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

First one yes absolutely.
Second one definitely not.
Third one yes (he's year 5 but will definitely get a place)
Fourth one maybe (he's year 4 we will see)

At start of the primary? I don't think one can easy to tell the kids themself in term of academic ability because they tend develop at different time and age.

But one can certainly tell the parent involvement level, like OP who already looking at selective secondary options and ways and chances to approach those.

FWIW I knew kids went to Latymer and City girls. I don't think they showed distinctive academic ability from other kids at year 2. But their family definitely are the one who were invested early.

Going to a academic competive secondary in London is not just about academic ability but also more about time/effort spend on prep intitated by the parents. Also, a lot of kids who didn't opt for 11+ can outperformed the kids from selective secondary schools academically in the later stage.

My daughter was put into an enhanced Maths grouo to stretch her within the first half term at reception. She’d only h turned 4 in the summer, I had no idea she was talented at Maths! She was quiet and generally overlooked at (comprehensive) secondary, never won a prize for example until an excellent set of gcse results. She currently on track for a first in a chemistry related subject.

so condolence and outgoingness can also contribute to how much they are ‘noticed’. Also hard work plays a part regardless of how gifted the child is. And some children develop much later.

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

Quite a lot of posters on this thread clearly haven’t come across selective secondaries that are neither grammars nor private. There are quite a few of them across the country. Near me is the SW Herts consortium which is a set of state secondaries who admit to some of their places on various criteria and pass points via tests taken in year 6 (their (dreadful) website might be interesting: https://www.swhertsschools.org.uk/).

One of the reasons the 11+ system was so controversial when it was universal was how many children develop academically when in their teens. There are many examples of people failing the 11+ who then found themselves frustrated in schools that weren’t focused on supporting them to achieve more and ended up at university via longer and more difficult routes. That is in addition of course to the issue of the difference that additional tutoring made to those on the cusp of passing - the old 11+ was in general more passable without any additional help that it is now but obviously extra help could be helpful.

I live in a grammar school area- every child in my daughters prep class bar one got a grammar place. Pretty much all have CAT scores 115 plus and average PTE/ PTM of about the same.
Those scores will give you a good indicator

And yes @SomersetBrie and @follygirl she is august born - end of august in fact, I think she is actually one of the youngest in her year. How interesting to hear your experience of this. She is also physically smaller than most in her class and I do sometimes think blimey she is a whole year behind these kids, it’s tough for her! I’m cheered to hear that your DC was catching up and doing so well by year four. Perhaps she just needs more time, although unfortunately she’s already got it into her head she is ‘not one of the clever ones’, poor kid!

My son is a summer baby and certainly didn't shine at primary school. We sent him to a lovely, nurturing secondary school where he has excelled. He did extremely well at GCSEs, has been made a scholar and senior prefect and is predicted to do well at A levels.
I just think he needed time to mature to be honest.

So helpful to hear everyone’s experiences - makes you realise how different everyone is!
For context we are in London so not a grammar area but more of a mixed bag: there are some very selective grammar schools which you can try for from where we live- like Latymer in Edmonton, for example.
Then there are more local schools which are partially selective (like Mary mags) and which partially use other criteria - but the academically selective places are also v competitively fought over
Then there are (the expensive option of) private schools, like City of London school for girls, Forest school in Snaresbrook and others. These are also academically selective, although because you also have to pay the fees I don’t have a sense that the places are quite so fiercely fought over as the grammars like Latymer.
It’s early to be thinking about all this obviously - but the issue for us (and many who live where we do) is that if she is unlikely to be suited to a selective school/ unlikely to be successful in any of these routes into selective schools, then we would possibly be better off thinking early about moving to an area where we are likely to get a place at a very good local comprehensive school (like Camden school for girls, parliament hill, fortismere etc).
I certainly don’t want to hothouse her or tutor her up to the eyeballs for a place at a school she won’t be happy at - not at all. I’m just trying to work out what our best options are likely to be, given the sort of child we have - or whether it’s just too early to tell that.
DD’s teachers have never had a concern about her, they are full of praise for her learning and behaviour and say she is where she needs to be, she is just not all that brilliant on reading, and is not currently ‘exceeding expectation’
I do wonder if as @Pinkpinkplonk , being a very quiet and well-behaved girl is not doing her any favours in her state primary especially as her year is boy-heavy and the boys are very boisterous and there have been some problems with behaviour (I hear from the boy mums)
DD is very bright and enthusiastic about school, remembers things she is taught in amazing depth and the complexity of her thinking when she talks is impressive but unfortunately it doesn’t seem to be translating into academic work - she is quite slow on reading although her teacher thinks she is just lacking confidence / being a perfectionist and not wanting to get things wrong.
Then again some kids in her class are independently reading through the Harry Potter books etc … it’s hard not to compare!

Is she young in her year?
My DS is August born and it took him up until Y4 to move into "expected". He was above expected by Y6 but did not sit the grammar test due to us feeling that it was not right for him (and a long bus journey).
He is now clearly capable of grammar as he is doing really well in his state comp.
He is not a genius though and would not thrive in a super selective environment.
Also, you have to work hard, your DD might really throw herself into her work as she gets older and improve that way.
So I wouldn't necessarily think she has shown you all she is capable of at this stage.

Also it does really depend if you mean grammar or private selective - average private schools get similar % 9-7 at GCSE as grammar, but super selective private will get far higher. Grammar kids would not necessarily pass super selective private and the tests can be very different to the 11/12/13+.

DS is 19 on course for a first from Oxford in a stem subject, so yes unusually bright
( best estimate is IQ around 160). He was always inquisitive and his language development was at the top end of normal. Colours by 18m, never misused pronouns, stuff like that. But not keen on writting or reading until 6 ( halfway through yr 1). He learnt his timestables by October halfterm in yr 2. His yr 3 teacher took is aside and suggested we should consider a superselective.

Oh and heavy tutoring to get into a super selective grammar might feel like a good idea, but dc1 is in year 9 now and several children he knows are really struggling- and I know they are the ones who were v heavily tutored. It’s not always a good long term strategy.

@Leopardpj one thing that really has helped dd is because she had struggles she learnt to persevere and that hard work, for her, paid off. This really helped in sixth form when some children have never been used to working hard suddenly find that something is challenging. She is on a very competitive course and some others are struggling because they have always found school easy and don't realise the step up and that at some point everyone has to work.

Do you mean selective grammar schools?

dc1 - was obvious in reception year. He got a good 11+ score (we live in Kent) and got into the super selective.

dc2 - was going ok, not as clear but obviously doing better than many of classmates. covid hit, the school wasn’t great at home schooling info. I wasn’t sure but she has done really well in her 11+ this year and should comfortably get a place at a super selective.

if you live in an area with grammar schools, there’s a temptation to intensely tutor, but unless there’s an area of weakness, don’t before year 5. The best thing you could do is play maths games (times tables rock stars was popular but I think from year 3), and reading- read to her, get her to read to you.

The handful of children from my kids' primary school classes who got into a nearby super-selective secondary were not necessarily the ones I would have earmarked to do so - and I knew the classes quite well as I volunteered at the school.

I think this kind of "success" is often a lot to do with parental attitude and constant tutoring. But it does depend on the target school as some are super-selective and others just on part of a LA grammar system (you don't have to be as clever for the latter)

It's not always that easy to tell. Kids that seem very switched on can regress and a lot of the time pushy mum's make kids out to be cleverer than they are (remembering one 4yo who had apparently read ALL of the Roald Dhal books and knew her tables, yet failed her 11+). I know plenty of kids who seemed average or just above who aced the 11+ with little or no tutoring and personally I think those kids are the ones who will swim at Grammar, rather than the obsessively tutored who need tutoring support through senior school as well. There's something quite sad about children who spend extra time trying to keep up with a certain level in school and knowing they have to do so to keep a place must be hugely concerning for them.

Both DC were obviously bright from an early age as were our GC. We always read to them and talked to them and tried to give them a lot of experiences without spending a lot of money. They both got into highly selective secondary schools. However, one of my friend’s DD seemed to be a genius when she was young but gradually became little more than average. She was just being coached by her mother.

Mine spoke early, learnt to read early, and were ‘greater depth’ the whole time they were at school.
Grammar schools are different in different areas though, some are easier to get into than others.

DS was always top of the class and an obvious candidate for a selective school. DD was always at expected level, prob until Yr2/3 Ironically it was lockdown and home school that gave her a boost (I'm not giving myself the credit here btw) and since yr 4 she has been certainly in the top 5 or 6 of her class academically. DS got a place at the super selective grammar, she narrowly missed a place but did get a place at several other grammars. So no, it's not always obvious from the start of school, children take different time to acclimatize and thrive in school, also gender, age in year, neurodiversity can have an influence.

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful. Your DD sounds very like mine @Unexpecteddrivinginstructor

There was a correlation for my DC - greater depth across the board throughout primary school, then on to a selective school.

But I think that’s only partly academic ability and partly being ‘school-shaped’, so ready to learn, able to sit and concentrate, independent at things like doing their own coats and changing for PE. All of those things make school a much easier experience from the start, and if they’re not in place (eg undiagnosed SEN) they can hide that a child does have a lot of academic potential.

So ds1 went to a bog standard comp but is now at Oxford University. He is incredibly bright and it was obvious from early on. A thirst for knowledge, photographic memory, everything came easy for him academically.

Ds2 is not quite as bright but not far off exam result wise. It wasn’t as obvious with him, he just quietly got on with things.

Children develop at different rates. I was always top of the class primary and secondary and my brother middling. My brother is a physics professor went to Oxford, taught at Stanford and fluent in another language. I got good grades too btw but am proud of DBs achievements.

We live in a grammar area and DS1, along with 3 or 4 classmates was battling out being top in spelling / maths tests since reception. Him and all of those kids are now in y9 all at one of the very selective (ie pretty much no catchment) grammars locally so I'd say it certainly helps being bright from a young age. DS2 is middling academically and there was no way he'd pass the 11+, even with tutoring.

My brother went on to amazing academic success (Cambridge/Harvard for STEM - Firsts/Distinctions) but was actually absolutely terrible at primary school - so much so that my parents were super worried that he was very behind and paid for private secondary school (I went to state school) because they thought he wouldn't be able to cut it in a state school.