If your child won a place at a competitive secondary….

was it obvious from the start of primary school that they were academically gifted?
No. She was 'bright' and curious, but if anything rather behind others on reading and writing, and had some support lessons (this teacher did say she seemed to have natural maths ability). This discomfited me as I'd been a precocious reader, but DH had been a 'late developer' ... we have identical degree qualifications but he was the one who won all the prizes. Anyway, dd didn't really catch up with reading till the start of ks2, but she was one of the few who got a place at the grammar (out of catchment so pretty high selection criterion). She was the only one of her primary cohort to go to oxbridge.

So... sometimes doubtless you can tell but they simply don't all kick in at the same age.

I don’t know about gifted but yes he was very academically able and had exceeding expectations on every section on every report all the way through primary. He’s at a super selective grammar.

How academic are you and how academic is her dad?
Often that is an indicator of how academic the child will be.

You can easily move her reading forwards with something like Reading Chest - I did this when my kids were young.
Reading Chest

@LeopardPJS im in London & you defo need tuition these days. It’s so competitive, I know people with bright dc who start from yr 4 & have them doing 4 hours a week etc

You see the interesting thing is lots of people focus on learning support v.s. chances of going into top school. But looking back at our journey of 11+ prep, the biggest gain (school offer or not we don't know until March) is the learning experience:

1. What he learned - enhanced his confidence and enjoyment at school for learning

1. Hard working ethics - however tough and reluctant he felt at some point, he was able to go through it and he saw the benefit of every single steps. He was able to take responsibility in the end for his own efforts.

1. He knows from his own experience (with results charts at the tutor centre), each time when he put his heart in a subject, he saw progress, however hard it was.

People tend to talk about inherent intelligence to warrant a place in grammar school or super selective. But that's not all what life is about.

Like some previous posters said, if a bright child takes it for granted and never learns to put efforts in what they do, his talent would be wasted and those who work hard might well exceed.

DH worked hard all his life and achieved more than anyone could imagine from where he's from. He believes in hardworking more than intelligence (though he does have it himself). He works with lots of people graduated from Oxbridge but quite often he saw lack of motivation and lack of continuous learning. Learning is a lifelong process. Someone who's born bright only has the advantage of being fast and learning easier. But there's no guarantee of achievement if they failed to put efforts in and use their gifted nature.

I do worry about if my DC could keep up in secondary (he's quirky and sort of bright not in the conventional way, and with ADHD), as I supported him extensively along the way. But ultimately, in Y7, regardless which school he goes, the goal is to help him learn to establish a good learning habits and self manage from earlier on. The 11+ process helps to show him what's possible.

OP, maybe worth asking yourself what the ultimate goal is. The focus might be more worthwhile if it's about learning and gaining confidence in learning instead of purely for exam result. That way, the process becomes meaningful in its own without the outward comparison.

We don't have super selective or even selective in our area. Ds1 was bright from the beginning and got exceeding for all but 2 subjects in reception. He was in the top set for everything they streamed for in secondary school and left with good grades (2 4's but the rest were 6-9's). He is now in his 2nd year of college doing a btec and is on track to get a distinction. Ds2, Ds3 and Ds5 are academically bright but they struggle with a lot of things due to autism/adhd. Ds4 has learning disabilities so he isn't academic at all but he tries hard and loves learning.

I could tell Prince George was destined for Eton from before his birth.

My DS's Y1 teacher told me he was Oxbridge material. I laughed and asked how she could possibly tell at such a young age (tho I knew he was bright). She had the last laugh...he's in his second year reading Engineering at Cambridge currently!

Yes, he was young for the year but ahead of every other child (100+ children, the teacher told me when I asked if grouping across classes was an option) in maths, and in the top few in the class for reading. Writing was very average. He got into a no-catchment grammar without tutoring but had mixed results at GCSE (grades 4 through to 9).

Both of mine were average or behind in some subjects in the early years of primary. One because they were August-born and one was not school-shaped. We were a bit naïve and didn’t realise you have to step in and help because school won’t. But both gradually improved and were near the top of the class by year 6. I do know a couple of kids who were determinedly average until year 8 or 9 but worked very hard at GCSE and came out with amazing results.

This is not always the case, we did the bare minimum for school work, never did the challenges etc. Instead spent a lot of time in the park, sports etc and my dc were still doing well in class. I never put effort into their school work until we realized we would do the 11+. Dd was end of year 5 for this. So we started to prep and she got a tutor. We did not do crazy amounts and she did well. But during this process when speaking to others, I found out there were a lot of parents who had tutors for their dc just to stay ahead...they were not doing 11+ So yes, you can find both dc who do extra work and are pushed/tutored so they can get GDS. But you can also find dc with natural ability getting GDS.

Yes, I think this. You can be naturally talented, but if you do not learn to also work hard others will eventually surpass you or do better. Its the same for sports too. Some dc are just naturally talented in sports, but they would not progress if they do not train. If someone less talented trains a few times a week, they will quickly become better.

@LeopardPJS for us, we were not considering private school in Year 2 and only made the choice to try end of year 5. Early on, I knew my dd was naturally bright. She always had a really good memory and just seemed really with it. We spent her early years though focusing on playing outside in the park, sport and art. Homework was an afterthought. She was average Year 2, but then slowly started moving to above average in areas. When it came to applying for 11+ I still had no idea if she was super academic or not. Heck, I still do not really know. She is still very much focused on sports and clubs. She does Sport 6 days a week. I hardly see her do homework, although she does go to school early and says she does it before her sport/clubs. She is now year 7 and going to a very academic school and really enjoying it.

I remember asking my DS' year 4 teacher at his first primary school, just before we we were due to move away and were looking at an area that happened to have a lot of grammar schools, whether she thought he had grammar school potential. He was probably bit above average at the time but youngest in the year so doing pretty well for his age. She said there is no way of knowing, as they change a lot in the next few years. So we didn't risk it, not wanting to have to get a tutor. Anyway we didn't move to that area but DS became a high achiever at the crap primary we did move him to and started year 7 in top set in every subject and I'm sure he could have got got in to a grammar school. So there was a massive change between the ages of about 8 and 11. Similar with my other DC but not quite so pronounced.

No competitive secondary (though yes for sixth form. I always knew she was bright but she didn't perform exceptionally well like some kids do at primary. She didn't get in to the top sets until GCSEs and did well at those but not top top. She did get three A stars at A level plus A star EPQ, well above the boundaries this past cycle but she worked hard.

Children do develop at different rates, but vocabulary at 5 is known to be a strong predictor of academic success later on.

meant to say aged 8 year 4-5

Yes I think you'll find that the kids who are doing well are also doing extra work in the evening...not huge amounts but say half an hour a day of English and Maths. I wish I had done this with my DD in primary...no parent will admit to it, but I found out via the kids themselves!! Some who went private in year 8 were coached for 2 hours every day of the summer holidays. In my experience, state primaries don't push at all, which is a shame as often children have a real thirst for knowledge and certainly as a child I loathed too much arts and crafts and loved a page of sums or whatever. It was so satisfying. People often say that in Europe kids don't start school until 6 etc. However at 6 most of them can read and write and by 10 are more or less fluent in English! I think our state primary education really lets children down...they don't have that essential grounding that a private school would give them

I agree with the above. My DC was always on the upper side of average, not remarkable. If there had been an 11+ around I don’t think would have passed it. Now in final year of school (Scotland), all As for National 5, all A at Higher and forecast 3 A for Advanced Higher despite dropping their strongest subjects. Very organised and a hard worker so when work ethic came into play then they improved

and some parents use intensive tutoring, which helps but does not replace natural gifts esp in maths and science at the higher levels

In fairness, in my experience (as someone very lazy to whom academic success has always come easy) hard work always trumps natural talent if the naturally talented don't work hard. 🤓

Worth noting that, while Latymer is not a superselective, it is a coed London grammar, the competitiveness to get in is easier than some London superselective but much harder than those Kent superselective (Judd, Dartford Grammar, Tonbridge). Similar level as CLSG.

(I think dc1’s year was also unusual in the super selective scores being around top 7%, boom birth year so the offer scores didn’t go very low compared to other years)

It’s also worth thinking about your child’s class average - is it normal average?! Eg in dc1’s class, 14 of the 31 kids not only passed the 11+, they passed it at a grade high enough to get in to one of the super selective schools. But across the county, for that year group, only 7% of children passed the 11+ at a super selective score. “Average” for the class was not the same as average for the wider county. (This was a state primary- just an unusually bright class, the same school didn’t get the same results the year before or after!)