To think the 11+ is the work of the devil?

[LynetteScavo]

And if you don't agree with me, you're wrong.

yes, mine were bright at primary no doubt. but weren't particularly flagged up as such, ie there were others who were thought of as v bright amongst parents etc. sort of all singing/dancing types, always winning competitions, then didnt get into GS. (Mine did all end up with all 5s in SATs). Was just pointing out, don't write off your children.

Our primaries do not do any preparation for 11plus at all- so it is up to parents to take children through vr/non vr.
No child could go into the exam without having done some test papers- it's about strategies and speed.
When I was at school (back in 1871) we were taught those skills in school.

There is nothing wrong with a few past papers-unfortunately some parents do far, far more than that. Any DC who has the intelligence to cope in a selective school only needs to be shown a few papers. If they need to do them week in week out for over a year, and an tutor needs to be employed, then it is entirely the wrong school for them. The parent should be matching the DC to the school that suits them, not finding the school and matching the DC.

Well, my ds is sitting his first 11+ exam today and I fully expect him to fail. He has looked at a few papers to get the general idea but has not done the eons of tutoring that is common around here. One boy at his school has been tutored for three years!!!

how does anyone KNOW what parents do at tutoring?
I think this is such a common myth
there are incredibly bright kids who can pass the 11 plus wih no advance warning at all ( a handful each intake) but a lot of parents who KNWO their kdis are clever enough( ahem) but know they might not manage the VERY esoteric test choose to pre warn them by doing some kind of prep.

ANd fwiw our state primary dOES help with 11 prep so every kid can do that

I think its just sour grapes tbh.

I agree with NAO. There is an industry of tutors etc preying on parental anxiety, when all any competent child needs to do is do a few past papers, and work out the patterns themselves.

DD! just took it a week ago as an entrance exam to the high school of her choice. It Is the work of the devil indeed. she has only just finished year 5 and was expected to do an exam that is a whole year ahead of what she has done so far.

As tutoring, we were advised to buy the NFER 11+ training papers (they are two sorts, standard or multiple choice" we baught both stiles(even though we knew she would have multiple choice) to make sure to cover as many types of exercice as possible. It was a nightmare, half the subject had not even been touched by DD in school and the non verbal reasonning was soooo difficult that even Dh who is quite brainy thought they were asking far too much from a 10 yo! If your DCs tests are in January (I hear most entrance ones are) start now!

Personnaly we only did 3 weeks (during school hols so several hours a day)with DD as her state school results are quite above the national average. Little did I know that whatever preparation they get for sats has very little to do with the 11+.

By the time DD went to her exam she had done all the training papers with more or less success (she only once managed to finish a paper in the time she should have but overall annswers were good).

When she came out of the exam room, she had given soo much that she was shivering with cold (last Saturday was a really nice day here). she was not crying but said that she really doubted she got it as it was much harder than the papers she had done (recommended by school) and that she, again, could not finish a single paper. I saw several other crying as they were leaving

We did not put pressure on her but she really wanted that school so we know she gave it her best shot. We now just have to wait for the results (should come in next week or so).

I think it might actually be a blessing if she does not get it as I fear she would maybe struggle if she "just about" got in.

Aspasiamanos, I hope it goes really well for you DS, I will be thinking of him !

Thanks, gorionine - he should be finishing in about 15 minutes (dh is there).

The exams are English (comprehension and essay), Maths and VR - none of it multiple choice. Most of the Maths topics aren't even covered in the state sector until later in Year 6.

If you are in a straightforward VR/NVR multiple-choice area you have no idea what these exams are like! Kids at prep schools and ones who are tutored have a massive advantage.

Dh told me that he bumped into the "three years tutored" child on the way there - poor little mite, I hope he passes as he is under a huge amount of pressure from his parents.

The taking of the test is by far the biggest pressure they are under. Once they actually get to GS (if they do) the pressure is off to a certain extent.

There's actually more pressure at a comp where they have to keep in the top stream/set or whatever.

Everyone is much of a muchness at the GS. The difference between the sailing in with top score and just scraping in is negligible IMO.

If the 11+ is the "work of the devil", I can´t help thinking that it´s parents who have made it so.

That isn't my experience of grammar schools,the pumkineater, it isn't much of a muchness. The difference between top and bottom can be huge. At a comprehensive the DC can go to a set that they are comfortable with-they can't at a grammar school.
Parents are responsible diddl! It worked years ago because you just did the test on your own merits.

Ah yes, piscesmoon, the "good old days".

I´ve nothing against parents wanting children to do their best academically, but I can´t see how cramming so that you pass 11+, and then end up struggling once at grammar is good.

I´m sure that´s not always the case, but have known it happen.

Diddl - I think you may be right.

I have just returned from a meet-and-greet at the local gs and - this is just ancedotal, mind - there are A LOT of myths about.

I didn't meet any parents whose dc had been at prep schools, for a start.

The group was very, very racially mixed. Way more so than the upper bands at our nearest "outstanding" comprehensive. Which an outside observer might think operates some kind of apartheid when it comes to "ability" banding.

What almost everybody had in common was that they were living in secondary school black holes - with no decent secondary school they could realistically apply to. And many had an experience of the dc being ostracised for being a "boffin" at primary.

Which had led them to apply to a non-catchment gs, some distance from their homes.

Who was missing? Well, I would guess that it was the parents in the socially and economically disadvantaged groups - who just didn;t have the wherewithal to apply to the gs, now that it's an opt-in system.

And there were quite a few self-tutoring parents, and one or two not-tutoring (as in not even seen a paper before) parents.

Tricky re. familiarisation and disadvantage - clearly, the sort of parents who go as far as researching 11+ routes, in an opt-in system, are usually going to then take the step of at least familiarising their dc with the paper. You won't get many in an opt-in system where the dc won't ever have seen a paper.

I have a theory - the whole gs thing attracts a lot of ire, some of which would be more properly deflected at socio-economic questions around education as a whole.

I want to know what happens in comps. re socio-economics.

At our nearest outstanding comp, the ability bands clearly have a socio-economic component. So just having more than 2% on free-school meals at comprehensives does not mean that those children are going to have the disparities of economic and social disability miraculously ironed out in a comprehensive system.

Just to be controversial; I think that the comprehensive system works overwhelmingly in favour of the average off-spring of pushy middle-class parents, who are able to facilitate their childrens' way all through the system.

Anyway, this subject is huge, covers loads of issues and is way beyond discussion in one small post.

And way off topic.

I would agree that the comprehensive school is just as unfair-I have got the very best out of it and so have all my friends. The child with supportive, interested and nurturing parents who 'push' for the best are always going to do better.
I did very well out of the secondary modern school but only because my parents pushed for the best and were 'clued' up on how to get me into the 6th form of the grammar school and A'levels.It wouldn't have been easy without their backing.
Family background is more important than anything else-I don't see how you can change it. People from disadvantaged backgrounds, and parents who don't care, can do well but it takes a lot of ability and self motivation-it isn't easy.

I had a fearsome row with DH this week as I had heard of a child who has turned down Eton to go to our local GS. My point was that this is social division at its worse. The child who turned Eton down come what may would get a great education but by taking the state place he takes a place form a child who's possible only chance of a great education is the GS - that child could never afford go to Eton.
I am not saying the comps locally are bad, the GS is spectacularly good.
DH said the Eton/GS parents pay they taxes, they get to choose and I shouldn't be so idealistic.
Am I idealistic?

That's a kind of outrageous position to take IMO. If the Not-Eton-Boy got a place, he got a place. And he got that place on his own merit. He is entitled to take it. Nice that his parents had the social courage (being from the milieu they must come from) to allow him to take the state-school place.

I think a bit more info is needed TBH.

Are the parents not really rich enough so that he wouldn´t fit in?

Perhaps his friends are going to the local GS.

And going to Eton doesn´t make it a given that you will do well.

In our LEA state school are forbidden to coach for 11+ and they are only allowed to do one VR and one NVR test per year.In addition to which they sit a familiarisation paper before sitting 2 real 11+ s and the rresults from the best one are taken

NFER's own rersearch found that a child had to do very few practice papers before maximum
performance is achieved.So I think if someone had only done them in school they would not be much disadvantaged compared to a well-tutored child.
With the VR and NVR questons I think a reasonably intelligent child can easily work out the strategies needed
(

I think that Eton is much fairer these days. You can't put their name down at birth anymore-they have to compete with everyone else and the best wins-so within the system, I think it is an improvement.

goingslowlyroundthebend

yes you are
life isn't like that
they boy made a choice
he took up his right to a state education
that's equality

Katiestar - that is interesting re. NFER's research (children have to do v. few familiarisation papers before maximum performance is reached).

Confession: we employed a tutor for ds BUT tutor told us, after an assessment session, that there was no point in tutoring him - he would be fine without.

I have to admit, I couldn't let go of the wheel. I was too scared by all the stories about how you NEED a tutor.

Tutor basically agreed with NFER - seeing a couple of paper is enough.

So, I clearly have no advice to give other parents! The advice should be just what tutor told us, and NFER research tells us all ... .

Well,goingslowlyround the bend, I can exactly see where you are coming from!

If it is any comfort there are several DCs who turned down places at top public schools to attend my DCs GS. However, they are not entirely happy with it as it is still a state school and although they are attending it for free and it is certainly comparable academically, they find it very, very different to what they have been experiencing in the private sector (ie lots of extras, possibly a bit more 'hand holding') and are not v happy.
Two have already removed their DCs and sent them back into the private sector, thus freeing up the places for those who cannot afford school fees. (hooray )

The problem is that children aren't equal, they don't come from the same background or have the same abilities. And that shouldn't be 'a bad thing to say'. Everyone knows it's true, some people are bright, some sporty, some real people pleasers.

And the system won't change until people understand an academic education is not the only acceptable path, its all very nice to be well versed in Virgil and Dante's divine comedy but until we accept ability is as stratified as the 9 levels of hell and the 9 celestial spheres of heaven its not going to work.

There is too much stigma attached to not achieving academically within middle class and bourgeoisie, which will take generations to properly overcome. If the middle classes view a grammar or private school education as the be all and end all then naturally they will flood those schools. As such the 'proletariats' or working class families with no history of wanting to go to university will feel alienated from such institutions.

The answer, I believe lies in a true comprehensive model, with different schools (because lets face it, at 13 you're always going to get picked on if you actually have read the divine comedy) with easy movement between them and, perhaps a more egalitarian selection procedure, teacher reccommendations, IQ style tests and perhaps a later division, maybe 13 or 14.

Of course this will never happen and the slightly fairer model of grammar schools from the 70s has been lost forever as it is now un-pc to admit some children are brighter than others so unless you have money and know the system you can say goodbye to your child getting a 'good' academic education no matter how bright they are.

Tutoring is not a myth-there is a huge industry built on it. There is an article in the Sunday Times here titled 'Pressure the Little Children'. The numbers being tutored in a place like Wales might be very low, but it isn't the case in London!