Why is there such a big difference between English GCSE results and all other subjects

The 11+ in my grammar county is entirely MCQ. So it selects for people who are good at making right/wrong choices under time pressure. I suspect that translates quite well to something like physics or biology GCSE but I am really dubious how well that predicts whether someone is going to be able to analyze and discuss the nuances of pride and prejudice or Shakespeare or similar for GCSE... Or have flair and imagination for creative writing.

Dd1 got grade 9 in everything but English where she got 2 x 6s. She hated eveything about English. The texts, her teacher, the lack of time in exams, lack of help from school. The other subjects she found very easy to study at home using online resources.

OP Super selective refers to what % of the top-achieving DC is taken by the school. So a super-selective grammar might take the top 5% of DC, where another grammar might take the top 25%. Obviously it makes quite a difference which one it is. You would expect very good stats from a super selective for obvious reasons.

The average for England is 18.6% ESOL.

HBS, St Olaves, Wilson's etc are predominantly S Asian, their English results are stellar. How would you explain this?

Superselective grammars are increasingly dominated by Indian kids whose parents spend years cracking the whip when it comes to STEM stuff but who rarely see reading for pleasure as being nearly as worthwhile. Reading for pleasure is still by a distance the best way to get really good at English. So even if the kids are 2nd or 3rd generation English and broadly speaking 'fluent' it's probably quite rare to see really exceptional command of the written word, even amongst kids who've got a natural flair for it.

Look at the A level results for the same school, see how many kids are taking arts subjects vs STEM.

My DS got a 9 in English said it was hard. He doesn’t find anything hard usually, The problem he had was it’s subjective, He could be told he’s wrong because a teacher interpreted the text differently . With maths and sciences the answers weren’t up for debate,

My suggestion would be that the school is good at teaching for the test - and it's harder to do this for English. Plus they may have selected a more STEM type ability cohort.

I got top grades in everything when I was at school - except English. I was very able but genuinely had no idea what you had to do to get a high grade in that subject.

Does this school have a sixth form? I wonder how many students they have taking Arts/Humanities A Levels compared to STEM subjects.

Nationally there's little difference in those who get level 7 and above for English Language and Maths - 15% versus 16.5% so not really a broader issue - will be either demographic of students or teaching quality. The proportion for English Lit is higher than both at around 20%.

And chemistry and biology.

I’ve also experienced similar concerns with English in the past few years. There seems to be a pattern of students predicted 6 or7 that end up with a 3 or 4.

My DD’s school showed this pattern. It was a small independent with a strong SEN department. We were told a lot of neurodivergent pupils would do far better in maths and science than English.i’m not sure if super-selectives would also have a higher proportion of high achieving (often not diagnosed) ND pupils?

Kids can no longer concentrate to read long texts. I have been teaching over 25 years and am saddened to see how reading is no longer enjoyed by the majority of students. Social media - TikTok in particular - has meant that the attention span is limited. Doing a class reader used to mean engaged faces and listening but sadly this is no longer the case. From Year 7 up kids no longer enjoy library lessons, don't want to take books out and get their fiction from Dhar Mann! It's really sad. There used to be a couple in a class who didn't engage with reading, it's now more than half. Other subjects are easier to chunk into bits.

The school may use AQA (the biggest exam board for English) and the marking over the last few years has been very hit and miss. Much more likely to award a 6 for a 7 or 8. There’s just not enough examiners so (it feels like) almost anyone can mark and there’s not the same quality of training as years ago.

If it’s not AQA - then I guess the pupils may just be stronger in maths/science or there’s been an issue - such as relying on supply teachers.

If your own child is in an exam year, I’d be tempted to get a tutor.

Arguments concerning reading, subjectivity, logic bias, second language etc may all play role but the point made by @REDB99 is key. Eng Lang is, in part, testing reaction to unseen material. My children's comp clearly understood that and did not encourage preparation of skelton stories etc. They focused on building a skill and that not only helped in Eng Lang (I had one who went from 5 in Y10 to 7 in the GCSE) but also unseen aspects of other GCSEs (eg Geog fieldwork paper) and, later in life, in job tests and the world of work etc.