Should I put my average child through 11+?

I was surprised at some that didn't pass in my son's class. I think nerves can make a difference on the day. Amazing SAT results you must be incredibly proud.

Totally get that. With offer day coming up ...

ah ok

Latymer and LU are different schools, both bird, one grammar another is a private

Sorry to hear your story- it is a brutal process. LU is VERY competitive. It was about 1400 I believe for much less than 200 places. Also they are co-ed so halve the chances. They also have a feeder.

Just to add, I do feel the time was wasted. We could have been doing other, more interesting and varied activities during that preparation time. Also as a pp said, lots of it is exam practice/verbal reasoning or whatever which doesn't help much with anything else.
He's well ahead of his peers due to the pushing, and will be likely be bored for a long time at the "requires improvement" school that is our guaranteed state option.
He also now feels a failure, which is worse. 😞

Latymer latest is 2500 applicants for 192 PAN. You don't have to be in the top 192 to get in normally top 400 will do as there will be applicants go for privates, QE, HBS or DAO.

However I agree, top set or full mark on SAT or high CAT might not be enough. It is a slightly different game.

Also to add, both my DCs were greater depth in all subjects. DS1 got 120/120 for reading/writing SATs in Year 6. DS2 got 135 in his maths CATs. Neither got close. In their years of 120 kids I think one or two in each year got in and in both cases they were kids who had siblings at the school so obviously knew what to revise, exam technique. I was not up to speed at all on that which didn't help.

Just to add, the school my DCs applies to was Latymer and it was over 2000 applications for 260 places, I think.

I wouldn't do it. Tried and failed with my 2 older sons, one of whom was very bright and hard working and, the other just above average and lazy. Neither got in or even close and it was a nightmare few months/years and all pointless in the end. I also wouldn't try the super selective privates for the same reason. Even the supposedly less selective ones around here still turned down loads of bright/top set kids, all of whom went either to the local state or more mediocre privates and are all doing absolutely fine. DS2 gets all 7/8/9s typically so not sure what we would've gained by going to a grammar unless you're after all 9s. . With my 3rd child we'll be going comprehensive or a nice gentle mixed ability private school. Nooone needs to be made to feel stupid/unworthy at 11.

I wasn’t referring to Latymer Upper, which is indeed a private school. Latymer School is a super selective grammar school in North London.

There is also a grammar school called Latymer in the north.

Not only North London grammar, all of grammars in London are competitive. The south and south west London are even worse: Nonsuch, Sutton, Wallington, Wilson, Tiffins. Circa 1600 candidates for 180 places at Tiffin school

Latymer upper isn’t a grammar - it’s private

I am in London and I wouldn't do it for the north London grammar schools - they are too competitive, both to get in and to keep up.

I have an above average (but not top of the class) dd and I'll put her in for some private 11+ exams as there are less competitive schools which are still academically selective. But she wouldn't cope with the superselective grammars or privates and she'd be unhappy trying to achieve that level.

If we didn't have the budget for private we'd move house to get into a top comp like Camden or Alexandra Park where entrance is mainly based on distance. I don't know much about boys schools but there must be one within moving distance that could be an option? Or if you are religious you can look at the top Catholic/CofE schools.

No. There you go. You're off the hook.

Just another slant, if the OP's DS has suspected ADHD, could it be that in reality he is actually significantly above average and a lot of his efforts are going into masking/coping with the ADHD? It might be worth reserving judgement on ability/suitability until after this has been investigated.

For a truly average child I would say that I wouldn't go that route. Mine went to selective London grammar schools but scored very highly without tutoring and were always in the top handful in their year group throughout their time there. That made for a pleasant and certainly not over-pressurised secondary school experience. However the academic standards were very high and the pace of learning fast. They both got all A stars in their A-levels and did loads of sports and extra-curriculars and went on to study very competitive courses at University and I feel their education served them very well across the board. However, for less naturally able DC in their year groups who just got in and often with much tutoring, there were some who struggled a lot just to keep up. There were a lot of self-esteem and MH issues around that. I think for the right DC, and it is not just ability but academic and social confidence too, these schools can be great but for others they can be not good at all.

I would say no unless you think your child is resilient and will be able to shrug off the disappointment and loss of confidence if they don't achieve.

My daughters (11 and 13) both did 11+ for superselective and did very well without masses of tuition but were always "greater depth" in every area through primary school. My oldest has been labelled gifted in English and youngest very able in maths. This is not to brag but just for context.

The process still worried me and my daughters as my oldest, though bright, was incredibly unreliable with completing tests (and could get either close to 100% or zero!) and my youngest was more consistent but less resilient and would have really taken a possibly irreversible knock to confidence if she had not got through.

Also, my oldest is coping well but I've heard some of her friends say they feel stupid when they are not in the top half of the class (but they are still quite able). I think it can be hard for some kids.

All those hours studying are not wasted since no matter which secondary schools they do go DC need solid Maths for sciences subjects and extensive English for those essays subjects such as History, Geography etc.

We don’t have 11+ here but dc did sats in year 6 2 years ago. Teachers had them as average… they totally shocked everyone (teachers not me) with their top results. My average dtds are youngest in the year and bloomed late, school never seemed to recognise they’d changed about half way through year 4 and kept them on the same trajectory.

if your dc wants to try then let them - but do it in a “let’s see what happens” kind of approach.

At the age of 10, of course. All the pedagogic data indicates that academic achievement is not linear and that the vast majority of DCs will experience peaks and troughs - < 2% achieve top results throughout their time at school and university, and there is no direct correlation between 11+ scores and GCSE or A level results.

Year 4 is still young - why don't you work through some Bond/CGP books together and work out between you where he's at and how easily he picks things up?

My son is also Year 4 and also pretty average in class. His older brother passed the 11+, which has made him want to have a go himself. At the moment he's enjoying working through the books with me and he's doing really well and his confidence with school work is growing with it too. However, I'm taking a laid back approach and will re-assess at the start of Year 5. If it looks as though he'd need intense tutoring/hours and hours of work at home to pass, it'll be a no for us.

Completely agree with others who mention average children fall to the bottom of class in a grammar system by the way. The top grammar near us has alarmingly high rates of self harm and poor mental health among the students due to the pressure and inability to keep up with the incredibly bright top students.

I think an average child can be tutored to pass the 11+ and thrive at grammar schools in Kent and Bucks.
I really don't think this is the case for the London super selective grammars. To pass the test for those you either need to be exceptionally bright or above average and tutored.
I would be surprised if there were many children at the London grammars who didn't get 120 across the board for their sats.