Page 7 | The 11+ was a eugenics test to weed out genetically "inferior" children, created by a classicist who falsified his research

ParentOfOne · 2025-10-09T09:03:04+00:00

I had already made a [[https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/5250645-11-test-i-think-its-unfair-and-elitist post ]]a few months ago about why I think the 11+ and similar tests are flawed. Since many families have just gone or are going through the 11+ drama now, I just wanted post a short but timely reminder that the 11+ was born as a eugenics test at the beginning of last century, when eugenics was all the rage. That meant looking for pseudo-scientific ways to improve the genetic "quality" of human population, by identifying "inferior" races and individuals, and "improving" the other ones. The father of the 11+ was [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Burt Cyril Burt]], a posh --t*at-- gentleman who studied classics at Oxford and then took an interest in psychology, without any training in medicine, psychology, mathematics, statistics. He became convinced that intelligence was innate and not affected by the environment, and therefore wanted to find ways to identify the innately gifted and intelligent children, with the not so subtle implication that everyone else --could go f*** themselves-- was better suited for other, less academic pursuits. Before dying, he burnt all his records and notes, and the current academic consensus is that he was guilty of scientific misconduct (falsifying data). A campaign group against the 11+ and selective schools summarises his story [[https://comprehensivefuture.org.uk/father-11-plus-sorry-tale-cyril-burt/ here]] If that seems too partisan, you might want to read what the [[https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/rethinking-psychology-gone-wrong British Psychological Society]] has to say (spoiler: mostly the same things). To recap: - the 11+ was created by a posh t* who had studied Classics and lacked any training in psychology, statistics, mathematics, the sciences in general - the ideology behind it was the (now debunked) idea that intelligence is innate and unaffected by the environment - the gentleman in question had fabricated a large part of his research - there is no scientific study on the reliability of these tests, on how better or not the kids who ace these tests do vs the kids who do not, on why answering those questions in 30 seconds makes you more intelligent than answering them in 45, etc - the very concept of IQ is controversial - when similar tests are used by psychologists, they cannot be administered too frequently, otherwise the results are biased. This alone proves that the notion that there can be no tutoring is utter bs, as proven by the huge industry that exists around tutoring for the 11+ - it is well known that selective and partially selective state schools are hugely SOCIALLY selective; the % of kids on free school meals at those schools is always much lower than elsewhere (e.g. only 5.8% at [[https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/138051/the-henrietta-barnett-school Henrietta Barnett]] in London). Cyryl Burt would have said that richer kids are inherently more intelligent; I call bs and say those schools select the kids whose families can either tutor them themselves or pay for tutoring So, if you are non-white and/or non-British and/or working class, remember that these tests were conceived with the explicit aim of weeding out undesirable and obviously genetically inferior people like you (if any artificial stupidity censor reads this, that was [[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm sarcasm ]]).

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 14:59

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 14:41

I actually work in one. Children are only set for maths, not for any other subjects. One of our local comps actually makes a point of not setting as they say there is no evidence to support it.

Show quote history

Just to add I do not see higher vs foundation as setting as each category contains a wide range of ability

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 14:54

Our comps that are more vocationally minded do not offer further maths, computer science, economics instead they offer hospitality, hairdressing, child development, media studies etc. Our more academic comp offers further maths, classics, computer science etc.but no vocational subjects. Both are having to cut subjects as they don't have budget for a broad range. Both are desperately needed to cater for different children's needs.

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 14:41

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 12:39

@Travelmad777
I still fail to see how making all schools comprehensives will cater for the broad range of intake. [...] I just think a one size fits all is disastrous for everyone.

How much do you even know about state comps?
Your mistake is assuming that, at state comps, everyone does the same. That's absolutely NOT the case.

At most comps, kids will be divided into sets.
The more academic kids take the higher paper of certain subjects, and are offered more challenging and academic subjects (further maths, triple science, etc).
The less academic kids take the foundation papers and have other options.

It's not an idealistic utopia - that's exactly what happens now all over England (I have no idea about the other parts of the UK).

So, you see, there is still selection and differentiation.
What's the difference vs the 11+ and grammars, you might ask?
It's that:

this selection is a continuous process
it is not based on a one-off overtutored test taken when kids are 10
it caters much better to those who excel in one area but not in another
it gives more opportunities to the bright kids who don't have family support at home
the 11+ is a highly imperfect selection tool, which misclassifies about 1/4 of the kids. That's quite the biggie

@Neurodiversitydoctor and if you tell me he would have done just as well at the local sink school or even in a bog standard comp I simply don't believe you. Also FWIW I think a lot of his potential was genetically coded.

I care more about what research finds, than about what a random stranger thinks, based on a sample size of 1.

Eg research by Durham suggests that grammar schools do NOT boost grades (more info here)

Let's not forget that only ca. 5ish % of English secondary school students attend a grammar. How do you think the remaining 95% cope? How do you think the remaining 95% progress at university and in the workplace? Grammars do not have a monopoly on Oxbridge and Russel Group admissions.

I actually work in one. Children are only set for maths, not for any other subjects. One of our local comps actually makes a point of not setting as they say there is no evidence to support it.

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 14:36

Arran2024 · 11/10/2025 13:35

My point is that it is parents who are pushing their children into highly selective schooling, where the focus is on extreme academic achievement and everyone is on the same page. And I'm just querying how much some of these children want it.

I know several local parents who won't let their children sit for the grammar schools, or who deeply regret sending their children there. The teaching is considered dull because the children are all so brilliant, there is no need to be creative. Subjects like music and art are tolerated but not taken seriously.

I knew several young people who went there for the sixth form and promptly left - they were horrified by how dull it was, compared to their comprehensive.

Show quote history

My DC grammar is the antithesis of what you describe. They are flourishing where they are. They love their teachers. Children are very much involved in music and art and they have amazing departments with great opportunities. Alot take music and art for GCSE as well as drama and PE. They have an amazing production each year as well as a variety of music concerts. They have art and photography competitions.

Arran2024 · 11/10/2025 13:35

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 12:55

@anyolddinosaur The tutoring industry exists because people will buy snake oil.

Not exactly. There is probably a point beyond which the benefit of more tutoring plateaus. And it is probably true that a family with the willingness and time but not the money can support their children with many free resources available online and at local libraries.

But none of this means that tutoring has zero impact, nor does it change the fact that the 11+ penalises the bright kids who don't get extra help at home.

@Neurodiversitydoctor
My DS is one of these children , tutored through yr 5, [...] What is your point ?

I cannot speak for @Arran2024 . My points are:

if you have managed to find the right balance between pushing your child to achieve his full potential, without causing him to get stressed and burn out, then congratulations, they are a very lucky child indeed
I have seen many kids being pushed too much by tiger parents, ending in burnout, or feeling like a failure if they failed to get into a specific school (again, selection is necessary, but not such a stressful selection at 10)
The problem with hothousing and intense tutoring is that it penalises the bright kids who don't get enough help at home. Maybe your child scored (I'm pulling numbers out of thin air) 80% without tutoring but 90% with tutoring. The hypothetical child of parents who didn't care / had no time / had no money maybe scored 85% with no tutoring but lacked the extra support needed to achieve their full potential.

My point is that it is parents who are pushing their children into highly selective schooling, where the focus is on extreme academic achievement and everyone is on the same page. And I'm just querying how much some of these children want it.

I know several local parents who won't let their children sit for the grammar schools, or who deeply regret sending their children there. The teaching is considered dull because the children are all so brilliant, there is no need to be creative. Subjects like music and art are tolerated but not taken seriously.

I knew several young people who went there for the sixth form and promptly left - they were horrified by how dull it was, compared to their comprehensive.

Original poster

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 12:55

@anyolddinosaur The tutoring industry exists because people will buy snake oil.

Not exactly. There is probably a point beyond which the benefit of more tutoring plateaus. And it is probably true that a family with the willingness and time but not the money can support their children with many free resources available online and at local libraries.

But none of this means that tutoring has zero impact, nor does it change the fact that the 11+ penalises the bright kids who don't get extra help at home.

@Neurodiversitydoctor
My DS is one of these children , tutored through yr 5, [...] What is your point ?

I cannot speak for @Arran2024 . My points are:

if you have managed to find the right balance between pushing your child to achieve his full potential, without causing him to get stressed and burn out, then congratulations, they are a very lucky child indeed
I have seen many kids being pushed too much by tiger parents, ending in burnout, or feeling like a failure if they failed to get into a specific school (again, selection is necessary, but not such a stressful selection at 10)
The problem with hothousing and intense tutoring is that it penalises the bright kids who don't get enough help at home. Maybe your child scored (I'm pulling numbers out of thin air) 80% without tutoring but 90% with tutoring. The hypothetical child of parents who didn't care / had no time / had no money maybe scored 85% with no tutoring but lacked the extra support needed to achieve their full potential.

OP posts:

Original poster

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 12:48

@Neurodiversitydoctor I think they actually have something like this in Brighton ( with pretty good results). However it is a geographically compact City with excellent public transport, I am not sure how reproducible it is.

Indeed, the first thing I said is that this can work in densely populated cities (with decent public transport), not in rural areas. But, equally, I presume that rural areas do not have the same problems of large cities, of people buying into catchment, or renting into catchment for 1 year then moving out and still sending all the siblings there, or of creating admission 'black holes' because you need to live 600 metres from a school but houses that close cost more, etc. You mention Blackpool. I am not familiar with the area. Does it have this kind of problems?

AFAIK Brighton divides the city into areas, and there's a lottery within your area. This is worse than what I proposed, because you cannot apply to schools in the neighbouring area, even if maybe those are closer to you.

@FairKoala Is the 4 miles as the crow flies or by road
As the crow flies. 4 miles is a lot (6.4 kms). You could do it in steps of 2kms

What happens if you don’t live within 4 miles of a school.
If there are more applications from people living closer, the same thing which happens now: you don't get in. I don't see how that's a difference.

A system which admits someone living 5 miles away but not someone living next door would be unfair and might create all kinds of problem with the increased commuting.

A system which gives the same chance to someone living next door and to someone living 2kms away is a better compromise. It means that local residents can still apply even if they cannot afford the house price premium of living next to a good school (premium which would disappear).

OP posts:

Original poster

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 12:39

@Travelmad777
I still fail to see how making all schools comprehensives will cater for the broad range of intake. [...] I just think a one size fits all is disastrous for everyone.

How much do you even know about state comps?
Your mistake is assuming that, at state comps, everyone does the same. That's absolutely NOT the case.

At most comps, kids will be divided into sets.
The more academic kids take the higher paper of certain subjects, and are offered more challenging and academic subjects (further maths, triple science, etc).
The less academic kids take the foundation papers and have other options.

It's not an idealistic utopia - that's exactly what happens now all over England (I have no idea about the other parts of the UK).

So, you see, there is still selection and differentiation.
What's the difference vs the 11+ and grammars, you might ask?
It's that:

this selection is a continuous process
it is not based on a one-off overtutored test taken when kids are 10
it caters much better to those who excel in one area but not in another
it gives more opportunities to the bright kids who don't have family support at home
the 11+ is a highly imperfect selection tool, which misclassifies about 1/4 of the kids. That's quite the biggie

@Neurodiversitydoctor and if you tell me he would have done just as well at the local sink school or even in a bog standard comp I simply don't believe you. Also FWIW I think a lot of his potential was genetically coded.

I care more about what research finds, than about what a random stranger thinks, based on a sample size of 1.

Eg research by Durham suggests that grammar schools do NOT boost grades (more info here)

Let's not forget that only ca. 5ish % of English secondary school students attend a grammar. How do you think the remaining 95% cope? How do you think the remaining 95% progress at university and in the workplace? Grammars do not have a monopoly on Oxbridge and Russel Group admissions.

Grammar school system does not boost grades and could be detrimental to some. - Durham University

https://www.durham.ac.uk/news-events/latest-news/2023/08/grammar-school-system-does-not-boost-grades-and-could-be-detrimental-to-some--/

OP posts:

Arran2024 · 11/10/2025 12:13

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 11:18

and if you tell me he would have done just as well at the local sink school or even in a bog standard comp I simply don't believe you. Also FWIW I think a lot of his potential was genetically coded.

Show quote history

There is more to life than a top degree.

Underthinker · 11/10/2025 11:48

anyolddinosaur · 11/10/2025 11:28

The tutoring industry exists because people will buy snake oil. Parents want to think they have done everything they can to help their child. Free tests are available for practise e.g https://www.cgpbooks.co.uk/resources/free-11-plus-10-minute-tests?srsltid=AfmBOoqKm8xJS0DjhsV0fFf3vnDAsnP9Zo3v1VdXUeSQOJrmlRC4jRBT

Sometimes schools have not covered enough of the maths curriculum and that can put children in state run schools at a disadvantage. Again plenty of resources online for parents interested in their child's education or children who are very keen to attend a grammar school. Examples include www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize and https://www.khanacademy.org/

I would disagree with that.

The tutoring industry is no more snake oil than the restaurant or mechanic industries.

You can cook your own food, or you can go out and pay for someone else to do it, you can learn to fix your own car or pay for someone else to do it, and you can tutor your own kids for a test or pay someone else to do it. People can choose to spend their time and money differently.

I have one who went through a group tutoring class 2 years ago and one just started. They have/are both enjoyed it and learned a lot.

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 11:36

anyolddinosaur · 11/10/2025 11:28

The tutoring industry exists because people will buy snake oil. Parents want to think they have done everything they can to help their child. Free tests are available for practise e.g https://www.cgpbooks.co.uk/resources/free-11-plus-10-minute-tests?srsltid=AfmBOoqKm8xJS0DjhsV0fFf3vnDAsnP9Zo3v1VdXUeSQOJrmlRC4jRBT

Sometimes schools have not covered enough of the maths curriculum and that can put children in state run schools at a disadvantage. Again plenty of resources online for parents interested in their child's education or children who are very keen to attend a grammar school. Examples include www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize and https://www.khanacademy.org/

Agree with this, it takes investment either time or money. Ideally both.

anyolddinosaur · 11/10/2025 11:28

The tutoring industry exists because people will buy snake oil. Parents want to think they have done everything they can to help their child. Free tests are available for practise e.g https://www.cgpbooks.co.uk/resources/free-11-plus-10-minute-tests?srsltid=AfmBOoqKm8xJS0DjhsV0fFf3vnDAsnP9Zo3v1VdXUeSQOJrmlRC4jRBT

Sometimes schools have not covered enough of the maths curriculum and that can put children in state run schools at a disadvantage. Again plenty of resources online for parents interested in their child's education or children who are very keen to attend a grammar school. Examples include www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize and https://www.khanacademy.org/

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 11:18

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 11:05

My DS is one of these children , tutored through yr 5, 11+ SS West Kent Grammar 4A*s at A- levels in STEM subjects including futher maths. 1st in a pure science degree from Oxbridge. Do I regret " pushing" him ? Not at all. Does he resent it ? No he thinks he has had amazing opportunities, yes he will likely end up working on the Oxford- Cambridge gate way. What is your point ? The world needs people like my DS we can only hope he stays in the UK.

Edited

Show quote history

and if you tell me he would have done just as well at the local sink school or even in a bog standard comp I simply don't believe you. Also FWIW I think a lot of his potential was genetically coded.

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 11:05

Arran2024 · 11/10/2025 11:00

How many of these kids are in that position because they have been pushed by their parents from an early age, tutored like crazy, then sent to schools which prioritise these subjects, where all their friends are in the same boat?

I live near 2 of the top London grammar schools. The kids are hot housed to a ridiculous degree. Meanwhile the kids who gov to the local comprehensive can do very well too.

Show quote history

My DS is one of these children , tutored through yr 5, 11+ SS West Kent Grammar 4A*s at A- levels in STEM subjects including futher maths. 1st in a pure science degree from Oxbridge. Do I regret " pushing" him ? Not at all. Does he resent it ? No he thinks he has had amazing opportunities, yes he will likely end up working on the Oxford- Cambridge gate way. What is your point ? The world needs people like my DS we can only hope he stays in the UK.

Travelmad777 · 11/10/2025 11:03

I still fail to see how making all schools comprehensives will cater for the broad range of intake. With current school budgets it is impossible. It will just lead to more children not being catered for and more behaviour issues.

In my DC primary school who set they were one of top set. They were bored and frustrated. Hated school and disaffected with education. They were bullied for their love of learning. They got the opportunity to go to grammar school and they are thriving. They are with like minded children all talking geeky things. Similarly have a friend with DC who was not academic, but an amazing sportsperson. Grammar would have been their worst nightmare - they admit that themselves. They were also disaffected at primary school (provision for all) They are now at a Sports College and again absolutely thriving - can't wait to get to school. I just think a one size fits all is disastrous for everyone.

Arran2024 · 11/10/2025 11:00

Araminta1003 · 10/10/2025 09:18

Anyways… we are in an AI tech arms race so nobody in their right mind will be closing any London superselective grammar schools, any time soon. Have you even bothered to look at how many of the DC there are achieving top grades in Maths, Further Maths and Sciences including Computer Science? And then bothered to look into the fact that the Government full well know that Tech is an important area and are throwing Oxford Cambridge corridor left right and centre and extra funding at Sixth Formers doing 4 A levels including Furher Maths?

Literally, nobody gives two shits about the collective white middle class male guilt. It is a bygone phenomenon. And funny how the white middle class male suddenly gives two shiny shits about the working class white male, and only once, he has been surpassed by the female and the ethnic minority. Yet still you are taking a swipe at the posh men above you? Give it a rest and actually tune in to what is going on.

How many of these kids are in that position because they have been pushed by their parents from an early age, tutored like crazy, then sent to schools which prioritise these subjects, where all their friends are in the same boat?

I live near 2 of the top London grammar schools. The kids are hot housed to a ridiculous degree. Meanwhile the kids who gov to the local comprehensive can do very well too.

FairKoala · 11/10/2025 10:56

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 09:02

@Araminta1003 The comprehensive system we have in this country right now is extremely capitalist as anyone can buy their way into a catchment.

Which is why I support a system of random lottery within a certain radius. E.g. first a lottery within 2 km, then, if places remain, within 4km, etc. It might not work rurally but it would work in densely populated cities, where buying into catchment is more of an issue.

Yet you attacked me very strongly for this.

You said it would never be accepted, yet I had shown you a list of London schools which do use a lottery.
This system would be a good compromise between serving the local community while avoiding buying into catchment.

Like I said, those who oppose a lottery system should not be allowed to complain about buying into catchment.

Do you not see how inconsistent it is of you to oppose lottery while still criticising buying into catchment?

At least it is free to go to church

What a great logic. Yes, showing up at church so that a service funded by everyone's taxes can discriminate based on religion is "free".
Would you accept someone donating land to the NHS to create an hospital, as long as said hospital discriminated against those with your religion / worldview? Even if your taxes still paid for that hospital?
Tell me, why would a state-funded hospital discriminating not be choice, but a state-funded school discriminating would be?

@Araminta1003 So grammar, church and music and language aptitude tests it is for people like us. Just like you then?

We all play the hand we are dealt. Including you and me.
The not negligible difference is that I advocate change to the system, and recognise the flaws in the system, even when these flaws favour my family. That's the very definition of being consistent. Goodbye.

Is the 4 miles as the crow flies or by road What happens if you don’t live within 4 miles of a school.

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 10:52

ParentOfOne · 11/10/2025 10:16

@Araminta1003 If we had a referendum on whether everyone supports a lottery system and travelling up to 4km to school (and I suspect people without kids would demand a say given the traffic implications), then we MAY get some clarity on how the majority feels about this.

I am not sure a referendum is the best way to decide these things.
Maybe we should also have a referendum on funding faith schools? Especially after the last England census showed that less than half the population (46%) identified as Christian, and 37% as no religion

Also, it is bad faith to mention "up to 4km". The first ring / catchment wouldn't be 4km, I think 2km would make much more sense. The most coveted schools already have a maximum distance < 2kms. So my proposal wouldn't suddenly cause people from 4kms away to have priority over those living next door. It would, however, mean that those who bought next to a good school would have the same odds of those who bought 2kms away where house prices were lower.

Were you not complaining about the unfairness of buying into catchment? My proposal addresses that. How would you address the problem?

It could even reduce distances travelled, limiting the barbell effect of oversubscribed schools with tiny admission distances and undersubscribed schools which take students from miles away.

In a city like London, 2 kms can be a 15-20 minute bus journey, or one train stop, or a couple of stops on the tube. Most London kids already travel these distances for secondary. And there is a scheme for discounted public transport: free buses and trams, discounted trains and tube.

A big part of the school run is caused by parents taking their kids to private schools miles and miles away, not by kids travelling 2kms to their secondary.
I think the official stats were something like 20% of secondary school kids in London being driven to work, but a lot of that is private school kids or parents in outer London dropping off their kids on their way to work. Driving a kid to secondary school in inner London tends not to make much sense.

You are just going to have to accept that many people want the local and simplest option.

2 kms is still local for a secondary school

Not everyone wants to engage with pushing their kids academically. It is just not their thing and perfectly fine!

Of course. I never said the opposite.

We don't all live in London ( or Brighton as refferenced above). These dense well educated areas ( I would probably include Oxford, Cambridge and Bristol) are not where the biggest problems lie. Take a look at Nigel Farage's constituency or Blackpool.

Neurodiversitydoctor · 11/10/2025 10:49

Araminta1003 · 11/10/2025 09:39

If we had a referendum on whether everyone supports a lottery system and travelling up to 4km to school (and I suspect people without kids would demand a say given the traffic implications), then we MAY get some clarity on how the majority feels about this.

You are just going to have to accept that many people want the local and simplest option. Not everyone wants to engage with pushing their kids academically. It is just not their thing and perfectly fine!

I think they actually have something like this in Brighton ( with pretty good results). However it is a geographically compact City with excellent public transport, I am not sure how reproducible it is.

Araminta1003 · 11/10/2025 10:26

I reckon if we had a referendum on whether to abolish KS2 SATS and GCSEs right now, they may well be abolished. Replace it with a simple Maths and English qualification.