary schools. Primary children are also unlikely to have met the more sophisticated reading comprehensions that the private schools are likely to set.

My guess is that your dd was simply wrong-footed by the kind of test she was set and did not do herself justice. The academic schools also vary in the extent to which they are used to/prepared to make allowances for children from different systems, so it might be worth asking the school what % of their 7+ entry come from state or prep schools, if they are prepared to disclose that.

If your dd likes the idea, you could try and get her up to speed with extended writing, so some slightly more old-style rigorous comprehensions, and try again in Jan. But I think Bink is right -- those schools are not fun places to be for a child who can't hit the ground running, so if it doesn't come to her quite easily, I wouldn't go for really full-on tutoring to try and scrape in.

hth

[tuppy]

I'd agree with frogs and bink.
Find out a bit more about the substance of the test and evaluate what your dd has actually done/practised in order to meet that sort of hurdle. Particularly if you simply conclude she was underprepared rather than lacking in ability, it would be worth having another go, if you think she has progressed enough without overly pushing the issue.

Would the January test be for Sept 2008 then or an occasional place for 2007/8 ?

Btw my dd did 7+ last year from a non selective prep. I did a bit of stuff with her at home, but not a vast amount. Her old school was aimed at 11+ so didn't prepare her at all. Her new school is one of the top 2 or 3 academic girls' schools in the country. She is very happy indeed, but they do go at a phenomenally fast pace, so for your dd you need to be sure she'd not only cope, but flourish and have time and energy for all the other things on offer, from school drams/music/chess, to chilling out in the garden at home.

[londongirl1]

Hello everyone thanks for all your soo helpful comments. Bink - yes, your situation with your son sounds very similar. The headteacher suggested to us, too, that we might want to consider trying again. But for the reasons you mention, I'm unsure. Frogs, I think you're right with your comment about hitting the ground running. I might prefer for her to go to a school with a respectable place in the league tables (rather than at the top), where she'll comfortably keep ahead of the work they set her. Tuppy, hi, yes she's always been very strong at literacy. I can only think that she hadn't come across a test of the kind they set her. What surprised me so much was that she did get a very good grade in maths (she's in the middle maths set of her current state school) but that was the area I tutored her in (did some Bond maths papers several times a week). But I didn't touch tutoring her for literacy as I didn't think she had a problem!!

[Bink]

Something I did before ds did the second test, which was enlightening & in the end helpful (paradoxically!) when he failed again, was to enrol him in a tutoring group aimed at these sorts of tests - partly to see how he enjoyed being with rather academically competitive children.

He didn't like it much - he didn't really notice or care that he was far ahead in maths (as that's his private idea of fun), but he really minded that he couldn't fly through the comprehensions, or join in the book discussions, the way some of the others could.

On the other hand, if you get your child to join a tutoring group and they love it - well, there's your answer, and your plan of action.

[londongirl1]

Yes Bink good idea -- though presumably your son is happy where he is now, so it all worked out in the end?

[Bink]

mmm - actually he's currently at an "extra help" school (for language-related difficulties, not academic ones), & yes thoroughly happy there - but I do fret over where/when he'll going next. [Hijack over]

[summer111]

DD is at the 11+ stage and is going for tutoring for secondary entrance places. She's a very intelligent child and shines in English. The one thing I have observed from her tutor classes is the huge emphasis placed on English - she's doing alot of old style comprehension and essay writing in this group which unfortunatley isn't hugely emphasised in her state school, This is despite the fact that her primary is considered a top performing local school.

Another alternative which you could consider would be to keep her where she is for now and then tutor her for entry into secondary school. If she's a bright child, she'll have the ability to succeed at this stage. More importantly at the age of 10yrs, she will hopefully also have the maturity to understand the reason for tutoring in preparation for her move to secondary.

[londongirl1]

yes, summer111, I think she was unprepared for English. Though I tried her on a few Bond comprehensions a year ahead of her school year and she seemed to cope fine with them, so I left it. I can only think that they were asking her less direct questions, and ones where you have to think more laterally. As you say, also I'm sure she had more problems with writing extended prose because she's just not used to doing it. Tutor groups a good idea though not sure how to go about finding one. Are there any national ones that are good?

[Bink]

You're in London presumably - I was given some tutoring contacts which I could pass on, though I can't judge how good they are ... CAT me if you would like & I will try to find the bits of paper

[frogs]

The Bond comprehensions are much more like primary school ones, ime, and more accessible. The private school ones, certainly at 11+, but probably also at 7+ are much more open-ended, and prep-school pupils are trained to respond to those in the way the examiners are looking for. So if you have a Q. like, "How do we know that Aslan is a lion?" even the most able state school child might put "He roars" or some such perfectly reasonable, logical answer. But the well-trained prep-school child will pick up his/her cue and run with it: "We know Aslan is a lion because the author tells us XYZ and Peter describes his golden coat and mane, blahdiblah" picking up the full complement of brownie points.

The creative writing thing is the same principle. A high-grade state school essay will begin "Once upon a time there were blahdiblah and this happened and that happened and then they all got home in time for tea", while a well-taught prep-school chld has had it dinned into them that they need to concentrate on descriptions and put in lots of adjectives and adverbs, and has probably also memorised lots of useful linking terms as well as having more sophisticated handwriting and more rigorous punctuation.

Although actually I think an alert admissions department should be able to see past the teaching a child has had, a lot of them are fundamentally lazy and if given the choice will take a well-drilled child who won't need extra input in favour of a bright but potentially quirky one with possible gaps in his/her knowledge.

[londongirl1]

Frogs - yes, thanks, that's interesting. So really I need to get my hands on some sample papers of these kinds of comprehensions ...

[singersgirl]

I suppose if you don't reach the required standard easily it might be a stressful experience, but, given that most of the children who get into academically selective schools at 7+ are from preps or pre-preps, I'm pretty certain loads of them are not reaching the standard 'easily' - they are being pushed to within an inch of their lives, judging from my observations. So the peer group at the schools is by no means all brilliant kids, but pushed and tutored above average middle class kids.

I'm absolutely certain DS2 is precisely the sort of child academic preps would want; I'm equally confident that he wouldn't pass the entrance exams because the gulf between what he is taught at school and what he would be required to demonstrate is so vast. The children at pre-preps I know have been doing non-verbal reasoning and dictation all Y1, are now doing much more complex maths, doing extended creative writing and having practice interviews - they are told what sort of 'hobbies' and interests they should manufacture before the interview. Some are receiving additional tutoring as well. It's pretty much impossible to replicate that at home even with the most willing, biddable and academically motivated child.

[Quattrocento]

My children go to a rigorously academic school and I am seriously thinking of removing them. These places can be quite destructive of children's confidence. I believe that my daughter is very very clever but she doesn't believe that of herself.

The point of this post is that you were worried about the effects upon your daughter's confidence of NOT succeeding in a second exam. But what about the effects on your daughter of succeeding then having to compete year-in year-out?

[tuppy]

That's a point Q. We worried about this re dd, but decided to go for it.

I heard an apocryphal description of one of the high achieving London girls' preps (not the one dd's at): "half the girls are as bright as buttons and the other half are being frantically tutored to keep up". A shred or more of truth there I'm sure.

Ds1 is at the senior section of a top London boys' school;just finishing his first year. We waited until 13 + to decide where he'd go as he was a bright but dreamy and distractable little boy who we were sure wouldn't cut it at all at a super academic prep. Horses for courses - both he and dd are happy and thriving.

[frances5]

A lot of very academic schools kick out children who don't meet the grade academically. I went to a very academic school and most the children who were kicked out for not being clever enough were children who had been to a prep school and had tutoring.

There is more to life than league tables. Some of these highly academic schools don't care a monkeys about the child well being.

The school I went to had several anorexic girls and a big bullying problem. For example I was called fat at 15 years old when I easily fitted into size 10 clothes.
The hot house nature of these schools can make children extremely insecure.

I got good academic results, but I didn't learn many life skills.

[roisin]

I agree with everything Frogs has said (as usual), and chuckled at her descriptions. But I would still sound a note of caution.

30 something % is really very low, even if she was unprepared for the nature of the questions, and not at all well-drilled in getting the brownie points.

Can you ask the school to send you a sample paper of the entrance test to try and get to the bottom of exactly what the problem is?

I think the gulf between a 'highly academic' independent school and the state sector is wide at this age, and gets wider; and I would be reluctant to put a child into this environment unless I was confident they would flourish in that setting.

[londongirl1]

yes Rosin, thanks for your thoughts my dd has been to an academic GDST girl's school before (when we lived the other side of London) and she never had any problems with the pace. As her teacher in Y1 said - she has a natural bent towards literacy. So that's why I was so astounded that she got such a low mark in that aspect of the test and did so well in the maths. I think you're right - I need to see a sample of the paper -- obviously it was very different to anything she'd done so far ...

Q you're right of course I'm sure I could get her literacy paper up to scratch with coaching but do I really want to spend the rest of her school years coaching her to keep up? No! I'd prefer her to be in a less hothouse environment where she can flourish.

[wombat1]

From looking at your other posts, I think I might have an idea about which school your daughter tried. Don't want to mention the school name in case you don't want it known.

If I am correct however, I have a copy of a previous entrance paper for Yr3 entry and can give you some info.

[frogs]

FWIW, londongirl, dd1 did get into both City and SHHS at 7+, despite not knowing her 4x table or having any particular extra work in English -- I had rather half-heartedly made her do a couple of essays over the Christmas holidays, but in the event she told me she only had time to write half the essay in the actual exam. [aaargh emoticon]

In the event we turned both the places down because dh and I both felt that the schools took themselves immensely seriously in a rather humourless, unimaginative way, and I wasn't happy with the heavy nightly homework load. I also wasn't sure how kind they'd be to rather quirky, anxious, slightly faffy dd1, although I was confident she'd be okay with the academic side of it. We never regretted turning them down -- she still got offered places everywhere she applied to at 11+, including the very pushy ones, but spent her 7-11 years having time to play with friends after school, go to sailing club and generally hang out. The secondary school we actually put as first choice is a good notch down the selectivity stakes from the likes of Henrietta Barnett or NLCS, but suits her down to the ground.

So in summary -- have a second go if you and dd feel okay about it, but maintain an air of slightly detached cynicism with regard to the school. The pushy London schools in particular do foster the slightly hysterical myth that all their pupils are geniuses and that getting in is the only path to success, but it really ain't so.

[wychbold]

My DS went to an academic private Junior school which prepares the kids for entrance exams. In the summer of Y5 he won the Achievement Prize (for exam marks aggregated across all subjects). A few months later they took the entrance for the Grammar. Three quarters of them got in but my DS wasn?t one of them. His literacy is fantastic and his Maths is OK but, according to the test results, he is fantastic at Maths and it was his literacy that let him down! And then, another few months later on, in the summer of Y6 his English SAT was a very, very high Level 5 and the fourth best in the whole school. Like you, I?m baffled.

I don?t know the fine detail of Grammar school tests but they do not just find ?the cleverest?. (whatever that means) Only the schools themselves know what exactly the tests are skewed towards but I think that they chose ?the ones who are best at passing exams?. The school has plenty of clever kids to choose from- they want to make sure that they get the ones who are clever and can demonstrate this cleverness in the GCSE tables five years from now.

I think that deep thinkers are at a disadvantage. The schools want kids who can scribble down the correct answer in the shortest timeframe; they don?t want kids who cogitate too much.

[londongirl1]

Yes Frogs interesting re your DD and the way things turned out. For the best obviously! I do feel a bit dispirited re the exam. I'm definitely veering away from taking it again, as I don't think it's the school for her. She's got another entrance test in the next month (for an academic school, but not nearly as pressurised as the one she's just failed) and I'm really hoping it goes well and she gets in.

[Bink]

I think it is very likely the case that, once you have loads of bright children to pick from, schools select for a particular "learning style" - which probably means cheery, biddable, picks things up quickly, doesn't challenge the assumptions, remembers its games kit, throws itself into the extra-curricula stuff as well as the academic stuff. After all, what school (and indeed what office/team/anything) wouldn't want those kids?

I'm sure though that there are schools who look beyond that, and encourage the square pegs as well as the nice shiny symmetrically rounded ones - but if the school in question is pretty clear about selecting for round pegs, then unless I actually had a round peg I'd probably deliberately avoid it.