Super-selectives: how do we know if we're kidding ourselves?

Just shows how unfair it all is.

Most of the grammar tests are very narrow and many favour those who have a mathematical mind. Sometimes quite plodding children can pass because they are good at that kind of test- while other very bright children who are at level 5 and above don't pass because they aren't. I know of many children who have passed the 11+ and been "deemed selective" in one area and not in another - there are always surprises and it's quite arbitrary.

Sutton is a super-selective and entry is based on performance on the day. There will be loads of people who missed out by a few marks (near the passmark it is common for there to be 30 or 40 boys each of whom have the same mark).There will be boys who pass one or two of the Sutton grammar schools but not all 3. There will be boys who fail all 3 and will still come out with 10 A*s from Whitgift or Trinity. Yes, it is all apparently random and uncertain, and far from guaranteed for anyone.

It depends what is meant by being deemed of selective ability.

Did you see the various Graveney threads at the moment? Their 63 places are set to go to the very top scorers, say 98% or more. I don't think it unreasonable to put a child who is likely to score over say 90% into an exam. But in these fiercely constitute exams, even that high a performance may not be enough.

OhDearConfused - in Kent (at least in the part I live in, which doesn't have super-selectives) about half the children sit the Kent Test. Of those, about half will pass.

I think (but I could be wrong) a much lower percentage of children sit the 11+ for super-selectives.

I'd have thought a decent grammar school could come up with a better phrase than 'deemed to be of selective ability'. I read that as poor paraphrasing for 'passing the test' too.

404 passes (or, sorry, "deemed to be of selective ability") out of 1458 is not far off from Kent's 25%. In fact, slightly better at 27.7%.

The head at Wilson's during his speech on the open day a couple of years ago gave some guidance on this. He said if a boy was working at level 5 or above in English and Maths in year 5, then he stood a good chance of passing the entrance tests. Went by that, and guidance from DSS's teachers.

I don't know about super-selectives - but in our area (Kent - 25% will be 'deemed suitable for grammar school') most schools refuse to give any advice on the likelihood of passing the Kent Test.

To comment fairly on this we'd need to know what the spread of scores was. It could be that absolutely loads of the children scored very close to the pass mark. With so many children taking the test, one or two marks means the difference between a pass and fail.

Is it just me who finds the phrase 'deemed to be of selective ability' odd? Surely 'selective ability' means an ability that you use when you choose to (like 'selective hearing' or 'selective reading'). What they mean is 'able to be selected' which is quite, quite different.

That does not say that 1054 failed just that they did not meet their selection criteria though doesn't it?