Changes to 11-plus to stop middle-class parents 'buying' access to grammars by hiring tutors

[breadandbutterfly]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2241411/Changes-11-plus-stop-parents-buying-access-selective-schools-hiring-tutors-children.html

Similar article in the Times apparently but paywall.

I went to a Prep. The way the 11+ was prepared for was we spent most of the academic year up to the test itself doing practise papers. We did two or three a week. Each one was gone through closely afterwards so that we were alerted to types of trick questions "what was the largest island in the Pacific before Australia was discovered" for instance. All types of questions were gone over. Every sequence was analysed.

It's no wonder Prep schools say they can pretty well guarantee a pass.

Interestingly, my brothers' school - the associated boys' school to my girls' school - didn't do it, but let their pupils sink or swim in the exam.

I openly admitted I was had not worked in a prep and therefore could only generalise. I have taught in a grammar however and have seen my classes packed with children from prep Schools. They must be doing something to be over represented at the lack grammars.

Did you enjoy all the preparation, Jux, and was any of it genuinely useful beyond the 11 plus exam, or would you rather they found another system for selecting pupils for grammar schools that didn't involve spending so much time analysing trick questions?

I have responsibility for behaviour and attendance in the school that I teach, I have never and would never run a trip as a reward for turning up to school or behaving. I may, however, put a child on a trip ban because of their behaviour or attendance.

I guess prep schools have to prepare you for something, or they wouldn't be doing what it says on the tin . Primary schools, on the other hand, make no promises of preparation for anything, they are just the first school your child goes to, before moving on to the next one. Which leads one to wonder why people claim that prep schools aren't exam factories - they are, after all, preparing the children for entrance exams to the next school they go to, not for entry into the "real world."

Prep schools round here market themselves by quoting their figures for getting scholarships or grammar school places.

However you could also say that much of year 6 is about preparing for their final assessment before moving up to secondary . I have a daughter in year 6 and she is always bringing home test papers and being offered booster classes.

Much of year 6 in a primary

Have many serious, large-scale studies been done on IQ tests? eg training people up for a year on how to do IQ tests by giving them a test a week and then assessing whether or not there has been a massive leap in their IQ score after a year of doing this?

I am not a great fan of OFSTED but my DS's school's system for rewarding good attendance and behaviour by trips and cash equivalent points was specifically mentioned in the OFSTED report as being very positive. Attendance and behaviour has significantly improved since the system was introduced. OFSTED loved it.

If it gets the desired results I'm all for it!

@Arisbottle - The answer to your question as to why there were so many prep school kids in the GS class that you taught is in your post in the other thread.

Namely, your child had better things to do than be tutored in basic exam techniques like watching the clock and not getting bogged down with questions they can't do. If this is your attitude as a parent who is also a teacher then why are you sooo surprised that children you have influence over don't pass the 11+?

Instead of ranting about the efforts that others go to on behalf of their kids maybe you should examine the attitudes of other parents similar to yourself.

I don't know about large scale studies, rabbitstew, but when I was a teenager, I bought one of those 'test your IQ' books with about 8 or so tests in it. Of course it said in the preface not to mark them as you went along, which was an obvious invitation to mark them as I went along. I started with an IQ of 115 and, within a week, had got to 140 by the time I finished test 8. I don't think it would have been possible to get any higher by doing more tests because there would have just been too much to do in the time to answer any more questions.

Was arisbottle ranting? I saw no sign of it.

Parents in Kent get kids tutored who attend state primaries as the school doesn't prepare them for the 11+, whereas preps prepare the kids intensively. If you want a more level playing field, abolish fee-paying school and give everyone the same preparation.

Rabbitstew, I wouldn't as far as daying I enjoyed it, as there was massive pressure but with our teacher, there always was. I got more relaxed about it perhaps (v long time ago) ans eas definitely more confident about the actual exam when it came to it.

Psychological studies in IQ have found that it doesn't really change that much, whayever you do, but that you can get get better at doing tests, though the most significant, or greatest, improvement happens early on, ie. after the first try. Thereafter it's like a law of diminishing returns.

I suspect that more practise providing greater familiarity and therefore better ability to not worry about a previous question or spend too long on a current question is pretty helpful.

Oh, one thing which has amused me ever since that time was that we had to learn the alphabet backwards! I still know it. Give me an alphabetic backwards sequence and I could probably still do it recognise it

I really don't see the argument for teaching everyone less because some people are being taught less. It makes no sense at all.

But it isn't about whether you are being taught more or less, Brycie, it's about what you are being taught. If it is thought worthwhile for everyone in the country to learn their alphabet backwards, then let's all do it...

Haven't had time to read this thread yet but will be back later....

I have not taught in a prep school but having spoken to friends who have their children in prep schools they are heavily tutored in school and then parents have the income to tutor them outside if school. I suppose because they are not having to study the national curriculum they can rehearse skills needed for entrance exams, whether this is for a grammar or for a scholarship to an independent

If I may? That is not quite true. The last bit is. Prep schools do not have to adhere to the NC and so can teach in avvordance with whatever they like. Many preps are teaching from CE anyway ( a harder test). It isnt so much about testing and rehearsing to an inch oflife as about making it part of the daily lesson plan.

With lesser able students some parents may give their DC additional tuition. This can work - or rather lets say it may make the difference with a boarderline candidate. To the chagrin of many parents in untutored state schools, this may mean its the preppy and not your DC who gets into grammar school.

But overall not even a good prep can make a sik purse from a sows ear
(sorry if that offends). An ableDC will pass anyway like as not as long as they have been given suitable background in what to expect. Practice tests show them what is expected. DC plateau after about six attemptsat these things and you get a good idea of what they are actually capable of.

Of course if you do not practice atall and someone else does it can mean the difference between passing and failing. This can be crucial if you are in an area where the competition for places is strong.
I dont live in an area where selection exists but I do work in one where there is a grammar school and sitting is optional. I know many parents put DC into our prep in order for them to be educated to the general standard of the tests. Most of our fourth pear preps will pass ( thats year 6). Our senior school will often pick up the dails ( a couple or so a year) . We may also get a number who stay with us on scholarships. They are then joined by a larger number of state school DC who failed the 11+ and whose parents do not want to send their DC to the local comprehensive school. Some of those may also apply for scholarships and sit our entrance exams. We ecen get around 5% who reject grammar school places for us (fees waived usually). .

To be truthful my semi selective independent school thrives on the 11+
(failures).

I thought that you were not allowing the word 'fail' in your house-is it just other people's children who fail?

Someone asked about studies on the effectivbeness/intake of grammar schools? I dont think there have been any since the 1960s/70's but going back there, one reason there was a push to remove them was that they were not found to be effective.

A big issue was ( like now) the num,ber of prep tutored DC who got in.

Another issue was that even though there was far less competition from independents ( many such schools started in the 1950's after the 11+ was made a general test at 11 for all DC and grammar schools stopped being pay - for institutions) parents were unhappy about the standardof education available to those who were "failed".

There was a discrepency across the country justlike now. In some areas ( Wales for example) a large proportion of DC went to grammar school In the Midlands - around Birmingham and the Black Country, the % was far lower. That was made worse by the fact more boys were admitted than girls and there were more boys grammar schools than girls high schools generally.

Yet still, even then, middle class parents dominated the entry. Only a few working class DC got in to start with.

Of those w/c DC many had middle class mothers or middle class maternal backgrounds ( grand parents and aunts etc).

Many w/c children may have gone to grammar school but a lower % actually did well academically. Compared to their m/c counterparts they got fewer O levels and many times failed the benchmark % O levels with English and Maths (to go onto sixth form).

It didnt increase greatly the numbers of such DC who went onto university ( universities only too 5% of the A levels any way and A level wasonly taken by 10% of all DC anyway).

So it was not the great leveller and social mobility ladder it has been made out to be. Yes a few did rise in the world through the system. Largely this was around one step up ( say from skilled working class to lower middle class occupation). So mobility was not great unlike the myththat it was.

I got this from an old book written in the lae 1960's " Home School and Wrok: A study in Originals and Cestinations" by Carter. I have a copy. It was obligatory reading for me once. Similarly a book called " Why Children Fail" by Holt, gave similar statistics although it concentrates more on the disadvantages of class in the education system generally.

Bernstein of course gave us the low down on why there was a discrepency - the middle class have an elaborated language code. This advantages them in any education system. Similarly in case you need to be told Bourdieu suggested it was "cultural capital" that made a difference. Letsliken the latter to your school bag. All DC come to school with their school bag. However, the contents of the school bag of a M/c child ( things like language, books, support, space at home, economic position etc) better fits them to do well in school than their w/c peers. This starts before school - by the age of 3 this has been set really.

There were also studies which showed that able DC would work fairly well in any school if they had ability.

I think there were a number of such studies in the 1960's/70's. Of course having abandoned 11+ in most areas further studies were not necessary.

So why do parents want to send their DC to Grammar school? I doubt its because of the riviting curriculum which in most cases can be found in any comprehensive since all schools do teach the same uniform curriculum.
It wont make much difference really.

Of course sending a DC independent means you get a different education most of the time as NC doesnt apply.

Yes. But if a DC arrives with me as a " failure" - from the 11+ or whatever school they have come from, , they wont be when I have finished because, as I said, I do not allow the F word.

But overall not even a good prep can make a sik purse from a sows ear

This doesn't quite add up then. My nephew's private school has DCs from 3 yrs to 18yrs-they have been weeded out at all ages despite the school having them from an early age-i.e. they have failed the schools criteria.

"I really don't see the argument for teaching everyone less because some people are being taught less. It makes no sense at all."

In most cases, tutoring for the 11+ is not about teaching children something useful. It is about teaching specific skills which apply to this particular type of test only. If you want to get 100% innthe maths, there will be topics that will probably not have been covered by the time a child sits the test, but apart from that it's just teaching them how to jump through the hoops very fast indeed.

It's worth noting that state schools are specifically forbidden to prepare children for the 11+, apart from a couple of familiarisation papers. Many do more, but they could be in serious trouble if anyone shopped them. This was a naive attempt to level the playing field. Unfortunately it did not take into consideration the actions of parents

I spoke to my ds about this thread last night and he made some interesting points. He loves his school and is grateful that we did make him practise. He was on a level 6 in primary but did not feel confident with the tests. His primary did assess him on all areas of the test and gave us feedback as to whether he was suitable. He did do a practise paper in school.He said there is a real mixture of children from the local schools and private. His point was why would people pull their children out of private school to go to grammar if they could afford to go private? As I said before, going to a grammar school has given him opportunities that I didn't get and that he wouldn't of got if we hadn't of moved. I work in a behaviour unit, some of the kids have siblings in grammar schools. You can't generalise that it is full of middle class parents.