Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

11+ test: I think it's unfair and elitist

334 replies

ParentOfOne · 12/01/2025 13:06

We are helping our child prepare for the 11+ test, to apply for some selective and partially selective state schools (we won't be going private).

She is doing quite well, so, from a purely selfish perspective, I should be happy.
However, I can't help but think that the test is elitist and unfair

  • it favours children who are well-rounded, and who are so at 11ish. A child who develops well academically but later, and/or who is stronger in the verbal part than the non-verbal, or viceversa, won't do well
  • state schools do not typically prepare children for these kinds of tests, so the family situation becomes a huge differentiator: if your parents are more educated, and/or take you to the library, and/or can pay for tutoring, you'll have a huge advantage. Libraries have books to prepare for the test, but a teenager can go to the library alone, not a 10-year old.
  • some of the verbal part is honestly too hard for a child of this age. I am not sure it is appropriate to expect that 10-11 year olds know vocabulary such as cantankerous, recalcitrant, cogitations, etc
  • children who speak a Latin language (maybe also Greek? Not sure) have a huge advantage guessing the meaning of the more complex words. French-speaking, Spanish-speaking kids etc are much more likely to guess the meaning of initiate, abound etc even if they are not avid readers

My sense is that the brilliant child of parents who are uneducated, don't speak another language, don't take their children to the library etc stands almost no chance vs a less academic, less brilliant middle to upper middle class child who enjoys all the other advantages mentioned above.

There is of course the separate topic of whether it is even appropriate to separate kids by academic success, but my point is not about that, it is that the 11+ test is a very poor assessment because it doesn't take into account all the other factors.

Thoughts?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
PokerFriedDips · 12/01/2025 13:55

You are quite correct OP and this is why Labour try to abolish them and restrict them as much as possible.
For exactly the same reason, they are popular among the demographics of people who consider themselves likely to be able to get their children/grandchildren into such schools thereby securing generational advantage. The remaining grammar school areas tend to be where such people form a majority among those who actually bother to vote.

If I lived in a grammar area I am sure I would do everything I could to ensure my own DC were among the advantaged not among the disadvantaged. That is a totally normal human instinct and the entire basis of evolution. But it is the duty of those in power to reduce such opportunities and level the playing field, if they are honourable.

DriftAlong · 12/01/2025 13:50

My youngest sat the 11+ and it was quite telling that most of the cars parked on the playground to drop off for the test were nice BMWs, Audis, RangeRovers etc.

Moonlightstars · 12/01/2025 13:45

EverythingElseIsTaken · 12/01/2025 13:40

DD went to grammar school. She did very well in the 11+. Her primary school did not support it or allow it to be sat in the school. She had no tutoring. I figured that if she needed tutoring to get into the school then she’d need tutoring to carry on so we decided that if she got in “naturally” fine. She did very well at the school and very well at university. I don’t actually think it’s fair to heavily tutor a child at that age. Both DH & I also went to grammar schools with no tutoring for the test but accept that it was a different time…….

Show quote history

Did she genuinely go into that test without having ever seen non-verbal reasoning and just cracked on with it? In which case she's a genius! My daughter was never tutored privately but we got her the practice books and a few past papers. So we basically tutored her. Her friend however didn't pass the 11 plus but it's academically much cleverer but her parents didn't show her any papers or show her what nonverbal reasoning was. She did go on and smash her GCSEs though at the state school she went to.

LIZS · 12/01/2025 13:44

It is optional though, even where state grammars exist.

EverythingElseIsTaken · 12/01/2025 13:40

Moonlightstars · 12/01/2025 13:30

I completely agree with you and I honestly don't believe a single child who hasn't been tutored by either a tutor or their parents has a hope and hell in blindly doing okay in the tests.
I've had a child go to a grammar school and to go to different state schools and personally have much preferred the state schools and the outcomes academically have an added much to how the children would have done anyway.

DD went to grammar school. She did very well in the 11+. Her primary school did not support it or allow it to be sat in the school. She had no tutoring. I figured that if she needed tutoring to get into the school then she’d need tutoring to carry on so we decided that if she got in “naturally” fine. She did very well at the school and very well at university. I don’t actually think it’s fair to heavily tutor a child at that age. Both DH & I also went to grammar schools with no tutoring for the test but accept that it was a different time…….

Moonlightstars · 12/01/2025 13:30

I completely agree with you and I honestly don't believe a single child who hasn't been tutored by either a tutor or their parents has a hope and hell in blindly doing okay in the tests.
I've had a child go to a grammar school and to go to different state schools and personally have much preferred the state schools and the outcomes academically have an added much to how the children would have done anyway.

littlemissprosseco · 12/01/2025 13:27

The Grammars are not the holy grail of education. They definitely have their flaws. Once in, they only suit and serve a certain type of child ( maybe family? ) , that’s why the entrance exam is as it is…..

clary · 12/01/2025 13:24

No argument from me here @ParentOfOne about the unfairness and elitism of the 11+ exam.

I went to an all-girls grammar school in an area that is still largely selective. So hideous and unegalitarian to have your future set for you at age 10+ (always think 11+ is a misnomer as many if not most DC taking it are 10). I saw many examples of the unfairness of it (and this was back when people did not tutor or do much at all by way of prep). My parents taught in sec mods locally so I saw that side too.

Luckily the vast majority of England features comprehensives instead of selective grammars, and just as most DC do not go to private school, so most DC do not do the 11+ and instead go to a local state comprehensive. I would never have wanted my DC to live in a grammar area. As I say, fortunately they are easy to avoid.

SuzieNine · 12/01/2025 13:17

My thoughts are that if I lived in one of the handful of areas that still have it I would move. There are only 160 grammar schools in England, and none at all in Wales or Scotland so you have the choice whether or not to play along. Trickier if you live in NI.