To bring up how unfair the 11+ is?

[Jaggerdagger]

I live in a notorious grammar school area in the south east (I'm sure you can guess which one!).

Reasons why I dislike the 11+:

1. Tutoring is an unfair advantage and can only be accessed for those that can afford it. How can the 11+ be accurately assessed if the majority are tutored and only a handful manage to pass the test without additional support?
2. If a child is tutored just to pass a test, it doesn't necessary mean that they will thrive in a grammar school. I'm a teacher and I've seen lots of pupils not coping well in the high pressured environment.
3. It's divisive and can make those children that don't get in feel that they are inferior. Feeling like a failure age 11 for something that could be totally avoidable if this system wasn't in place seems terribly sad to me.
4. Comprehensive schools in the area suffer in various ways because of grammar schools. For instance, more private schools are opened in the area due to parents wanting to pay for better facilities for their children that didn't get into grammar school.

I'm sure this has been discussed before on here but I think it's worth bringing it up once more for debate.

Aibu to think that this is an archaic and unfit system that should be either be abolished or drastically changed?

Sorry for slightly off topic question but what does everyone think of sending an (Hugh functioning) autistic child to a grammar school?
My 7 year old dd has not been diagnosed but we are on waiting list for an assessment. She struggles with friendships and high anxiety. She is very bright, on top of her class, she reads every spare moment she has. She has emotional issues she has huge meltdowns etc.
Our comprehensive school is the only one in area and doesn’t have a great reputation. I’m worried about level of education and bullying due to her being slightly different.
Because she is quite bright shall I give 11+ a go in a few years time? I’m worried about her anxiety though as she doesn’t like being under pressure

This is a really interesting piece on the politics behind the grammar system www.educationengland.org.uk/articles/31labourgrammar.html
I passed my 11 plus 30 years ago, but now live in the north east. My daughter’s school is offering her a much more rounded and diverse education than I had.

I’m in favour of grammars as I was academic and thrived but the test format is no longer fit for purpose. I feel it should be a blind test which covers subjects covered at primary level up to end of year 5.

“Sharp-elbowed parents” indeed!

I went to a SE grammar nearly 40 years ago. Nobody was tutored. All junior school children sat the exam without pomp and drama. Just a bit of a giggle. We all knew who’d pass and who’d fail.

My grammar had clever kids from high rises in thamesmead and Erith.

The “sharp elbows” will have pushed THOSE kids out.

@PickledOnionSandwich

YABU. My mum couldn’t really afford tutoring but just decided to cut down on luxurious for a few months so my sister and I could have it. Life isn’t fair and kids have to learn that sadly. In fact, only I passed but my sister got a full scholarship to a local private school. Sometimes it’s down to priorities and not whether you choose to have a nice mobile phone and Sky TV 🤷‍♀️

But why should finances even come into play when it comes to a child's education - something that should be available to all?! What if parents have cut down already on a"luxurious" lifestyle and are in fact living on the breadline? Why should money come in to play all? Personally, I think YOU are being unreasonable here.

@RowanAlong

I suffered terribly as an academic child in an eighties comp (non-Grammar School area). There were behaviour issues all around, time-wasting, bullying, low expectations, and it has impacted me massively way into my adult life.

I will definitely be letting my children sit the 11+ for the local grammar, if they want to.

This was absolutely my experience as well. I was bullied for being academic and I quickly learned not to put up my hand in class/deliberately dropped marks in tests so I didn’t come top. I would have loved being in a school where everyone else was there to learn.

When my mum and dad were young, apparently in their area each junior school had a certain number of grammar places allocated. That would be an interesting experiment nowadays! Would we see a rise in the popularity of less well-performing primaries if it was more likely to lead to a grammar place? Or would we see more social mobility?

@bozzabollix Yep. I'm sorry to hear about your son's experience as SEN taking Kent Test. That's borderline discrimination, isn't it?

Whilst grammar schools exist, parent will always try their hardest to get their children in. There is certainly a lot more tutoring now than there was when I went and when my parents went. If I didn’t like it, I would move out of that area.

I'm in Reading which has 2 super-selective single sex grammars. We went to the open day for Reading Boys for my eldest. I was utterly shocked at the resources and environment on offer- it looks just like a private school! It is simply vulgar how this is a state school- I simply don't understand the difference in resourcing and how that came about. (Do alumni make donations?!) My son decided it wasn't for him as he didn't like single sex (has loads of female friends) and totally called the elitist nature of it. He's at a comprehensive down the road and I'm so glad he sees a wide range of the community, he lives near his friends, he still has opportunities to learn from great teachers but he learns to get along with people from all walks of life too. If our mps had gone to comprehensive schools, do we not think we would have some very different decisions being made in politics? Empathy in seeing diversity all around you is such a life lesson. I'm glad my son made that decision.

2 of my grandchildren live in a grammar school area. Average family income, no tutoring. They and a lot of their classmates got in. They were in an exceptionally good primary school though.
The alternative was one of the worst rated high schools in England

Runninginthewind
I am from the same area as you.
Me and my secondary friends at the grammar were all from very ordinary working class backgrounds wouldn’t have even known what tutoring was and excelled at grammar.
Unfortunately the system doesn’t work in the same way now as so many are tutored they push all but the brightest poorer kids out. The Greenwich ruling meaning the borough couldn’t give priority to kids from the borough has also meant that the schools are full of children from neighbouring boroughs who push the local kids out.

@mumof2exhausted

I took the 11 plus 30 years ago and didn’t have a tutor and passed. I hate this argument now though as it’s a totally different ball game. I know of a child who has been tutored twice a week from year 3. He is in bottom sets in maths & English at school yet he has passed. You can absolutely train to pass the non verbal reasoning and some of the verbal reasoning stuff. There are so many tricks to answering questions quickly (and speed is the essence with this test). The comprehensive side is more difficult to pass unless you are bright but if you score high enough on other parts you will pass. My friend is a teacher at our local grammar and has said you can absolutely tell who has been over tutored and they struggle to keep up.

Then that poor child will either struggle at grammar school or continue on that awful treadmill of tutoring. It stinks doesn't it?

It has changed so much from my day. We turned up at school one day and sat a test. I didn’t get in but I think only one did from our school. Never bothered me, nothing was said really.
These days it is different but I think it is because there is such a difference in standard of schools. Our local comp is shocking, the catholic ‘state’ school however is amazing. That school is worse than any grammar school, you at least can have a go at getting into a grammar school, there is no chance of getting into the state school unless you’re catholic.

I feel uncomfortable with grammar system for reasons you mention but part of that is probably due to not having it at all where I grew up

I think it is divisive and harsh on some dc

It's unfair.

I failed the 11+ . I just missed out and went to the shittest school. I had a bad education and have a massive chip on my shoulder about it

I do feel that i didn't reach full potential at school and would have thrived more at Grammar.

My own child will receive tutoring if she shows potential. She isnt going to narrowly miss out

@Meatbadger

No tutoring here when I passed the 11+ 30 years ago. I benefitted hugely from my grammar school education and feel very grateful for it. No system is perfect but grammars were designed to give opportunities to those from less well off backgrounds, which in lots of cases they do.

The situation 30 years ago is not comparable to today though.

Tutoring is the norm, London m/c families flocking into Kent (or close enough) just in time to take advantage of a place, making places more competitive.

All this is borne out by the stats which show that GS places are disproportionately occupied by those in more privileged socio-economic groups and do not do what they were set up to do in terms of social mobility.

Top sets in comprehensives however are more representative of the local area.

For the poster that enquired as to whether or not I am employed at a grammar school: No, I'm not. Without risk of giving too much away, my job involves visiting lots of different types of schools and coming into contact with children of different ages and backgrounds. I teach one girl who was tutored up to the nines to get into the single sex grammar school in our town. She actually failed by one mark but won an appeal. Every time I see her, she mentions how she is struggling to keep up with her peers and feels embarrassed. Now in her GCSE year, her parents pay for extra tutors across all core subjects. She has to study every single day, including Sundays and school holidays. She is often in tears and not eating over the stress. I am absolutely convinced that she would have thrived in one of the comprehensives instead. This girl is just one example of how the system can actually fail children from middle class backgrounds who would be better off elsewhere, but because going to grammar school is seen as "the thing to do", parents will throw money at tutoring.

@homehomeintherange Do you have access to these stats, at all? Would be interesting to see them.

@crazydineraddict

Yes it’s unfair. No I don’t believe if you pass the 11+ you will struggle because you’ve been tutored. The concepts are still advanced. If that was the case then at GCSE everyone would get a 9.

A truly talented child won’t need tutoring but the bar has been raised through tuition of what is “truly talented”

I live in a grammar area (not sure it’s yours). I never touched a paper before I sat mine and we were poor so couldn’t afford tuition, I passed as did a lot of my friends. Of course some failed, but if you were capable you made it

It’s changed a lot on last 10/20 years. It’s become much more extreme l.

@TyotyaKlava

Sorry for slightly off topic question but what does everyone think of sending an (Hugh functioning) autistic child to a grammar school? My 7 year old dd has not been diagnosed but we are on waiting list for an assessment. She struggles with friendships and high anxiety. She is very bright, on top of her class, she reads every spare moment she has. She has emotional issues she has huge meltdowns etc. Our comprehensive school is the only one in area and doesn’t have a great reputation. I’m worried about level of education and bullying due to her being slightly different. Because she is quite bright shall I give 11+ a go in a few years time? I’m worried about her anxiety though as she doesn’t like being under pressure

I’d look at both schools in their individual merit. I wouldn’t necessarily take your dd to begin with. Look beyond the glossy brochure and see which you think is a best fit and if it’s worth pushing.

I can give anecdotal answers here as to which would be better in my area. For my area it’s a complicated one, the grammar has had terrible bullying of SEN kids and the school has been ill equipped to deal with the level of behaviour. However the schools teaching, lesson plans and clubs have been more supportive later on. But those first few years were rough. The comp would have been better at stamping it out initially. Don’t be fooled that the kids at grammar want to learn and be there over the ones in the comps. School is still school!
But that’s entirely anecdotal. For my schools on my intakes at this time. So useless for your daughter really!

I agree in so many ways. Suspect we are in the same area as you. DS is in Y11 of a super selective. He got in with two marks off full on the 11+ but he did have some tutoring that summer before the exam.

However what we have found since he got there has shocked me and meant I chose to send my younger two children to a comp, although this comp is out of the grammar area so truly has the full spectrum of kids (we are on the border). Basically well over 50% of DS class went to prep school. A large proportion of the remaining have very wealthy parents with a SAHP who basically lives for their child's education. It is not reflective of thd child's innate ability.

DS who lives in a 4 bed semi, has the odd foreign hol and certainly doesn't wish for anything seems poor alongside his peers. Fortunately he's not the sort to care, but I have had to take steps to show him how fortunate he actually is as I worry his school life is a total bubble. They will likely all be given cars for their 17th bday and it's as likely to hang in the garden or pool room with his mates as it is to head to the park for most his age. There's minimal social mobility going on in the majority that's for sure.

At primary level the tutoring is now insane. The comps suffer because they lose that 10% of highly motivated engaged achievers which can positively balance a school. When I was at school we just turned up one day and sat the 11+. No one tutored so it was a fair reflection of ability.

My younger two are not in grammar but in a large comprehensive which doesn't suffer from being in a grammar area because it's over the border and only the very highest achievers leave the area to go out of county to grammar. One of my younger two is easily 'grammar school material' and this is recognised in school and I'd say she's getting a fast paced education like DS and is in a 'Latin stream'. We felt, given DS experience, that she would thrive more without the pressure of a grammar (she puts enough on herself) and so far that's proving to be the right decision. But having been at the top of he village primary so many couldn't believe we were taking that decision.

We can't change where we live and of course we can't turn back time and we are very fortunate that all of our children are very happy and achieving well at school,but I wish we weren't in a grammar area and that's with one child benefiting enormously from its existence. I just don't think they are fair in so many different ways. It's possible to deliver a fast paced academically focused education to high achievers without it and that is fairer.

I couldn’t agree with you more. I went to a grammar school and had zero tutoring and passed. I was the only person that I know of that did the 11+ from my school that didn’t have a tutor. Out of about 100 of us 9 of us passed.

The threads on here about ‘grammar or private’ make my blood boil. The whole point of a grammar school is to give disadvantaged children (as I was myself) the chance of a good education. Not to serve as a cheap alternative to private school with parents paying sometimes literally thousands of pounds for a tutor to get their children in.

I was afforded lots of opportunities due to my GS education but it’s hugely unfair on the other comp students that didn’t get that level of education or those opportunities.

I am so, so strongly against grammar schools now.

The year you sit it matters as well. So if it’s a particularly high achieving year you’ll struggle whilst the year above or year below you’d pass and go to an entirely different school.

It seems a funny way to decide your entire life

'But why should finances even come into play when it comes to a child's education - something that should be available to all?! What if parents have cut down already on a"luxurious" lifestyle and are in fact living on the breadline? Why should money come in to play all? Personally, I think YOU are being unreasonable here.'

But finances always come into it. If grammar and private schools were abolished then top performing state schools with outstanding ofsteds will have inflated house prices in their catchment area. Or people with money will buy spots near the school to ensure being in catchment. And so the privileged continue to reap the rewards. Life isn't fair unfortunately.

Those commenting they got into grammar schools with no tutoring years and years ago are out of touch. The truth is even super bright kids need familiarisation with the exam paper format and need to learn how to pace themselves in the exam. This means some practise is required - parents helping or tutoring. Many parents will pay for this to be done as their experience is limited.

I agree comprehensives need to be better performing. Behaviour needs to be good for all children to reach their best. This doesn't always happen though. Some kids disrupt constantly and some parents excuse their shitty behaviour constantly. (Caveat: a small but disruptive minority). So those who do have other schools options will always try to get their kids into them if possible.

"labelled failures" is an interesting concept. That a child feels a failure if they don't get in. I failed the 11+ years ago. My ds's went to local school. Children know when other children are bright. They know what set they are in. Even when in reception they are put on a table for reading. If when doing GCSE's you are in a top set with children who never ever get below 90% in anything. We all know how bright we are. Dealing with that is part of life. So I call it on feeling like a failure. If your kid fails the 11+ and is traumatised for the rest of their life, instead of getting over it, then maybe the failure is yours in not realising they weren't the right kind of child to cope with it, so you probably shouldn't have entered them anyway. More importantly you need to work on their self esteem.