Should I have coached my child for 11+?

Of course you should, everyone does.

Should add in our GS classes, most children have birthdays September-January (despite being told that scored are averaged against age, to remove any age bias.

I guess it's more than probable that any given unstreamed class in the GS there would be less range of achievement from high to low, but they study exactly the same syllabus in both GS and High School. Thank goodness. I have older members of family who went to the old Grammars and Secondary Moderns and those in the SM left school having taking no exams, no certificates or anything (1960's). Very sad back then that not passing an exam could set you back so much and lessen any achievement as a child. Thank heavens this changed.

Our local high school also has more choice of subjects to study. There are a lot more students who go there. However it was my DC who wanted Grammar.

We have done tutoring for our daughter through year 5 (1.5 hours group sesdion plus about ab hours homework each week. It has become apparent that although she is bright enough, personality wise grammars are probably not the best fit for her. However, it has still been good for her to be stretched and her class test marks have gone up loads

State primaries are apparently not allowed to help at all beyond doing a practice test 2 days prior to the actual one, and writing a headteacher recommendation for those who miss by a few points but are otherwise high achievers. Or at least that the case in Bucks where we live.

I did send mine to a tutor. I just didn’t want to take the chance and wanted mine to be in an equal setting to the other kids taking the test. The tutor was known to be very good and had a waiting list. On a different note the tutor was a retired head teacher, making 2k a week in hard cash from classes. I remember one of mine calculating that on the drive home one night🤣

Very good point!!! Don’t beat yourself up OP. There may be other opportunities to get her into the school for an occasional job place later. And you could contact the school and explain this was your DC with literally no preparation or help at all. But odds are she will be fine and do well wherever you send her.

Yes, and no it should not be that way. However mine go to grammar and all children that got the required mark to be admitted had tuition in year 5 (and some before this). We had a few months and also a couple of sessions of mock exams. I was a bit shocked some children had received tuition since years 2 or 3 to 'work towards' grammar.

If you look at sample papers I would imagine most children would not be used to the style of questions that are asked, especially NVR.

Hi OP I don’t know if this helps but twice in my life, in two separate areas, I have known groups of children who’ve attended the same secondary schools. Looking at them now, some are adults with their own children in the first area, others are Y6 onwards. Most are doing really well. Invariably the ones who did and are doing well had involved and interested parents who prioritised their children’s education. The parents were and are of very differing backgrounds, some on high salaries and professional jobs, others working at an hourly rate on the minimum wage. They’re all interested in what their children do and involve themselves in their children’s lives.

Neitg of the schools were / are anything special

This is true. Hence why I wouldn't have dreamed of attempting to get my other 2 in grammar. They would've needed coaching both to get in and likely throughout school

Better to do well in a comp than struggle in a grammar

Know so many kids that had endless coaching to get them through 11+

They got into the highly selective school - then parents had to continue endless coaching to try to keep up and kid subjected to endless pressure .

a super bright child that is suitable for grammar school may need a little exam technique coaching to help them pass but not years of hot housing.

so many ‘average’ kids are being forced into high attaining school by being super coached and basically being set up to fail or a life of endless additional coaching because of parental aspirations.

i’s rather my kid enjoyed life in a normal school than have to face years of coaching and pressure to go to a school that is above their ability.

Well done to your daughter for doing so well without the intensive coaching so many parents push.

It depends on how your brain works, but there are a substantial number of children who can sit down and ace those tests. The VR and NVR parts are essentially an IQ test. You can coach someone to gain a couple of points here and there but you can't really increase someone's IQ by a large amount.

The maths and English potentially can be improved, although very bright children will just "get" it. But then you have, for example, vocabulary. There's 100,000 words in the English language. Tuition centres will make a big show of giving out lists of words and testing them every week but the chances of any of those words actually coming up is almost zero. The only way a child is going to have a vocabulary which allows them to sail through that test is because they are reading a wide range of high quality texts and fully absorbing the words in context. You can't tutor it.

It's very rare a child doesn't get coaching for 11 plus. I'm in an area that does 11 plus. Those children I know who are sitting the 11 plus every single one is having coaching for 2 years prior

I have not proposed to put grammar school children into non-selective secondary schools to improve behaviour anywhere. You are reading things in my posts that are not there. Taking privileged children out of the mainstream system sucks up resource and good teachers and furthers inequality.

do you understand that not everyone who doesn’t get in to grammar school has a behavioural issue? That lots of children who don’t get into grammar school have aspirations, want to be able to learn and have consistent teachers and apply themselves at school, and suffer from the disruptive behaviour of others? Or do you just not give a crap?

Investing time, skill, money, making schools attractive places to teach and using evidence based pedagogical approaches in state schools is required to create optimal learning environments for children from a cross section of society. Most state schools have sets to allow children of similar ability to be taught together, I don’t know why you are reacting as if secondary schools are a soup of mixed ability classes day in day out as standard, they’re not.

this is now derailing and I will be leaving it there.

Or there's not enough places. When my DD did her 11plus there was something like 1000 girls sitting the exam for her school. Only 135 places.

The rest aren't automatic ally " less smart"

And you can be smart in more than just being good at certain types of tests

This is so sad.
We had a local tutor that was ruthless with feedback...

She'd tell you if she didn't think the child was suitable.
She'd also tell those who were brilliant and had nailed the techniques that they no longer needed her, so could practise at home.

It probably helped that she had a 2-3 years waiting list, so could afford to be honest.

Absolutely agree with the point about - for example - non verbal reasoning. Just glance through one of the books in any book store as a reasonably well educated adult and you will see that trying to do it under time pressure when no one had taught you the techniques to figure out the answers would be hopeless. At my DCs’ prep they have weekly lessons in NVR at and VR from the start of year 4. Presented to the kids as the “fun words and picture games” lesson on Friday afternoon, but that’s what it actually is.

Really sorry OP but you were extremely naive. While I agree that a child who needs years of tutoring won’t be a good fit for the school, you wouldn’t send your child in for any other test - eg music exam, spelling test, ballet/gymnastics, Cubs badge, etc, without helping them practice and familiarising them with what would be involved. Why would this be any different?

I just don't understand the obsession with "failing"

I sat the 11+, so I know you can't fail it. I came in at place 211 out of 1200, I didn't get in because they only took the top 150. I was waiting listed but obviously 61 kids weren't going to drop out. I never felt like I'd failed, I did better than nearly 1000 other kids which is bloody good! There just 210 kids smarter than me. I learned that there would always be people better than me. It didn't harm me, it was a lesson I needed to learn after always being top of the class at primary. I'm still proud of ranking in the top 20%. No feelings of failure here.

I went to an academy instead, the first few years I learned fuck all while the naughty kids disrupted every class and I was invariably sat next to them to "rub off on them" which of course never worked, they just bullied me instead. After year 9 we were all setted and I did really well, I've had a very successful career since. I've never harboured any resentment for the grammar kids, they deserve the environment they got they achieved it by outperforming the rest of us. It's how life is. I did really well as well but only after I got away from all the disruptive behaviour and into a more grammar like environment where I was only taught in classes with peers of equal ability. Every child deserves those opportunities, if I had gone to grammar I would have got that experience for all of my high school years not just half of them, every child exceptional enough to get into that environment deserves it. They wouldn't achieve as highly in a mainstream school and why would anyone want that for any reason other than spite?

We are also in the South West and considering whether to have our child sit the 11+ it may well be the same school. I have such mixed feelings about it all and have also listened to the school about not tutoring. I wanted to keep our approach very laid back so that there is no anxiety or pressure about taking the exam but maybe I’m very naive. Her friend is being tutored and has been for the last couple of years.

Do you understand that putting the nice privileged grammar kids in state schools will not improve the behaviour of the children already in them? It is well known that disruptive behaviour only drags down the hard working children who are sat next to them in an attempt to rub food behaviour off on them.

They are less smart though.

2 children. Older child passed 11+ into grammar school. Younger child just missed out and went to a secondary modern that we were very happy with. Neither child received 11+ tuition, only a few practised papers bought from WH Smith so they knew what to expect. Both children did extemely well at their schools. I do understand your regret when the non grammar option isn’t great and other parents were getting their children coached. Is there an option to try again at a later stage?