Prep school children at a disadvantage

[slickrick]

When taking the 11+ for independent schools compared to state school children according to the admissions lady at a top independent school. Children in independent schools are not prepped for the 11+ only the 13+ what is the point in going private if this is the case? I was under the impression private schools were at least a year ahead of state schools.

I did say to be crude

Understand, Shooting, I had to put my own dd down for private school when she didn't get a place at our local (not even amazing) primary. Was lucky enough to then get a last minute place, but it cost me a term's fees

But I do hear more than any other reason, I want to move little x because I'm so worried about preparation for 11+. And always say, if they're happy and doing fine in primary, no need, get a tutor for a year and save the £££.

"To be crude, you can't polish a turd. The best children in both systems will win through."

What a deeply, deeply unpleasant thing to say. And not true either.

If there is any truth in it at all, what the admissions lady means is "the applicants we have from state schools for 11+ entry are ahead of the applicants we have from prep schools for 11+ entry". There is a selection bias in this. If only the top 5% of state school pupils apply for this particular school and the applicants from prep schools are borderline candidates whose parents want them to have two bites at the cherry (at 11+ and 13+) then she may well see this differential in the candidates. But it can't be generalised to the wider populations of all state school pupils and all prep school pupils.

I went to an independent school which was 4-18 but doubled in size at the 11+, via a very competitive exam and interview. The majority of those entering at 11+ were from state schools. Pretty much all of the junior school pupils were allowed through to the senior school and none had to take the 11+ entry exam. At the end the school the 11+ entry cohort did on average better than junior school cohort; better A level grades, more selective universities. Can you therefore conclude that state schools prepared their pupils better than the school's own junior school? No, it was just the result of the entry to the junior school being less selective, partly because it is much harder to assess 4 year olds.

Disadvantaged compared to who?
Are there many state schools now that prepare children for private school examinations?

I think this depends on the prep in question and whether the school "feeds" a school at 11+ some clearly do and others not. You need to think long term look at destination schools to get the right support

I think private school pupils CAN be '2 years ahead' in Science, History, Geography, French, Spanish, RE, even DT as most prep schools aim to provide a balanced, well-rounded education and not 'teach to the test'.

Just going back to this - they teach those subjects in state primaries too without external testing, so there is room for creativity and quite surprising depth. Many state primaries have subject specialists in these subjects, as well as art, music, PE, drama, and yes, Latin - although they may teach their own class too and swap into other classes. Up till now there has been a focus on skills or independent learning rather than particular facts (good independents may do this too) but there can be some really interesting project work too.

Art, music, drama and PE (not sport) perhaps but ds1 had a 'Spanish Day' at his outstanding state primary whereas ds2 has 2 Spanish lessons a week at his prep. I can see the difference in the other subjects too.

Language teaching varies at state primaries, that is bound to be true - DD1 had lessons in three different languages over seven years at state primary, but I suspect none in much depth and no more than once a week. However, there are problems with continuity in secondary school in any case, as they start from scratch in whatever language is offered there. And not all private secondaries would start with Spanish from Y7 if that is what had been offered at prep school.

My DD's state primary had Spanish twice a week and a Spanish lunchtime club.

There is not a lot in KS2 languages and whichever one the school chooses they all complete the same topics. There is a list of them including families, body parts, numbers, colours, celebrations and festivals, and a few others I forget.
My dd has completed the whole of KS2 topics in Italian in half a term. She is starting KS3 which should be completed before secondary.

Different prep schools do different things. You have tocheck.

That said, it would be an odd prep school that only prepared to CE, since so many schools now have their own entrance test way before CE.

I'm sure there are some fantastic state primary schools out there and we had no complaints about ds1's primary at the time - I just notice the difference in teaching now ds2 is at the prep. My real problem is with the wide variation in quality of the secondary schools.

The brightest quarter in state schools are working on average two years ahead of the average state school cohort too.

The school sold me on leavers destinations and the fact that they taught 2 years ahead of the NC. I know know that that was a big fat lie. The leavers got into the top schools by being tutored, the school teaches at NC standard or below.
I have had one child go through CE that's why I dont want DS to go through it. The CE is an outdated system that most schools only use for setting purposes.

Most prep schools do not 'prep' for 11+. Being at a state school, that has grammar school applicants, will inevitably result on a focus on English and Maths.

In the prep schools, the curriculum is not that focused with significant amounts of all the others (Latin, French, History, etc). Those who do go to grammar tend to be quite a bit ahead on these subjects from my experience.

agree with OddSins, many 13+ prep schools do not prep for 11+...and are focussed on wider subjects...eg Latin starts in year 5, (and some also start Greek in year 6 or 7).. I am actually surprised at DS's school that they have as few English lessons as they do but then there is a lot of sport ...whereas in grammars that teach it you will find most state school pupils joining in year 7 will be doing Latin from scratch. So in that respect yes, are 2 years ahead in certain subjects. Also prep for CE could mean better prep for pre GCSE in year 9. If my DS takes scholarship exams at 13, he will also be close to GCSE level in some subjects, esp. maths, latin and french, so yes may be ahead of those at state schools at similar age, since prep for those will be more intensive that internal school exams given what hinges on them. My issue with CE is the amount of RS in it!

Ds (yr 5 taking the 11+ in September) is a safe level 5 in maths and is working towards level 6 in his state school. Others are similarly working at higher levels in literacy (not his thing really)

I'm not too bothered if DS1 (yr 6) is 2 years ahead or not as long as he is at the right level by Yr8 for the CE / Senior School exams. I do like the fact that he has specialist subject teachers for most subjects including things like French, Latin, History and RS. The school has 2 full time music teachers and 3 full time sports teachers. I genuinely believe he is getting a broader education than would be available in the local primaries.

slick - not all private schools are good. As others have said some focus more on the 13+ exit so there won't be NVR / VR teaching etc for 11+ because it isn't relevant and is a waste of teaching time.

I don't mind that they don't teach VN and NVR but I do mind that they are deliberately not covering any new topics in Maths since the start of September.

Anyway the school is rubbish and my child will be leaving come what may.