DD Year 8, struggling at grammar

SJane I totally agree on your second point, which is why I kept saying 'statistically'. Of course there are lots of PP children who are very well supported and whose parents are academically ambitious for them. But it is also inescapably true that poorer children are statistically more likely to face other challenges and to be already academically behind their peers by the time they reach Year 6.

As to your first point, I've no idea what the answer is (other than ditching the selective system, but that's a whole different argument). If the test is based purely on the national curriculum/SATS then it's hard to differentiate at the top level (lots of children would get 100%). If schools are allowed to coach then that doesn't solve the problem that some schools are just better than others and have more resource to dedicate than others (esp preps). Even if schools are all allowed to coach, how on earth do you actually prevent parents from tutoring on top? KCC have clearly tried to take the position of an untutorable test as the fairest option, but clearly it hasn't worked! God knows how you solve it. Perhaps base your test on innate reasoning skills but make it so completely different every year that it's hard for tutors to predict the content??

I’m in a grammar county. I know most get tutored now. It’s changed wildly in the last 20 years or so. My DD wasn’t tutored and got 1 mark off max. Only the very over invested tutored then. I went through the type of questions with her. Now, because the exam has changed, I think I would have to get a tutor.

Having been a governor at a primary where virtually no one got to a grammar school, the big issue was parents affording tutors. They couldn’t. We reckoned (back in the day of the 121 pass mark) that tutoring was worth 5 marks. Now I think it’s worth more. The only way to even up the playing field is to have free tutors in schools. Nothing else would work. Dc can do very well at Sats but not get a grammar school place. Timing issues with the exams and technique are major issues.

We used to rank children in the school for extra info for the 11 plus decisions at review. The county would review the near misses. Also don’t forget not all pp children are from families who are underachievers. High ranking forces officers have dc too that get pp. Some very very bright parents have low paid jobs and devote themselves to tutoring. Their dc get to grammars. These people would even game the system for a year!

I resigned from being a governor at one school with fairly high fsm partly because the head wouldn’t support dc at appeals. She thought they were not right for the grammar schools. She pulled a face when I said dc deserved a chance. They were 4-5 marks off but had had no advantages at all! Not even the school gave them a chance. Awful.

There is also the question of over tutoring for the exam and being unhappy with the pace of grammars. I’ve seen it a lot. Bed wetting. Crying. School refusing. It means so much to the parents they don’t listen to dc. Around me, most primary schools don’t have 25% pp in the schools so you couldn’t make up 25% in the grammars with them. There are some high achieving pp, as I’ve said, but few. A few more would get in with free tutoring. No chance of that though. If pp DC are not tutored to get a place, having a % available for them is meaningless. They cannot access them.

Yes, ok, you're right, of course, ladiessmock. You can play Xbox and love French grammar! And yes there is less 'stigma' attached to doing well, because it's kind of assumed they should, although I still maintain it's not particularly cool to be seen to be trying too hard. You can still be considered 'nerdy' even at a Grammar, I'm afraid. Just my experience. I'm probably jealous that none of my dc ever wanted to talk French grammar with me! However, I have known families who have not put their bright children in for the 11+ with the attitude that 'it's not for the likes of us' which is a damn shame and compounded by the image of Grammar school children as somehow 'other'. Not the case, in my experience.

I do absolutely agree that access to grammar school for disadvantaged DC needs to be improved.

You could either ring fence places for DC whose parents have not attended university or provide tutoring for those who can’t afford it.

@turlstreet, I’m not advocating ring fencing PP places, I’m advocating a return to a system where Primary children are all coached in their schools on the 11+ or intake is based on SATS. No external tutoring or coaching. That way you have a democratic intake based purely on ability.

Also while I don’t disagree some PP are educationally disadvantaged, that’s some not all. I’d also say that many working class parents are educationally ambitious for their D.C. My MIL (barmaid, single parent, brought DH up in a tiny council flat) was very much so for DH - as he ended up with a Firsr from a Russell group Uni, it paid off. I’m pretty sure the status quo of bright to average but coached for 2 years middle class D.C. going to grammars isn’t what we as a society should be aiming for.

[quote TagMeQuick]@AndThatsNotRight

"The point is that normal kids can do well" not in London, not anymore.

But well anyway let's agree to disagree. No point going around in circles.

Some children tutored close to GCSE standard with parents who have degrees in maths from Oxbridge etc. For the 11+...

You have no idea what it is like here.

Grade 8 piano and grade 7 on another instrument, still not good enough for a music scholarship...

The level at all things is insane here...

Pleased for your son though, sounds like he's having a more normal existence than us lot in London! I'm trying to create a normal existence but it's near on impossible...[/quote]
My point is though that it shouldn't be like that x

It can work for normal kids, but never will with that sort of tutoring.

@AndThatsNotRight

"The point is that normal kids can do well" not in London, not anymore.

But well anyway let's agree to disagree. No point going around in circles.

Some children tutored close to GCSE standard with parents who have degrees in maths from Oxbridge etc. For the 11+...

You have no idea what it is like here.

Grade 8 piano and grade 7 on another instrument, still not good enough for a music scholarship...

The level at all things is insane here...

Pleased for your son though, sounds like he's having a more normal existence than us lot in London! I'm trying to create a normal existence but it's near on impossible...

I think it cam be a bit of a shock for quite clever kids to go from primary where they're in the top sets for everything to grammar where there are a much bigger proportion of really academic high fliers. So they go from being always at the top to sometimes being in the middle and occasionally near the bottom.

I also really feel for kids who started secondary last year because it's such a step change from primary and they had so much time at home.

I hope your conversation with the school reassures her.

@samuraimyths exactly what a Tiffin maths teacher said to me. The very bright ones sometimes don't do well as it comes easy to them. They coast along never having to try too hard. But the slightly less bright and more average ones know they need to work and therefore get into a good pattern of doing the work. He said they do best and in the end it's only people who are prepared to work hard that do well consistently.

SJaneS48 I agree the grammars could do more, but it's also the case that unfortunately educational disadvantage begins right from the start, so there's a limit to what you can achieve by tweaking the grammar system at Year 6. Poorer children are already statistically more likely to have fallen behind academically by then. And, as discussed on this thread, grammars can be a fast-paced environment where children need to keep up in order to thrive - and children on low incomes are disproportionately likely to face other issues such as lower parental educational attainment, less chance of a quiet space at home to work, less access to technology, lower attendance, more chance of having caring responsibilities etc etc. Of course many of these things are not true for many children in receipt of PP - but statistically it may be true that children from lower income families are not only less likely to get into grammars but in some cases may also cope less well once they're there. Giving 50% of places at Judd to children on FSM is not going to solve those problems. It's a bit similar to the issue of contextual offers to Oxbridge. Very few people would argue with the principle. But equally there's no point in sending a student to Oxbridge who's not going to be able to pretty much hit the ground running and thrive academically in that environment. Designing a system that's sophisticated enough to identify students from failing schools who have the ability to do well in a very academic environment (and also to weed out those who have over-performed in outstanding schools but also wouldn't really suit that environment) is exceptionally difficult.

[quote TagMeQuick]@Ecosse I completely agree. Tutoring can be a real confidence boost.

Why does anyone think there's something wrong with a bit of extra learning outside of school?

@AndThatsNotRight may have been blessed with a 0.0001% genetically gifted child - but that camp of kids is extremely small.

Grammar school is mostly made up of tutored kids.

Still don't think he'd pass the Tiffin test.[/quote]
The idea that he's 0.0001% gifted makes me laugh, he's nothing unusual! I love him, but not blinded enough to think he's a genius...

The point is that normal kids can do well, and if there were less tutoring going on just to pass a test then everyone would know where they actually sit on the spectrum of ability that is measured.

[quote Sarjest]@AndThatsNotRight 🙄 to the implication that tutoring is some kind of torture. My DS comes out buzzing from her session as she's covering topics that are not presented in Year 6. It's just the way it is. You're also underplaying the meaning of torture.

OP, I'm glad you followed it up.[/quote]
Of course I'm not underplaying the meaning of it! It was funny that's all. And small amounts of tutoring are one thing, the example I have is very different to yours!

I know lots of children/teenagers at grammar schools, some "superselective" grammars. My observation from friends' children is that a child who likes to work hard, is organised and motivated (but "only" of average/upper average intelligence) can do really well at grammar school - I know a few of this ilk who got pretty much all 9s at GCSEs, super duper A -levels too. Meanwhile I also know some very very clever kids in these schools who do not work hard and have coasted and did not do as well. At the end of the day, there are tons of subjects and good study skills (e.g. writing vocab out in foreign languages/Latin) from Year 7 and revising in the holidays (even if just a bit), reading around a subject such as a science is the stuff that gets you there. If you are a lazy, disorganised bright spark it isn't enough. Also bear in mind that lacking a bit of confidence actually motivates many children to work hard and revise more. It is the over confident ones who don't always reach their full potential. So I think as long as your DD is happy with her friends and working hard and the teachers are happy with her it does sound like the right kind of environment for her. Often clever people are quite modest about their own abilities, it is quite typical especially in younger years.

@Ecosse I completely agree. Tutoring can be a real confidence boost.

Why does anyone think there's something wrong with a bit of extra learning outside of school?

@AndThatsNotRight may have been blessed with a 0.0001% genetically gifted child - but that camp of kids is extremely small.

Grammar school is mostly made up of tutored kids.

Still don't think he'd pass the Tiffin test.

I appreciate it boosts confidence and gives DC valuable practice in exam techniques but it doesn’t create a level playing field with all having equal opportunity. Essentially it creates a system of unequal provision and opportunity. Good for an individual DC but not the overall population.

@turlstreet, you’re quite right and I didn’t know about pupil premium places in Kent. You’re also right about the percentage figures just going on the quick look I had at Skinners and Judd (two local to me Grammars). Skinners has a massive 8 places compared to Judds 5, the PP pupils still have to pass the Kent test and are ranked according to their score. So they might not need to get as high a mark but they do need to pass. And to pass without the aid of tutoring or parental coaching that’s more of a struggle.

I don’t think there is any issue at all with tutoring. It can really boost DC’s confidence and while of course it helps with the 11+, there is also huge benefit longer term.

Asian countries that substantially outperform the U.K. educationally have a real emphasis on tutoring and after-school study. DH has relatives in South Korea and DC there are expected to spend virtually all their time after school studying!

If your dd went to a state school and there are many there from private schools, especially with lockdown they might still be experiencing the benefits of their primary education. In yr 6 when state school children are working towards SATs, private school children can plough on with the yr7 curriculum. It evens out by about yr9. If she was privately educated and tutored for 11 plus then maybe she would be happier in a different school.

@AndThatsNotRight 🙄 to the implication that tutoring is some kind of torture. My DS comes out buzzing from her session as she's covering topics that are not presented in Year 6. It's just the way it is. You're also underplaying the meaning of torture.

OP, I'm glad you followed it up.

However, my ds got 1 mark less than him in the 11+, despite his being adjusted down by 6 for age and his friends up by 4 for his, meaning my ds actually was quite substantially ahead!

I do feel for that child, he has no life except work, never allowed to play and if the tutoring ever stops, he'll be screwed.

My ds wasn't interested in going to the grammar so he chose to do no prep at all, but his grade was so good he considered it and decided in the end that he'd like to. He's just always assumed he'd go where his sister went- she didn't get in to the grammar.

I'm not at all saying that it's impossible to get in without tutoring, but some children do, and I think they're far better off than the ones that have been tutored.

Interestingly, my phone just autocorrected tutored to tortured... rather apt.

Very very few kids would get into a grammar school in London without masses of tutoring - because all the kids are being tutored around them. So the whole playing field is at another level. Many are also going for independent schools too some of which are super selective.

@AndThatsNotRight I'd have to assume wherever you are in the country your grammar school doesn't have masses of tutoring to the cohort as say in Kent or London.

Never heard of anyone getting into the likes of Tiffin for instance over in SW London, boys or girls, without masses of tutoring.

SJaneS48 some Kent grammars do have PP places, but it's done school by school not as a blanket county thing. Generally not nearly as high as 25% though, I don't think. Primaries are also encouraged to encourage PP pupils to apply, and deprivation can be taken into account in the appeals process.

Fair point HunkyPunk, but actually I disagree - it's perfectly possible to enjoy the intricacies of French grammar and love Xbox. In fact, one of the advantages of going to a grammar/selective school can be that you aren't seen as some kind of ivory tower weirdo for being interested in French grammar (or whatever). Maybe I made the point too strongly, but our experience of being in a selective environment is that it's cool to be clever, work hard, push yourself academically. And yes, the kids do talk about work (as well as football and Xbox), going by their WhatsApp chats. And from what I can gather they have very good relationships with their teachers and do talk about work with them too. My point was that if you don't have a basic interest in pushing yourself academically, then you're not likely to get the best out of a grammar school. That's not the same as suggesting that all grammar school kids are intensely academic and not interested in anything else.

And good news @BaconAndAvocado - perception is a funny thing. Have they just done assessments? My DD has had a week solid of them which if that is the case would go some way to explain the feeling of pressure. Good luck!

@TheAnon1 - perhaps in some regions that happens but it doesn’t in Kent.

@Zodlebud I think the ring fencing has happened already at many schools.
I can't recall the % at my DC's school but think it's 25%