11+ being scrapped

[musu]

At one school in Essex here

Interesting development which follows on from Bucks CC overhauling their 11+ and trying to make it tutor proof (although everyone I know in Bucks is still employing tutors).

It is like sport LaVolcan- the staff are all about 'the taking part' and the DCs only want to know who won! You can dress it up how you like but 'selected for the appropriate school' was fail to the DC if it wasn't the 'winning' school. It was also- in some cases- not the appropriate school.

"I failed 11+ and, despite being at a very good secondary modern, I felt a failure- it didn't need seeker's postings! I felt a failure. Other people with their 'what do you want to be when you grow up?............really........can you still do that?' made me feel the failure. It was the expectation that you fail an exam at the age of 10 years and suddenly people don't think you can be a doctor, lawyer etc. "

Yep. Hasn't changed!

exotic just because DC were treated rather more robustly in the sixties doesn't mean that the concept underlying grammar education has lost its value. Children don't all need and won't all benefit from the same sort of education after a certain age and the downsides of the system as it was could be addressed. Grammar provision around the country, accessible to all, is an excellent idea. Individuals will benefit and society too. The whole idea of writing it off in case some children perceived that they've failed is fairly weak and inherently unfair to those DC needing a faster paced more academic education. Streaming or setting means there are failures too. We all succeed and fail all the time. And the tutoring issue is being addressed, expensively, which indicates its importance to those running these schools.

That is the problem - you can know that you haven't failed in your eyes, you can be told that by your parents and teachers,and yet you still get the barrier that before the results you can say you want to be a vet - but after the results people think you are unrealistic and yet you are eleven years old and sometimes even ten years old! Suddenly people are closing doors in your face - they have written you off as not having a chance of going to Oxbridge. You can tell them it was a minor set back and you will just do a,b and c to get where you want, but it is largely a waste of breath.

I find it patronising to be told at 10 that I won't benefit from an accademic education. I did benefit from it. I was 2 DCs below a place. Had I lived on the other side of the river my marks would have got me a place.
Streaming is not failure- you can move up and down at any time.
DS1 was in set 3 for maths as he entered the comprehensive and yet within 6 months was in the top set. Had the top been creamed off there wouldn't have been anywhere higher for him to go.

The snobs remark and 'bearing to mix with the parents at secondary modern' remark just shows the prejudices and assumptions. My best friends from secondary modern at 11, who are still friends today, were the DD whose father went to Oxford and mother went to Cambridge and the DD whose father was an army officer whose siblings were at boarding school. People don't half like to pigeon hole!!

The whole idea of writing it off in case some children perceived that they've failed is fairly weak and inherently unfair to those DC needing a faster paced more academic education.

If Secondary Moderns are so wonderful then why is all this tutoring going on? It sounds as though the perception that children have failed is still alive and well in Grammar areas.

You don't get the same sense of failure with setting - people can and do move up and down sets, and besides no one outside the school knows which set you are in. There was virtually zero movement between the Grammar/Sec Mod system.

Quite.

What nobody ever seems to have is a clear idea of what they'll do with what backbeat calls 'the bottom', or, those who are 'not recommended for academic education', or, those who fail the test.

It's not enough to say, 'we will ensure they are trained for vocations' or 'well we just need to make them equally good' - that's too vague, and it's wrong for the child who narrowly misses a place at the grammar school. What, actually, do the Bring Back The Grammars bods want to do with the rest?

They don't really care TOSNit - as long as their DC is isolated from them in the grammar school!

You can tell what is wrong with the system when we have just had giant assumptions made about the parents of SM pupils!

Why are they 'snobby' at grammar school and not at SM school?

Yellowtip- there is a significant difference between being in a lower set for something, and actually spending your entire secondary school career wearing a uniform which says you failed the 11+! How can you problem compare the two!

And why can't the academic children who need faster paced learning get that in the top stream of a comprehensive? Why do they have to be in a different school? Are you saying that clever children all suddenly end up average everywhere but in the small number of areas where there is selection at 11?

seeker has sadi many times that the students at the SM are generally of a lower socio group. The GS is full of middle class parents.

Kent, it seems (I've never been so don't know) is divided not so much on academic lines as class dvisions.

Sorry that was to exotic

Possibly- not problem.

It is interesting how nobody actually addresses this issue. They just say stuff like "oh, children face failure every day" and "it's the same as choosing different universities" Er, no it isn't!

As for the top set point, c'mon! This has been discussed ad infinitum!

Yep. Round our way the division is pretty much down socio economic lines. According to all the research, this is pretty typical. So unless you think that working class/disadvantaged children are inherently less clever than middle class/privileged ones, there's something going wrong somewhere.

The top set thing has been discussed- but as far as I am aware, the one reason people come up with is that in a comprehensive the top set is a bit bigger- so a child will be working with a few level 5s as well as other level 6s. Well, if their intellect isn't able to cope with that then there's a problem there too!

Getting rid of GS because of snobs in your social circle is an equally silly reason

Yes, and it's not the reason anyone would like to get rid of the 11+, either.

MTS- it is so very boring that even under your new name (the comeback kid, eh?) you carry on missing the point.

Why not join in a proper and interesting debate? It's honestly much more fun than whatever game you're playing. I promise.

I have to say that at SM I never once came across a snob! The thing that upset me was the assumption that certain doors were closed to me- there was nothing remotely 'snobbish' about it.

And it's not snobbishness that makes people congratulate the passers and commiserate with the failures! It's the simple fact that that's what you do.

Friend taking the driving test? "wow, well done!" if they pass, "What a shame, never mind" if they fail- oh, sorry, not fail- "selected as suitable for non driving"