WWYD? DS sitting 11+ in September but I loved the comprehensive open eve!

[yosammitysam]

We live in Kent where secondary school places are decided on whether or not your child passes the 11 plus which they sit at the beginning of yr6. It's a nightmare in many ways as I'm sure lots of you know! Anyway, we have a very bright (slightly geeky and bookish!) ds1 but he really struggles in maths which is a big chunk of the exam basically so it's borderline if he'll pass or not. The local comp is very good but very sporty. Several of his teachers suggested we get him a tutor for maths (and we have) to help him but he finds it very demanding/boring and its putting huge amounts of stress on all of us.

We went to the comprehensive open evening last night and i felt it was just a brilliant school. It has 'outstanding' across the board in its ofsted reports and has special schemes for bright students. So now I'm wondering if its worth pushing him? Friends of his who are bright seem to be being really pushed into getting into a grammar by their parents. I feel the local comp might actually be ok for our ds. I do have some reservations as its VERY sporty (and he isn't!) but I think he'd be happy.

SO: am I letting him down if I take the pressure off and say he can stop the extra work and go to the comp? Should I push him as maybe a grammar school would suit him best? Is it all about their happiness now or should you think about the long-term (university, job market etc) where maybe a grammar school education would be an advantage?

I was chatting to someone about this very issue a few weeks ago. In the end she decided to let her dd sit the 11+. She passed, but only just, and the school was also oversubscribed for the year. They decided to send her to the single sex comp, and as far as they're (and she's) concerned it was the right decision - she spent her school career being top of the pile which was a great motivator for her, as opposed to the bottom of the heap she would undoubtedly have been at the grammar (those were her mum's words btw). She's gone on to join the sixth form at the grammar.

Was interesting to hear, because I suspect I may have a similar issue myself in the not too disant future.

I think you must be in the same part of Kent as me. I'd say have your DS sit the 11+ as you never know and then you have all the options open to you. Because of the standardisation of the test you actually only need around 55-60% in the maths paper to gain a pass of 120 out of 140, and less if he's a summer born as they age standardise as well. And he would be allowed to go as low as 117 in the maths paper if his other scores are high enough to achieve the aggregate of 360.

At DS's grammar they set the boys in maths from year 8 and the less able ones are taught in smaller classes than the more able ones (one group is only 20 boys as opposed to the top set which is over 30) so they do support those who find maths less easy.

^Grammar school 6th forms are open to new candidates - including children who may have "failed" the 11+ when they were 11. Therefore if they have (and they do) hundreds of children who would like to take their A levels at Grammar School, they are not going to turn away an external student with 12A* grades in favour of an internal applicant who has a C in maths and maybe B's and A's in the rest.
Grammar Schools take their results very very seriously and they only want to have students there who will be guaranteed to do well. Perhaps they see a C in maths from someone who only 4 years ago did well enough to get through the 11+ as evidence of lack of hard work or slacking in some way?^

I have to say I think that is dreadful. If the children were good enough for the school at 11, they should be good enough at 16. (I am not talking about the small number of children for whom grammar school was the wrong choice and who really struggle). Do these schools want a second bite of the selection cherry so they can show how good they are?

"If the children were good enough for the school at 11, they should be good enough at 16."

Well like most things, there are late bloomers and flashes in the pan.

Even non-selective, oversubscribed comprehensives ask for Bs in Maths and English for sixth form and A/A*s for sixth form subjects. When you have typically 10 applications for each place, and someone is not able to benefit from five years' teaching and support, it may be better for child and school to part company.

This also gives 10 other people a chance to benefit from an experience that is demonstrably not for the child in question. The child is likely to thrive and therefore do better elsewhere. The children who cannot make these basic entry requirements for sixth form will probably not meet the subject requirements either, and would be better prepared for further training outside of a school sixth form. All children surely deserve the chance to find something they would be good at doing and work at when they leave education. Why does this have to be a school setting?

To the OP, if I lived in Kent I'd trust my instincts with DS, and stay positive about his options. That way he can only win whichever one he goes to. He will not have the choice if he does not sit the exam. He will not be happy if he thinks the outcome of the exam makes that much difference to his next five years, and it may not because either way there may be a 16+ option.

Didn't have time to read the whole thread but when looking at prospectus of any school make sure that they do triple science.
Othervise there's no physics and IMHO that is the sign of school not working at making difficult subjects accessible

also unfair on those kids who would need physics for their degrees in the future

Take the test and then see how he does. The forms don't have to be in until half term so you could ask both schools if you could look around again in September.

You do have the option of going in at 16 but where I am in Kent, my local grammar this year was hugely oversubscribed for the 6th form with external candidates (over 100 for what is normally around 30 external places) and had to operate a waiting list. Most of them now are co-ed for the 6th form so you'd be competing with girls as well as boys, many of whom are coming from other grammars so will presumably have good grades.

TickTockPillow mentioned that they wouldn't turn down a 12A* pupil in favour of an average one of their own but look at the admissions policy for your 6th form. Existing pupils will nearly always have priority.

Wait and see how he does, if its one of the super-selectives then I would ask myself, has my ds got the sort of character to survive in this environment, if so then ask yourself, will he be going with people he knows, does he want to go, are there people from primary going to the comprehensive, do you have to consider transport costs now KCC are changing their policy.

At the end of the day, it should be your ds's decision.

The child is likely to thrive and therefore do better elsewhere.

What sort of elsewhere were you thinking of, rosar?

I think it's a little unfair to say the comp is set up for boys who really don't want to learn. I'm sure many of them very much want to learn and hence why the school has an outstanding Ofsted report. Don't be fooled by how many A-C GCSEs the grammer school gets. Grammer schools cream off the highest achievers so don't have to do much to get good results. Bullying happens at grammer schools too. I suspect you instinctively know which school is really best for your son. If I thought a tutor was needed then I wouldn't opt for the grammer school. Why put that kind of pressure on your child? If he is 'bright' he will equally do well at the comp and if it is still worthwhile move on to university. As an employer I have never been swayed by a CV just because it has a grammer school on it!

just re-read the whole thread and think I know which school you are talking about. Is it smack bam next door to a super selective?

I looked at it and liked it and would happily have sent ds1 there if the other pupils there were like him, but their traditional cohort has always made me too nervous. All the bright non GS kids I have known have gone to the church schools or gone private - sorry. Saying that I do know parents of children who aren't so academic and the school has worked wonders for them and they have gone onto a local GS for 6th form.

personally if it is H and the GS I assume you would be opting for is 4 miles south, I would do as many many other parents do and get a tutor in for maths, then take the test and see how he gets on.

CecilyP - depends on the reason for failing to achieve Bs in two core subjects after five years in a stable context.

Setting aside, as you've done, the ones who struggle academically, that would probably leave mostly children who have had health or developmental difficulties that the school has already a track record of limited success supporting. If my child was in that situation s/he would be better off in another school or even at home so as to have the space and appropriate support addressing the issue(s). Pushing them straight into sixth form in the school where they achieved poor results at entry level in any core subject does not seem a recipe for a good outcome at an even more important phase of their schooling. Doubtlessly some parents may take the risk, but even if the school was prepared to take them back, I would think twice about it.

Top-performing grammars are generally not funded to support the quirkier child, they prefer the conventionally bright child, which is why they do not use the computerised 11+ test of potential used by schools such as Eton, that is the subject of this thread. They are clear about what they offer. If a child in the top quartile cannot achieve those Bs in a grammar, that's a early warning sign s/he needs help of a different kind than the grammar is able to provide.

It's not as if there is a level playing field at 16+ entry. The joiners will tend to be much better than most of those already there, even if they didn't make the 11+. They are doubly welcome because they lift academic performance of the others and often introduce a co-ed environment, all useful preparation for university life.

"... the subject of another thread", not this one, on 11+ tests immune to tutoring;
and
"... joiners are better academically than most already there,... " because the competitive entry means they will almost always exceed the minimum by a long way.

I'm really shocked about the pupils who do a two hour commute what ever are the parents thinking. How cruel.

We are in sussex and we don't have Grammar schools, I think the nearest to us is in Surrey and approx 30 mins drive but in rush hour much longer. I think it is wrong that the Kent authourity alow children in from so far away, it obviously disadvantages all children incl the commuters!

We have applied to the blue coat school which is boarding. Ds is brilliant at maths but rather unmotivated with English and hates anything like drama. Although sciences fine, art ok and sport, well don't even go there. I dread him getting in, It will be the making of him I'm sure but the first few weeks will be tough. The next few years will be a hard slog for him.

I think it's worth the extra push, like you, I wish my parents had encouraged me. The comp did all they could incl IQ tests and speaking to my parents. They could have sent me to one of the best girls schools in the country but having two marxist parents meant I had to "slum it" with the good folk at comp.

I sometimes feel that you can't have everything in abundance but you can strike a balance. I have freinds who have happy kids that don't excel, I have seen academic kids that seem very serious and beyond their years. Who knows which of these kids get to be happy and fulfilled adults, which I think is the aim of parenting.

Gillg, my son wouldn't do equally as well at a comp (not that we have any, they are really sec mods in a grammar area) because his specific special need would not be picked up. As a teacher I embrace the comprehensive system, but was repeatedly told my ds would not receive support for his dyslexia at sec school as he achieved a level 4 at SATS. That was through his own (and my) hard work. If he wasn't dyslexic he'd be right at the top of level 5. His grammar accepts this and supports him and many others in his situation. This is the difference for a dyslexic child between a d/e and a b at GCSE. That means opportunity vs no opportunity.

It's an a in grammar by the way.

rosar, thank you for your explanation. I can see it is a WIN/WIN situation for the grammar school, but why would the pupil be better off in another school? Also, I am not sure what you mean by 'even at home so as to have the space and appropriate support addressing the issue(s)', especially in the context of a child refused a place in 6th form for not having a B in maths when that is not going to be one of their A level subjects.

Still it is one more thing for the OP to investigate.

Cecily, it comes down to the point that if a child in the top quartile aptitude cannot deliver Bs in any core subject at entry level (GCSE) with the current qualification standards, then there is an issue in their learning, for whatever reason.

A parent can choose to address or ignore these issues. If they consider there is no other local school capable of teaching their child, they can nevertheless take responsibility themselves. A selective or oversubscribed non-selective school with limited state resources cannot afford to ignore the issues as it would not be in the best interests of the child concerned.

B at today's GCSE Maths, especially in a grammar school context, is barely numerate in RL. Even catastrophic incidents are unlikely to drag down aptitude (after five years' support) to less than a B. We sometimes have an over-inflated view of A/A*s at GCSE level, these days they are far more easily 'tutored' for than the 11+ reasoning tests. If you disagree about the standard of a GCSE B in Maths, then we simply have different views on this.

But for the OP it simply means there are options at 16+.

I originally came to this thread as a bit of an outsider, pondering what I would do in OPs position. When I was at grammar school myself, admitedly a very long time ago, anyone who wanted to was allowed to stay on for 6th form, and I have to confess to having been a bit shocked by mumblechums post. I am wondering if this happens a lot.

I do not know enough about the standard of a B in GCSE maths to either agree or disagree about it. You say it can be easily tutored for but I wonder why parents would expect to have to tutor for it when it is a subject that is taught in the grammar school.

You refer to issues as if it is something serious when it could just be very little aptitude for maths. This could be balanced by very high ability in other subjects. Therefore, I am still wondering why the grammar school wouldn't be capable of teaching this child if he or she was not doing any A levels that involved maths. What extra resources would they need? I appreciate that parents could find another school or FE college, but am not sure why they should have to, or what resources these other institutions have that are not available to the grammar school. What further responsibilities would parents be expected to take? What, practically, would you advise a parent in this position to do?

Practically, a parent can do exactly the same way they did for the 11+, i.e. do nothing, coach or contract out the coaching. Getting through 11+ reasoning tests is not consistent with the inability to get at least a B in GCSE maths, an entry level exam considered easily within reach of the non-mathematical (of such ability). Five years at a grammar school is generally expected to translate ability into aptitude.

It's no different from specifying English, which may exclude the most brilliant scientist who can easily communicate in another language e.g. Maths. I am merely making the observation that selective (and over-subscribed comprehensive) schools have their 16+ entry policies, and not defending them.

Objectively I suspect it's not really as shocking as the hoops we expect 10 and 11 year olds to go through. It's less shocking than the fact that the 11+ tests aptitude over ability; at least a 16 year old would have had five years of good teaching amongst relatively able peers before they are expected to demonstrate that level of aptitude.

Gomadinthecountry - please do exactly that!

Gillg you say that grammars 'don't have to do much' to get good results since they cream off the highest achievers.

That's a ridiculous statement.

What experience do you have of grammars either as a pupil, parent, teacher or employer (since it sounds as though your experience is limited).

Geography counts.

In those places where the old two-level system exists (Kent definitely as thats us also I think Bucks, Cheshire, Torbay and maybe some others), it is quite possible for the better non-selective schools to do better than the less good selective.

In those places where Grammars are rare and are properly elite schools, like London and Essex and maybe Devon and Yorks, they will always far outclass the comps.

Having had 3 DCs go though the system, my advice is: meet the 6th form. That's how your DSwill turn out , and if that is what you think they should be, then chose that school, Grammar or not. Simples!