Grammar school tests to be made 'tutor-proof'

[breadandbutterfly]

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeducation/9653189/Grammar-school-tests-to-be-made-tutor-proof.html

I aspire for my DCs to go to grammar schools whereas my DW (very MC) would expect them too but without being arrogant about it....That is to do with background I'm afraid!

The reason my clever dad did not pass 11+ I am convinced is that he was the youngest of four kids to a single widowed mom who spent all her time cleaning other people's houses. Even in the early fifties this was a barrier. His dad who was well educated was stll alive when his sister got to grammar but died after dad born leaving a great but uneducated mother who had started work in an Irish factory at 12. He only progressed on to get his exams after leaving school and getting an apprenticeship with more educated kids. It sounds harsh but the grammar school system did not help those sorts of kids in the 50s and it much more of an issue now so we should be concentrating on really pushing and mentoring the bright kids in inner city comps.

My Dad was the first person to go to GS from his mining family and mining village..and spent his whole youth and working life having people making fun of him not doing a 'proper job'. (he went into one of the professions). It was a bit socailly isolating, within a small tight knit community.

Wry smile at gazza's aspiaration / entitlement perception.

Did anyone read the article linked to in the OP?

Interviews or improved exams were only 2 possibilities - another was for the German sytem of selective school place awarded on the basis of teacher recommendations not one-off exams - works well there.

I think over years, teachers and indeed pupils know very well who is top of the class - removes the pressure.

Agree that a return to interviews would be daft - far too much opportunity for abuse or picking mc kids.

yelowtip - your head was not typical then and certainly is not now.

By the way, the CEM exams are no better - have been reading about the furore re my old school which has just introduced them - they have so few papers they used a paper set previously in a different grammar area - lots of kids were familiar with the texts even though it was the firt time the CEM tests had been used by that school - pathetic.

I could write them a new test - piece of piss.

But bread are interviews at Oxford and Cambridge an 'oppportunity for.. picking mc kids' ? I think that the overwhelming majority of current grammar school heads have a quite different agenda. I'd trust them to get it right.

Big difference - interviews are only the last stage in the process - xbridge have lots of other 'hard' data to go on eg exam grades etc, and yes, teacher recommendations. The interview is only 1 factor and the individual tutors only interview a relatively small number so can put quite a lot of effort into it - unlike the thousands applying for grammar school places. Plus by 17 or 18, students could be expected to have come out of their parents' shadows and even if from an uneducated background, to have read up on their area of interest hemselves - you couldn't expect an 11 year old to have developed that ;evel of independence of thought (or means) yet.

So no, I don't think it is comparable.

And yes, I think the temptation to pick kids who 'fit' by background, ethnicity or class would be overwhelming. Or even good looks! - ee the Eton thread.

Don't forget that Oxbridge take far fewer from state schools than they should. Would grammars fill with kids from preps?

Most areas in Gemany have arrived at a system where teachers give recommendations for grammar school, but these are not binding for the parents. Th recommendations are based on the grades the children receive after sitting class-based abd teacher-assessed tests throughout the school year. Which always makes me a bit sceptical when I read on here that English children are the most tested in Europe!

I would really dislike teacher recommendation also. Teachers could be biased. Being a quiet child, I wasted a year at comprehensive by being put in the wrong stream. If this were a decision for grammar I would have been in the wrong school.

Yes teachers always seem to favour the more outgoing and extrovert, often underestimating the abilities of quieter children.

Agree with Ouluckyduck, I would dislike teacher recommendations intensely.

I have a son who always seems to fall below the radar and not get noticed - he is quiet, well behaved, and doesn't push himself forward. I was warned by his nursery teacher to watch out for this, and it has proved true! I think his teachers frequently underestimate him.

We can cater for this outside school - going to lots of extra lectures, courses, etc - which he loves. It would be terrible if he were penalised because of his personality not his brains. (not saying he's Einstein - just saying he is brighter than he is given credit for).

Oh, and agreeing with richmal!

"Which always makes me a bit sceptical when I read on here that English children are the most tested in Europe!"

Nobody who actually knows anything about education in continental Europe could possibly say this. You only have to tqke a cursory glance at the French state school system....

Nevertheless it has been repeatedly claimed on here.

I know. Bonkers, isn't it!

With a bit of luck, a new 'tutor-proof' test might put the brakes on the tutoring industry and open up access.
A few miles from us is a super-selective where I believe it's not unusual for children to be tutored or put on tutor waiting lists from as early as Year Two. The names of popular tutors are closely guarded secrets and it's generally believed that with this level of competition, professional tutoring is absolutely essential. There are lots of tutors who have a commercial interest in maintaining a certain mystique around the exam and in reinforcing the idea that preparation requires well-paid experts. It's not surprising then that lots of less affluent or less educated parents never even consider the school as a possibility. The school has only 1% of children on FSM.

In reply to Tired Mummy, saying that private school children should only compete for 7% of grammar school places. This makes me really angry , I am a teacher in a private school, fortunately my daughter could attend said school because of this. We do not have the funds to continue private education. Therefore we entered her for the 11+ . She is very bright , thoroughly deserves her place and received full marks. She had five lessons of "coaching" to familiarise herself with the format of the papers. Valuable time is lost if faced with a paper on test day that they have to spend time working out how to complete. A child, wherever they live or whatever background should be able to attend a school that is right academically for him/her. I do , however, feel strongly that a child who has been coached at length for more than a year possibly could struggle at a high achieving Grammar School and begs the question" is the school right for the child?" My daughter is amongst like-minded individuals at her Grammar and is being challenged academically. More importantly she has friends with very similar aspirations and personalities and is overall much happier than when she was the only "bright" one in the class.

I had my DS and DD tutored over the summer, only to realise now that they are taking entrance exams how woefully inadequate that is. Given that DD is a straight A student and DS is gifted, it goes to show how extremely difficult it would be to pass the exams without tutoring. In my ideal world each child would take one non verbal reasoning exam, and then each school would have to take a percentage of children from each level of exam performance. School league tables would then more truly show how good the school was, not just how many bright children from motivated families attended. Streaming would mean that children learned at roughly the right pace for their abilities. Private schools would just be for people who wanted their children to go to school with other wealthy people, not a desperate fall back for people who can't really afford it but whose children did not pass grammar school entrance exams. If only they would put me in charge of the education system!

"More importantly she has friends with very similar aspirations and personalities and is overall much happier than when she was the only "bright" one in the class."

She'd get that in a proper comprehensive too.

"Don't forget that Oxbridge take far fewer from state schools than they should."

Could you please give reasons why you think that Oxford and Cambridge are doing thing. I mean valid reasons, not just that half the student population come from private schools as this says nothing of the caliber of applications from either sector and how "deserving" they are of earning their place there. As far as I recall, the number do not point out that the private students there have not earned fairly the right to their places, unless you think that they should only represent 7% of the student body for "fairness" sake.

More importantly she has friends with very similar aspirations and personalities and is overall much happier than when she was the only "bright" one in the class.

My DSs were in a 'proper' comprehensive school and so it solves the problem-there isn't only one bright one in the class-there are lots of them and so just as easy to mix with similar aspirations and personalities.

She had five lessons of "coaching" to familiarise herself with the format of the papers. Valuable time is lost if faced with a paper on test day that they have to spend time working out how to complete.

I would love it if they all went in without seeing a paper-it would really separate out the intelligent-the first test being to work out unfamiliar questions. It wouldn't be a waste of time, it would be the most valuable part of the test.

mummybiscuit,

I think you miss the point. Your child was lucky in being able to attend a private school for primary for WHATEVER reason. It gave her a flying start over a child in a rough primary who is a class of 30 and has to put up with distruptive children. A private school has the time and resources to give a broad education and make sure that the child knows mental arthimetic, has a good vocabulary and can spell. This a huge advantage of the test. I definately think that your child should compete with other children from a similar primary. The fact that you can't afford private secondary is irrelevent.

There is no way that a child from a rough primary without tutoring can compete with her.

I think with Oxbridge the situation is slightly different. A student can take a year out and reapply. There is loads on the internet to support the learning of a sixth former. A bright sixth former is less dependent on their school than primary school child.