Grey Coat school admissions - how to get in?

I remember doing a language aptitude test at school and I did very well at it. As far as I remember it was basically a logic test; identify the rules of the test 'language' and apply them to set questions. I am quite a scientific person so this appealed to my strengths. What I am definitely not is a linguist. I have no 'ear' for language or music and found learning GCSE French difficult.

I believe that there is likely to be a new set of admissions criteria as a result of an adjudication which found like other leading faith schools - oratory, coloma, - the criteria were being used as selection through the back door. I suspect you will see a constant cycle of slight change to admission, adjudication, another tweak... So the criteria that apply now could well be different in 3 years time.

Admissions criteria like this make me froth with rage. This is a state fucking funded so-called comprehensive school!

The music aptitude tests I have less of an issue with, because they are generally using well-established methods of testing abilities like pitch discrimination that are known to correlate to musical potential, and hence an acceptably fair way of trying to assess aptitude without covertly selecting children who have benefited from extensive musical training. (Though it must be added that quite a few schools that have music places use the aptitude tests as an initial screen before a second round involving auditions, where preparation and teaching is clearly key).

My issue with the GCH language test is that (afaik) it is set by the school and I don't know of any evidence to show that it correlates with actual linguistic potential or subsequent achievement - clearly anecodotal evidence of dc with high linguistic ability (as evidenced by A* grades at A-level and places at Oxbridge) is just anecdote, but enough to make you wonder. I'd be really interested to see whether the school have actually attempted to evaluate their selection tests against outcomes for the pupils thus selected.

The point I was making was really just to warn the OP that however potentially able an applicant is, it would be unwise to assume that the outcome of the test will reflect htat ability and hence lead to an offer of a place.

they don't test actual languages

That's because they are required to test aptitude, not knowledge. If they tested, say, French they would simply be prioritising children who know French already. They should use a test that tells them how good the pupil will be at learning a foreign language.

Note that I have not seen the test used by this school. I have no idea how well it tests for aptitude.

Quite a few schools used to use Swedish for this, that may have fallen out of favour now, especially in London where they might well be an actual Swedish speaker taking the test .

No, it doesn't, because they don't test actual languages, they set some kind of 'Martian language', or at least that's what they used to do. Really don't set your hopes on it, it's a gamble, no more than that.

I'd be really interested to see some evidence that Greycoats idiosyncratic 'language aptitude test' correlates with anything in particular, tbh. I know of three girls from different primary schools and year groups who didn't pass the test, but went on to Oxford (1 girl) and Cambridge (2) to read...

Modern Languages.

I guess some girls must get in that way, but prob best to treat it as a lottery rather than a reflection of academic or linguistic potential.

Is it Michael Gove who has a daughter who just started there? I wonder which criteria his child got in.

That has to be one of the most complicated set of entrance criteria there is!