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.

Quattro - Trafford (which is the majority of South Manchester) and North Yorkshire

Sue52, sounds wonderful. Both dd's state primaries offered extra-curricular activities but they were ALL SPORT. DD is arty and intellectual and definitely not sporty! Perhaps we should move again to your neck of the woods, except she's at secondary now.

Jux The school had a very active pta and school governors who were keen on standards. Parental involvement counts for a lot, I must admit the school was full of pushy middle class types who were not afraid of confronting the head if they thought their child was underachieving.

kodokan - the same applies in Germany. The unfortunate thing is that nowadays most parents will do their upmost to ensure their children end up in the grammar schools as the other two (usually, I am sure there are exceptions locally) options equal very reduced chances in the job market. There are so many a-level students that not only university places but most of the decent apprenticeships will go to them.

We found that dd1 did not pass the Kent test yesterday. We were not particularly surprised because she said that she could not finish the questions in the given time. She was not able to attend the familiarisation test either because of a family commitment.

I have said to her that the 11 plus is probably the only test that you cannot resit, and the only test that is designed for most people to fail. After this, then GCSE's and A'Levels will seem simple! She is due to sit some tests for private schools, and I am hoping that this has not knocked her confidence too much, because like many 11 plus failures, she is on track for L5 in her SATs and is considered bright in her class.

"I dont think you should be concerned whether 11+ is unfair. An exam does not work for all children the same. Not passing the 11+ does not mean anything and does not mean failure certainly!!"

You know that and I know that, but try telling that to a 10 year old who is the only one in her group pf friends not to "pass"!

I agree, no ten year old should have to go through that. It causes no end of problems for teachers and social groups throughout year six. The last year of primary school should be a time of celebration and positive preparation for change, rather than making children feel bad about themselves.

I am wondering how Monday went for OPs child I hope it was ok OP ?

At Cambridge 1 in 3 state educated undergraduates are from grammar schools.

The 11+ system is rubbish and not only splits up friendship groups, but families. My DW went to GS, but has a sister and a brother who went to something called a "comprehensive" (but which is, due to the educational apartheid, anything but comprehensive), causing a rift which has endured.

There's so much parental paranoia supporting educational segregation, but smart kids do just as well in streamed classes in comprehensives. I went to a "proper" comprehensive and did academically as well as my mates who were moved aged 11 into the private school 6 miles away (although I have to admit they were loads better at rugby).

Betelgeuse, I haven't followed all of this thread and am not contributing an opinion on the OP as I can see things have moved on apace - but I must point out that, certainly in our county (Glos), if you have failed the 11+ you will not be considered for a place later on, certainly for years 8 - 11 at least.

Places obviously come up, but a child who has already taken and failed 11+ will not be taking one up.

In our part of the country this is possible, WWWY. You can take the 12+ even if you failed the 11+, the only stipulation being that you must have achieved level 5s in your Y6 SATS.

And of course you do have to weigh up the advantages of a grammar school education against the fact that your DC will have settled into their school and made new friends etc. We faced exactly this decision last year and decided our DC was happy where they were at an upper school.

I was quite in favour of grammar schools (both my working class parents went to one) but then looked at the research that showed that children who failed the 11plus in grammar school areas (ie the majority of children) did significantly worse at school than similar children in fully comprehensive areas. So the success of the minority of children at grammar schools is bought very much at the expense of the majority of children. I didn't feel at all comfortable about that. In areas with grammar schools, the majority of children are not well served. This may be because the best teachers don't want to work at schools where the brightest pupils have been creamed off, or because there is no point in giving Oxbridge tutoring when there might be no Oxbridge-ready children in the school, or because expectations are low. But it is true, and for me, it was a very sobering thought.

I am anti grammar schools and I think it very unfair that some parents 'buy' a place with tutors etc. However the 11+ isn't designed to be fair-they are simply looking for the most academic DCs and it must give that or they would do it differently.

Sorry, betelgeuse. I don't live in the world you live in - and I suspect mine is closer to reality.

There are about 3200 maintained secondary schools in England. 164 of them are grammar schools. From this thread one might think that every area has them, but this is far from the case.

notirednow Children may discover that someone else is better than them at something and yes they will have to deal with it.

However, the eleven plus is not really an example of that. If none of them were tutored it would be, but some are. It is more a case of finding out who has the best tutor these days.

Take for example boy i know who failed last year. This boy is known to be mathematically gifted. He had outgrown the KS3 curriculum at the age of 7. However, his parents who are extremely poor and uneducated themselves could not afford to pay for a VB tutor. They were unable to manage helping him themselves. He failed to get into grammar. The school he is at will have far fewer opportunities for a mathematially gifted boy because there is no such thing as a true comp in a grammar area.

I have asked him what happened in the exams. He told me that it wasn't that it was hard but that it took him a while "to work out the system with each question type" and so he did not finish the VB paper. I would suspect that even though he failed it would have been by a small margin.

Children far less able who had tutors will have passed because they have seen that type of question before.

He is bored at school and has started to misbehave and often does not turn up. In a true comprehensive system his chances would have been much better.

He did not discover that some children are more academic than he is. He knows that is not the case. He discovered that what counts is how much money your family has.

Skippyjonjones, your sad example shows what I mentined earlier, that in areas where there are grammar schools children who don't get into them do significantly less well than they would have done in a real comprehensive in a non-grammar school area. The children who go to grammar's achieve at a direct cost to other children. I think that's wrong.
And that's a whole different issue to, say, a child hitting their stride a little later but still finding there is no adequate teaching.

ColdComfort, is that true? I?d be most interested to see evidence to back that up. I know it sounds counter-intuitive but I think I?ve read elsewhere that actually non-grammars in a grammar school area do OK??

skippy, what a sad story. That boy is exactly the type of child who grammar schools were set up to benefit but who no longer does because neither his parents nor his school equip him to pass the 11+. Unfortunately middle-class parents have learnt how to play the system to the extent that they realise a year or two of tutoring is a lot less expensive than 5-7 years of private education.

The 11+ is a very specific type of exam and it just doesn?t suit some DCs, no matter how bright they are. When you couple that with the extensive tutoring which goes on in some parts of the country, you realise that neither the exam nor the grammar system serve the purpose for which they were originally established.

I think that skippy's example is all too common and the middle-class parents who have played the system will trot out the tired old saying 'it helps the bright DC escape their disadvantaged background' this is rubbish and they know it!! They pay to exploit the system and it is easily exploitable. I would have nothing against it is every DC did a couple of papers to practise and left it at that-but I have a lot against it when some have been drilled for 2 years(or longer)! It is then very unfair.