I think the 11 plus is unfair

[LargeGlassofRed]

Dd1 failed her 11 plus today, she did'nt have tutoring just a practice paper from wh smiths.

It seams all of her close friends have passed, she' ok she does like the local comp, but she's dreading Monday at school

I seamed to be in the very small minority who hasn't paid for private tuition,

Just ranting really and feeling sad for her, I'm sure it will all blow over by next week.

Grammars are most definately not always the best school.
The only reason they get best results is because of the intake.

The teaching is by no means always better than at a comp - we have DC at both and can see both sides.

The main advantage to the two at the grammar is that they are taught with children of similar ability but the staff are no better than at DS3's comp.
At the comp, he is streamed so is also taught with children of his ability by excellent teachers. I expect him to get good results, but not as good as DS1 and 2 because he is not so naturally academic, not because he went to a comp.

Having said all this, we are lucky that we are in the catchment for what is considered to be a good comp, I do appreciate others aren't so lucky.

'At least these days everyone gets entered for GCSEs.'

Yes; that's because they're so easy that anyone can have a go.

ooozathon hit the nail on the head about the rason people like grammar schools so much.

The problem that those of us in grammar school areas but who don't like the system have is that because it's a grammar school area the social/academic mix at the high schools is unbalanced. It's a circular, self perpetuating system sustained by anxiety, myth and snobbery.

The statement that all comps set effectively is not true.

There have been many,many threads on MN that attest to the fact that the lack of setting cuases concerns for parents.

sorry she failed, especially when all her friends got through

I also think we are lucky not to have grammars tbh. Our comp also doesn't set for everything from the start (but does for some subjects like maths - think other setting comes in later).

Quat - I agree with your sentiment but you also have to acknowledge that there are a lot of families who wouldn't even know where to start with those V/NVR papers (where you are saying that all they need to do is practise a few). You are speaking from the point of being a parent of some intellect who also understands how the system works. We are not in a grammar area (though have a grammar school in the neighbouring borough that children try and get into) so my feelings about them may be skewed.

Perhaps if we were in a borough with lots of grammars everyone would be trying to get into them and the primary schools would have a vested interest but tbh, the only ones trying for the grammar school in the neighboroughing borough are the middle class children with university educated parents.

Agree with the OP in some ways.Our ds1 took 11+ last year and we purchased some papers for him to have a go on.Some children are hugely tutored and obviously prep schools in my area are geared up to taking 11+.I do think if a child has to be extensively tutored they may struggle at school but then again maybe not as it is a weird test anyway and plenty of children who would be fine at Grammar won't get in.

In the primary schools they can prepare for it, indeed the test itself takes place in the primary schools. The teachers just often don't agree with it so they won't be part of the process, if I had a pound for every teacher, usually in a long hippy skirt (soryy but true) who told me it's not right, unfair yadda yadda i'd be rich.
If they think it's so bloody unfair why not give extra time to the children who aren't being tutored ? But no if they ignore the issue it'll just go away

The whole point of grammar schools is that not everyone gets a place. Your child didn't get a place, you feel it is unfair. Your child gets a place you don't care about the others who aren't as academic. Some have tutoring, some don't. The majority of parents only make a fuss when their child fails.

OP I am sorry for your daughter but what do you expect!

There is an elephant in the room in this discussion - the private schools.
No grammar schools in our area, yet the majority of the academic children are creamed off - by the local private school. (Because not all, but a high proportion of the brighter children are the ones with the well-off parents.) It is a fairly cheap private school as they go, so open to a wider proportion of incomes than the London private schools would be. But still too much for us unfortunately! And it becomes self-fulfilling; I know families around here who would probably be in a comprehensive quite happily if it was a true cross-section of ability but because it's already not, they scrape together the money for private even if it's a struggle, leaving even fewer such children in the comp.
No grammar schools does not mean truly comprehensive system.

Whereas there's a town 15 miles away with two excellent comps and I suspect it is no coincidence that there is no private school there.

Not to mention the whole house price catchment thing which means that the good schools are in the more expensive areas.

"high proportion of the brighter children are the ones with the well-off parents."

Can you support that statement at all?

sethstarkadders, I was going to post EXACTLY the same thing. Maybe we live in the same area, as this is exactly the same situation where we are.

In our local primary, we start off oversubscribed at 30 per class and finish off at 15 in Y6 (the other 15 mostly at private schools), then of those 15 left half again will go into local private school for 11+.

Agree, mnistooaddictive. The OP would certainly not be saying the system were unfair if her dd had passed.

I went to a grammar school. We knew some people who rather jumped the gun and moved opposite the school. Their dd failed the 11+.

The next minute all these "Ban Grammar Schools" posters appeared in their windows and they kept getting letters published in the local paper extolling the virtues of the comprehensive system.

PS we also looked at the town 15 miles from here where there are excellent comprehensives and house prices are almost double. So actually it might work out for us moving with 4 kids, but if you have 2 children private secondary might be cheaper!

only by personal observation!
I'm going to get flamed, aren't I?

not all academically bright children have well-off parents and not all well-off parents have academically bright children, but it is what I am seeing at dd's school: for instance all the kids on her table at primary school have parents with degrees (it correlates exactly, which surprised me a bit) and they tend to earn more than the parents without.
Though there are also families with money whose children aren't academic, such as a traveller family who are very wealthy and whose children struggle with reading (though I'd hazard a guess the family as a whole are pretty damn intelligent in other ways to have achieved what they have.)

'In our local primary, we start off oversubscribed at 30 per class and finish off at 15 in Y6 (the other 15 mostly at private schools), then of those 15 left half again will go into local private school for 11+.'

similar in our village except the numbers are different; dd has lost two best friends to private school so far. She's the only girl in her class now. It is depressing. Fortunately (!) her new best friend is in no danger of leaving because they couldn't possibly afford it.

A number of my DH's colleagues moved to Kent because of the "excellent" education here. And a number of those have children who have failed the 11+. Suddenly the system doesn't seem so great.

And equally, other people speak up about the unfairness of the system whilst paying for coaching for their own DC.

The hard fact is, if you live in a selective area (I refuse to call it a grammar school area, because the majority of children will go to secondary moderns) your children have to live with being tested (and in some cases found wanting) at 11. Whether you believe in selection or not is irrelevant.

Whilst I agree that it's not fair on those parents who can't afford to pay for tutoring, I don't agree that's all you can do. My dd is in a grammar school and didn't have any paid tutoring. We moved house from an area where there are no grammar schools at short notice so she had two weeks notice before taking the exam. I got past papers, looked up the 11+ forum and signed up for some online tests. It probably cost me about £40 in total. Just buying one set of papers and expecting a child to pass is naive. Even the most intelligent child needs to familiarise themselves with the questions.

I will however be paying for tutoring for dd2 and ds when they are in year 5. I can afford it and I want them to have the best chance they can of getting into what I now know is a fantastic school.

I didn't go to a grammar, but a local comp where I was streamed into the middle stream. I was always the top of the class in most subjects, but the school refused to move me to the top stream because 'we have to draw a line somewhere'. It meant that I began to believe that I wasn't very bright, so stopped bothering - I didn't go to university and at 40- something I still feel very sad about it. I will therefore do the best I can to help my children get the best education for them. In the case of ds it may not be a grammar school - he's too young right now, but I suspect he'd struggle and it wouldn't be the right place for him.

I'd also like to point out that dd has got girls in her class from a much wider social and ethnic range then she did in her primary school, so I don't buy the idea that she's going there to avoid tracksuited parents.

I am a little shocked however by how expensive the uniform/kit list was, families strapped for cash would struggle to pay £800 like we just did.

"The OP would certainly not be saying the system were unfair if her dd had passed. "

An outrageous thing to say. Mine did. I do.

I went to a prep school and we spent a vast amount of year 6 (though it was called Lower III) practising and being pushed and coached for the 11+.

DD took it last year having done a practise paper from Smith's on non-verbal reasoning - that is the worst one imo, as if you've never seen anything like it before you're really stymied. Of course she failed. In fact, there were two children from her state primary who passed, and both had been tutored almost to death.

We had a local prep school (it's closing this year) and all the kids there pass, naturally. They'll have spent a year at least being prepared. That's what a prep school is, preparatory.

I think it's utterly ridiculous that teachers at state primaries are hardly even allowed to say "11+" let alone help children get through it. There's no such thing as a level playing field, and the idea of choice is rendered nonsensical.

Genunine question, this: Is there actually time available in the Y6 curriculum to coach DCs for the 11+? Indeed, should there be?

There was at dd's school. I don't really know how it worked, but if there's time in the curriculum at a prep school why wouldn't there be time at a state primary?

Prep schools don't have to work to the National Curriculum, Jux.

£800 for uniform etc! My son goes to Dulwich College and I don't think we spent even half that on his uniform in total in year 7 - blazer, tie, school trousers, school shirts, pullover, house games shirt, PE shorts, rugby shorts, rugby shirt, swimming trunks, rugby socks, sports bag, school shoes, rugby boots, trainers. OK, that was five years ago, but I can't believe it would cost £800 now.

Can't speak for all areas but here the LEA forbids schools for tutoring for 11+, so it isn't just a matter of there being time. Friends with children at private schools say they do little else but practise for entrance exams for private schools and 11+ from yr 5 onwards

(but that's only a couple of local private schools I know about, obviously can't speak for them all)