Is it really that hard to get a place at a good private school in London if you have been State educated at primary level?

[Aubergines]

We live in West London and intend to send our daughters to the local State primary. It is a good primary, outstanding Ofsted etc.

The State secondary schools around here are pretty terrible so at 11 we hope to get the girls into a private school.

This all seems very sensible to me but several "friends" have raised their eyebrows and suggested I am taking a gamble and may well find that the girls don't get a place at any of the good private secondary schools. THey suggest good private secondaries (e.g. St Pauls, Latymer, Godolphin and Latymer) are incredibly competitive and children at "feeder" private primaries will be at a distinct advantage.

Is this really true? Is there a chance that at age 11 my girls will have no choice but to go to the local State secondary? Can that really happen, that at 11 you have no choice of education even if your parents are willing and able to pay?

Any words of wisdom appreciated.

We're in W London too and in the last couple of years I know children from my own and neighbouring state primaries who've gone to, or got offered places at, the schools you mention; looking at the last two years together, for example, from our primary, children got offered places at Ibstock, Harrodian, LEH, Hampton, Kingston Grammar, both Tiffins, Latymer Upper, Godolphin, St Paul's, Emanuel, Surbiton High, Putney High. Etc, etc.

I don't know anyone who didn't see a tutor for at least some time in Y5 or 6 though.

So long as you tutor to pick up the areas where the state schools don't cover then you stand a perfectly good chance of getting your child into the good independents at 11. We're the other side of london and our state primary has a great record of children moving into Haberdashers, North London Collegiate, City of London and Merchant Taylors amongst others. There are so many private secondaries in london and they all take a good chunk of pupils from state primaries and know what they're looking for in those children.

as one poster says of SPGS that the candidates who get in can be somewhat unbalanced

I really don't think this is true. There are people who favour certain areas of life over others in any school. I don't think it's endemic to St Paul's and I don't think I am less balanced than the average person. I know it was quite a long time ago but all the talk about how nutty Paulinas are was going on when I was there and I never saw any evidence of it. Maybe I just didn't pick the loony ones for friends.

trained and socialised to a life of taking exams

This is simply not true, in the vast majority of cases. Maybe some children were being trained like this but it had nothing to do with the school which was and is at pains to promote the love of learning as an end in itself.

it's been said many times before but it depends on the child - ds1 was at a bog-standard state primary, had no tutoring at all (would have been extremely resistant so would have been counter-productive), sailed through the exams and got offers at both schools he applied to and a scholarship at his first choice

however ... of the current y6 in his old school, only 1 child out of the whole year got an offer at a selective school (highly sought-after grammar), despite several of them trying - and they'd all had tutors

no amount of tutoring is going to turn an average child into outstanding - and the schools these children were trying for are getting increasingly competitive - I'm sure there are plenty of places where they'd have passed with flying colours

So if you have a realistic view of what your child can achieve and then choose school(s) accordingly, they should be fine

I think the problem, also in SW London, is not whether the VERY bright children will get into the schools the OP lists. The problem is that there are many more children who are bright rather than very bright. You don't need many years of stories from friends and neighbours about the stress and trauma trying to get their children into a secondary school, state or private, to decide to opt out of all that and just go private. And fom the OP's post, it seems her children are quite young - she doesn't know if the children will be top of the class, or motivated to study, or what sort of school will be right for them when they are teenagers.

I have to declare my bias here - we are moving DS1 to a prep school in September when he starts Y3 - precisely because we are concerned about the lack of choice for 11+ if he stays in the state primary. Obviously what we think is right for us might not be right for everyone.

Just under half of the Yr 6's went on to private school last year, from my dc state primary. SW London.

Add Portland Place to the less competitive list in West/central london. I think Queens ollege might be slightly easier than the ones OP mentions too.

Also if you are stuck with a 13+ entry alot of the prep schools will take a bright kid for year 7 and 8 and prepare them very sucessfully for common entrance.

Francis Holland is another one

OP,honestly don't worry for now - loads of state kids get into schools and until you know how bright your child is it's pointless to start planning with a particular secondary in mind. Agree with everyone, it's grammar schools that are tough to crack, there's enough private to go round

Also there are many more coed and girls schools than boys schools, so with dds you're in a better position

I asked the head teacher at the private school straight out if my state educated DD would be at a disadvantage compared to the prep school girls. She replied "we would take into account that she had not been prepared for our exam".

Can't say fairer than that really.

Portland Place is run by an ex-teacher of mine. He was the best teacher I have ever encountered bar none so I'd definitely consider that one.

Aubi - was just talking to my next door neighbour, whose girl has just moved from state primary to a competitive private secondary. Its clearly possible, but it was obvious that there was also a lot of hard work involved to get her ready - tutoring, study at home with parents (one a former teacher) etc. However, they did say that their DD was not necessarily naturally academic (although she does have plenty else going for her)

I see it as a high wire act based on parents' nerves....and finances.
At my dc's state primary, parents that can go private do seem to pull children out at 7 from state, because the competition at 7 is less than at 11.
Having said that - half a dozen boys got into Sutton Grammar last year at 11. This year was not so good and in terms of the girls, only one got into the local GDST school(after tutoring). I am not aware of any getting into Tiffin after tutoring.

Of course it is possible to get from a good state primary to a private secondary even in the craziness of West London. Some primary schools do have many children getting their first choices but not all and asking parents with older children how they achieved this is important. The truth is that unless you have a mini Einstein it is unwise to attempt this from a state primary without tutoring during year 5 and 6. The NC does not cover the 11+ common entrance curriculum especially in maths in time for the January exam and the children need to be fast and accurate for the schools that the OP mentions which are after all, some of the top independent secondary schools in the country.

Having said that, having been through this process and seeing all my friends' children (state and private) I think the schools are very good at selecting the 'cleverest' children and there weren't that many surprises but it was the clever but not exceptional children where the difference was clearer and the private school children did get their places and the others were often less successful.

You need to tutor from Y5 regardless of if your child goes to prep or state school.

I have to disagree with Madsometimes. If you tutor a child who attends a private school you are in serious danger of getting them into a school that does not suit them and they will struggle when they get there, unless of course you are planning to provide tutors for all their secondary schooling. This is particularly true of the top academically selective schools.

I went from a state primary to a private selective school in SW London with no tutoring - my parents figured if I got in on my own merits, great, if I didn't, no worries. I remember feeling a little intimidated at first by the fact that I had never learnt any French, Latin, netball or had private music lessons, but I soon caught up (except for at netball...). The entrance exams only tested pretty universal stuff such as English and maths.

DS is now 16 and taking GCSE's but he was only one of 4 who were offered Latymer places out of about 8 or 9 from his state primary who made it to interview. Don't know about now but the interview seemed to be a pretty important part of the process at Latymer and I had the impression they were looking for a particular 'fit' with the school as well as academic ability.

I agree that tutoring might be necessary but only as a way to be prepared for the exam and the style of questions they ask.

If a child is tutored to 'pass' these exams then they will struggle. Choose the right school for your child - state or private. I spoke to a boy in his last year at Latymer Upper a few weeks ago I asked what he thought of it, his response was he wished he had gone to a private boarding school outside of london, he found he spent years doing so much extra work to be as 'smart/keep up' with his peers and he would have much preferred to be at a school where he could have concentrated more on his sports.

Don't forget that private schools also interview scucessful applicants and use this stage to really get to know the pupil not just looking at their exam results.

Both SPGS and G&L regularly accept large numbers of girls from state schools each year (something like 40% of their intake). They do take into account the primary school the candidate is applying from during the admission process. Anyway, the exams and interviews are chiefly geared towards assessing potential rather than measuring what the child has been taught. Therefore, no need to worry needlessly!

As others have said, if children don't pass the exams then it is better for them not to be at a school where they will be unhappy and really struggle. Children develop at different rates, so there's nothing to stop them switching to a more intensely academic school for GCSE or A Level.

As for good state schools in west London.... well, you may need to discover religion. Twyford High School (C of E - Acton) or Cardinal Vaughan (Catholic - Shepherds Bush/ Holland Park) are highly regarded.

Having worked at a senior level involved in admissions at a high achieving private London day school I can tell you that the only thing that will matter is whether your chld fits the profile of pupils the school is looking for i.e. the current school will have no bearing on success or failure other than how well it prepares its pupils.

We are further out and my daughtesr have left (and we did get them into their schools Habs and North London C at 5 or 7) but huge huge numbers of state primary pupils get in at 11. However most children who apply aren't clever enough to get in just like at St Paul's. There are loads of private schools for thick and mediocre children too of course so yes you'd get a place somewhere even if your children have low IQs and even if they have never had any coaching and hadn't studied for the exams or covered the work. But you do need to look at which schools pupils come from and don't generalise about all the schools as some are hard to get into whichever school you go to. Plenty of chidlren go to feeder private schools for London secondaries adn don't pass. If they all passed there would be something wrong with the schools and they'd lose their positions as only having the brightest children.

The issue is not whether an outstanding child will get in. All these school, and indeed most of the others mentioned, want those destined for glittering prizes. But there are plenty of kids out there who would thrive at either Latymer Upper or G&L who are not quite at that level. The trouble is that the numbers applying are higher than the number of places available, so some will be disappointed. This may be worse at Latymer as there are only half the number of places for girls, and they have a prep.

The test is performance on the day and the interview is about 15 minutes. The difference between getting and interview or not, may be a very small number of marks. I think it is worth ensuring that your child is properly prepared, eg is experienced in the different types of questions and is used to working accurately to time. This can be done without a tutor. (The Latymer maths paper is seen as quite tricky.) But if the exam is going to be a struggle, have a go but make sure you are looking at alternatives that might provide a better fit.

With luck the school you like best is the one which your girls are best suited for and this comes over at interview. They are very different schools and will be looking for different things. Having interests outside school and being in a position to contribute to the wider school life helps.

If your girls are likely to be up to standard and going to a local school would be a real advantage, I would be tempted to look at both Latymer Prep and Bute at 8+. Neither are easy to get into at this point so trying does not mean any commitment. The first will definitely improve your chances of getting into Latymer but is not looking to prepare for other schools. Bute has a great track record for both SPGS and G&L and a range of other local schools. Every child we know who has been there and we know quite a few, not all of whom are very academic, seems to have loved it. Aside from those obvious feeder schools I would leave them where they were and focus on making sure they are able at 11+ to show the potential they have.

My DD is by any measure one of the very brightest ones (top AL grades, Oxbridge, prizes, etc) but struggled to get in an academic indi at 11 because she'd spent KSII in a (top drawer) state school. It was the lack of 11+ preparation that did it for her.

I think this is a real shame as the state primary gave a much more rounded education, and did things like taking them up to the equivalent of GCSE level in maths and so on if they wanted to see how far they could go. But this did not seem to fit the 11+ Common Entrance mould, so she was rather written off.

Some of her contemporaries who had stayed on at the prep school she attended got into more 'academic' independent secondary schools, but ultimately did not do as well in terms of getting into top universities.

I don't think she's untypical, and I think the moral of the story is that the 11+ may be a bit useless as a selection mechanism for later academic success. Or a blunt instrument, at any rate. It would be really interesting to do some academic research into this, but you'd never get access to a decent sample, methinks.

Probably the disadvantage of not going to a prep school is that you may not know about the suitability of the senior schools for your child. A prep school head is an expert in steering their children towards the right schools for the individual child. The oenly time things go pear-shaped are when parents have their minds set on a particular senior school and pursue it against advice.

If a child does not get a place in a particular senior school, then it probably wasn't the right senior school for them. No child is written off.

As for the 11+, if a state school pupil takes the English and Maths papers, there is no reason why they shouldn't do well. Science papers are more an indication of the facilities available in their prep/junior schools, so not many senior schools do these papers or attach a lot of weight to them.

The most emphasis is put on their performance in the verbal and non-verbal reasoning tests. The only pre-requesite is a familiarisation with the tests, but you can be taught for them.

I'm not sure about that, Blueberry. I think schools get used to a certain type of package and have difficulty looking beyond it. For example, DD tried for Wycombe Abbey and I reckon would have been very happy there, but they cited the 11+ as the sole reason for her not getting in. That's just daft IMO if the rest of the cohort has been taught to the test and it's clear a girl is very clever and adaptable. She did get into the Perse Girls later on, but decided bullying was just a bit too rampant in the year group she would have been joining, so chose a co-ed boarding school instead, which I have to say worked out well. But the Wycombe Abbey thing has stayed with her as a failure TBH, not that we see it like that at all, but there you go.