Why would people be dishonest for 11+?

Same here - people don't admit how much they tutor Even SIL downplayed her efforts which was disappointing because we expected family to be honest!

We're in London and the competition is crazy. For boys 11+ there are typically 700 applicants for 35 spaces at the super selective schools. There are of course less selective schools with less competition but these tend to have similar GCSE and A Level results to the local state schools but they charge the same fees at the super selective ones so unless you're rolling in it they really aren't worth the money.

One tutoring company I approached said they don't consider taking on students unless the tutoring started in Year 3.

DS2 is Year 3 and I don't even know if I want to put him through the same as DS1, it's way too stressful.

Some of the tutoring is crazy. I know of programmes that are 5 hrs a wk & start in yr 4.

I have just finished the 11+ exam for my DC, and I realized that many parents were dishonest and understated their efforts during the preparation, including those who had gone through this before. It is such a toxic culture.

Yes agree with stopsnowing

I was always very open and would share resources.

One child got in and one child did not.

Unfortunately a very close friend has lied about the resources and the amount of work she did with her children. It has (for me) ruined our relationship. She enjoyed one of my children not making the mark. I am sure some of it was driven by competition but my second child missing out was after her two children got into grammars.

If you are going to go into this system really go for it, especially if you don't have the money and resources that other people have. You don't want to be in my position where you are now looking at at 12 plus.

I know someone also repeatedly moaning about how stupid their child is compared to other children, despite the child is in academic, music, getting sport prizes etc. Saying so makes people respond by pointing out to her how talented her child is. That makes her feel good. She also moans about her job, her life, etc, and of course people empathise by again pointing out to her how great her life is.

I don't know what this psychological trait is.

I have the opposite of the usual, the downplaying mum. She pretended that her child got a low score to all the mums whose children actually scored low... went thru all the 'stress' of 'my child's score is on the border' participated in all the conversations like waiting lists etc..

However at the end , many found out her daughter had top scores... all other kids went into waiting list and some didnt get in. I mean knowing that she wasnt, she kept pretending like she was one of them.
Many kinds of people eh 🤷🏻‍♀️

My friend’s daughter was tutored intensely for the 11+. She passed, but really struggled to keep up. She crashed and burned before her GCSEs, coming out with only a handful at crap grades. It destroyed her relationship with her mother. So if your daughter needs intense tutoring for grammar school, maybe it’s not for them. Sure, it gets them
through the exam, but it can’t help once they are at the school.

I am not sure if this is how you intended it but I agree with everything you say - as a very strong argument against selection at 11.

I open about tutoring & the fact I'm going to church regularly!

I find the idea of keeping quiet to reduce competition a bit weird tbh. The grammars near me are so incredibly oversubscribed that in my mind a few more dc wouldn't make a difference.

I agree that it’s not really a case of people often outwardly lying or being dishonest…just often keeping quiet or saying very little about what their are doing re prep and their plans.

After the exams it often comes out that far more people applied and did the exams than many people knew were prepping, and at that point some people might reveal that they had tutors or how long they have been prepping for or how many schools they tried for.

At whatever point other parents who either aren’t applying, aren’t tutoring or aren’t prepping so much hear this info, it often makes them feel uncomfortable. When they hear others have done stuff they haven’t, they can feel like they’ve let their kids down, or their kids will get less opportunities than others will. All the feelings associated with competitive parenting come out even if not spoken. I agree too, that people keep quiet because they dont want to share the name of their tutor or make others think about prepping their own kids. It’s true that other families are potentially the competition. People often will share their tips about tutors, resources and applications after their own children are past that stage and they feel they have nothing to lose.

The thing is, talking about prepping for exams or talking about having several offers of going to grammar or indeoendnet school with those who aren’t doing those things, is a little bit like someone with lots of money or a big house talking about it to those with little money or a big house…..or that’s how it can feel to those listening. It can feel boastful, even if it’s not and it can feel like unspoken and implied criticism of what they are doing for their kids.

It’s all very awkward and can be the moment where inequality of opportunity really becomes real for people and personal rather than just theoretical. Sensible people don’t say too much because they can’t win. Saying little means you don’t set your child up for lots of Ws about their prep or how they got on with exams, or feeling like they’ve failed if they don’t get in. Saying little avoid ps some parents thinking you are boasting or suggesting they haven’t provided for their kids so well.

It’s really tricky. When I was at this point, I found it never helped to say things that many do like ‘we chose it because it seemed best for our child’…all this justifying choices as being best for the individual child - the implication is that such a choice wasn’t best for other children whose families didn’t choose the same option. It’s not said as such but it’s heard like that.

So I found the best thing was to say very little about choices or reasons and to ask very little of others about what their families were doing. And I tried to say positive things about the schools other people were sending their kids to. Comments about being lucky to have a place or the selective school seeming best for DC, whilst well-meaning and intended to try and smooth the way and indicate others might be going to good schools or a lot being bout luck, often don’t actually make people feel better about it all. Some people really dont care that much about it all. Others care a lot but find they don’t have many choices - they can’t afford the fees for independent schools, or their kids aren’t able enough to prep for 11+ or they are borderline and do prep and then don’t make it. It’s hard…especially when others seem to be going places that seem better. And sensible people are empathetic and know this is how people feel. And they know too that really there’s not a lot you can say to make people feel better about it, especially if your child is prepping or has a place at a seemingly better school. So they keep pretty quiet.

@Nightowlprobs Agree with you about this. The education system sucks but given how it is I get why parents try to get their children into grammar schools. As I’ve said before I be rid of the lot of them plus private schools, religious schools and so on. I guess I’m idealistic but all children should have an excellent school in walking distance to their house.

We do, but our tutor is always full now and not accepting new students. Sometimes I think I'm far too honest for today's society!

And do you give them the details? Because when my children's contemporaries were preparing for 11 plus very few details were shared. It was hilarious. Mothers you knew were paying for tutoring (bc their children said they were) played dumb when asked.

We dodged and just went comprehensive. And hey, got better results.
But unnerving at the time.

Well said.

It’s very normal. In my day everyone said they weren’t starting revision yet/hardly done any revision when it came to GCSEs.
My kids took GCSEs this year and 2022 and it was exactly the same for them - no one admitted to studying hard.
I think it’s because in this country everyone thinks intelligence is fixed and you are either naturally bright or really thick. The assumption (not mine) seems to be that if you have to revise/work to pass exams you must therefore not be very intelligent.
In reality intelligence is not fixed and you can improve and grown your brain if you work hard and revise but this seems to be frowned on.
The 11+ threads are full of people saying that children won’t cope at grammar schools if they have to be tutored to pass 11+. It’s really not true - it’s showing that if these children work/study they will succeed in education.

I was open about tutoring my DC for the entrance exam. There is no shame in admitting that they had a tutor because the exam is very different from the stuff they learn in year 5 and 6 at the state school and they had to get used to type of test, which again is a very different format from SAT's etc. But I know parents who won't admit to tutoring and when they ask me for the details of our tutor will pretend that 'it's for a friend' 😅.

There's a difference between lying and just keeping quiet. The latter I have no issue with.

I'm sorry but that's just not true! It may be where you are, but here we only have selective education and (in my town), the secondaries historically have been what they say 'secondary'.

There are a few places that have better secondaries in our county, but I cannot afford to live in them. Incidentally the secondaries get better funding for SEN than the grammars do.

My children would never have had the opportunity to 'mix' with the children they have/do if the grammar school system didn't exist, their friends were/are far more affluent than us (I'm disabled and can't work, DH is a bus driver, when DS was at school I was a single parent).

I'm not totally condemning the secondaries, I went to one ffs, a bloody awful one, and went to university, through sheer damned hard work. But the culture in these schools is one with a lot of disruption (chairs thrown at teachers/doors, etc), bad behaviour that isn't controlled, children being noisy and disturbing classes.

When I went to university it was in spite of my secondary school, not because of it. I think the same applies across the board, most of those who go to the secondaries and do really well have managed to keep their nose down and work.

I'm not totally in favour of grammars though, in spite of what I said above. I have to be living here, as the top students are creamed off (and no parent of an academically able student would duck out of the 11+, as it doesn't happen, so we are not in the same situation as areas with comprehensives).

A good comprehensive that catered for both the top and bottom, that allowed children to flourish, would of course be preferable.

I still state that I never had either of my DC tutored, as I said I simply couldn't afford it.

This is spot on. A friend's school was at a private prep and she found out afterwards everyone was tutoring their kids like mad and lying about it. She said it was like Fight Club.

I’ll stop grammar bashing after this, I promise. But I feel similarly about secondary schools that wealthy people push into with their house price money. Quote from this article:

“We would do better to focus on schools making kids happier and healthier, with strong academic standards, rather than thinking they improve one’s position in the race for life. Grammar schools didn’t give more opportunities to more people, they gave more opportunities to the same people.”

https://magazine.alumni.cam.ac.uk/this-idea-must-die-grammar-schools-are-a-tool-in-promoting-social-mobility/

I’m aware that those “same” people don’t care, they just want it in a race against the other “same” people, but that’s why I think they’re not good for society. Research after research has proven that they don’t improve social mobility, and when you factor in the fact that they’re selective, don’t get better grades than ordinary secondary schools.

But I’ll bow out now. I’m probably feeling particularly ranty today!

(I’m a teacher as well as a parent, by the way, which is why I feel strongly about all of this!)

Hmm I disagree. I think people keep quiet in case their kid doesn’t pass the 11+, or because they don’t want other people to prep more and lessen their kid’s chances.

But maybe I’m a pessimist about this kind of thing after all the conversations I’ve had over the years! (Or just need to leave N London!)

People are secretive because whatever they say, it often provokes a negative reaction. People are critical of those who prep - it’s because they feel it implies criticism of themselves for doing less. They don’t like the thought that another child might be able to access opportunities their kids won’t be able to access. Therefore people keep quiet about prepping and about applying and about where they are applying in the case of independent and super selective schools. To be honest, it’s often much easier to say very little. The whole topic breeds resentment and toxicity so the less said the better.

Yes, even for local state schools in London we live too far to get a place by distance, so can only get a place if we get tutoring for the various extra tests! It's ridiculous.
My son is consistently at or near top of his class at state primary (way, way more academically able than I was and I got scholarships and Oxbridge degrees), but it would still take more work than I have the money or time or spoons or inclination to out him through.

You do understand that since the introduction of the NFF any disparity is primarily because grammar schools have fewer pupil premium children?