Average ability kids at grammar schools.

[manicstreetpreacher]

Hey all! Please be gentle as this is my first post after many months of lurking.

Just wondered what everyone thinks of this really. I don't wish to sound unkind in any way so please bear with me.

My dd failed her 11 plus by 10 points despite being the cleverest girl in her class (sorry, not crowing - there's nothing worse than mothers who do that on a regular basis). She was at 5a in all her Mock SATs (don't get the true ones back till next week) yet just couldn't get to grips with the 11 plus thing. She did a few practice papers and just couldn't grasp it. A tutor was out of the question as we simply didn't, and still don't, have the money to fund it.

Having looked around the alternative school and being impressed with it she has stated that she was more than happy to go there. So I didn't appeal - to be honest, I don't think I would have stood a chance anyway as she didn't just fail by one or two points!

So I would be interested to see what people think of this as I know for a fact that kids of a lesser ability have gotten places at the grammars. My dd said that there are a couple in her class who really struggle with their maths but are going to the grammars and she said to me 'surely they're not going to be able to cope?' Which got me thinking about the unfairness of the system.

Do the grammars expect you to be at least at a level 5 for stuff? If that's the case then what is the point of the 11 plus?

And no, I'm not bitter and twisted that my dd hasn't made it in. That's life. I wasn't prepared to shove practice papers at her day and night to ensure she got in. The poor things get little enough time to be kids as it is and I'm quite sure she'll do well at the non selective academy she is looking forward to starting in September.

Thoughts please?

Thanks.

First off I am sure you'll DD will do very well, you sound very involved and caring.

Secondly, define ability? SATS measure attainment at 11 not innate ability although most seem to see it like that.

Also, can ability not develop over time and how can you be certain that those who have gained places are less able than your DD?

Lastly, no point in wasting energy worrying about it.

In a nutshell, you have detailed why selection via one exam on one day, aged 10 or 11 is a pretty poor method of differentiating truly academically able DC from those whose talents lie marginally differently or even elsewhere.

I went to a GS and there were girls in my year who left at 16 with 4 odd 'O' levels. They should never have been there. And we had several girls come into our 6th form from a particular girls SM who'd attained the necessary 7 'O' levels (in 'proper' subjects) to be allowed to do 'A' levels at the GS.

Madness.

It depends on the school - at dd's grammar there's been no one below 5 for the last few years.

agree with Litten

Just to add it might be you may have grounds for appeal if you changed your mind? If not to late may be worth at least investigating.

I personally think it's a bit of a myth huge amounts of children struggle at Grammars - ours used to stream on entry anyway.

I think these days you have to tutor sadly.

Manic, I totally agree with you, my DD2 also failed, by 6 points, yet there are quite a few children in her class, who are off to the grammars and she knows she is cleverer than they are. Kids know who the cleverest ones in the class are. She is also probably going to achieve all level 5s in the SATS.
We did pay for a tutor, but we didn't push it down her throat like I know other parents did, so she is following her big brother to a comprehensive in the next county, as the secondaries around here are woeful. So she has a 30 minute bus ride to school, as opposed to walking 5 mins up the road, where the grammar is.

It really depends on the grammar school. There are some grammar schools where no child that isn't already level 5 gets a place, and others which have quite a significant percentage of level 4s amongst their intake. You can check the entry levels of your local school's intake in the 2011 GCSE results tables. I am sure the schools tailor what they provide to the abilities of their intake, unless they get a pupil who really is way behind the rest.

Depends on the format of the 11 plus exams.

Some are designed to test the child's innate intelligence and ability rather than knowledge.

I think it depends more on how selective the selective school is.

Tiffin/Wilson thread on Secondary makes lots of interesting points about this topic.

Thanks for all your replies. And for being so kind. I take the point of testing innate intelligence rather than ability but even so it doesn't really seem fair.

As long as she's happy that's all I'm bothered about - I just wondered what other's views on the system were.

Thanks again. x

It sounds like your comp is a good one and your girl is enthusiastic - that alone will carry her far.

With the Grammar some children who were near-misses may have,at appeal, disclosed a medical condition or other factor that affected their preformance on the day. One girl at our school scored quite far below and was accepted as she had a terrible exma outbreak at the time of the test.

For those who other children think in class are not so bright but then get better results in the 11+ it could be that the successful children are actually brighter than the non-succesful ones, or that they have acquired faster/more accurate exam technique, whilst children often think they know who is the cleverest in the class they may not be basing thier views on the same criteria the 11+ tests.

One point stands out form your post - and I accept I will probably be flammed for saying this (again!) - but you say your girl couldn't get to grips with the 11+ - was that with the layout and wording of past papers ? I only ask because sometimes children are very capable but need tuition in hoe to approach and pass exams, really there is a nack to showing what you know in order to get the maximum marks you can. If she has exam technique difficulties in the future it might be worth getting a teacher to show her how to get her knowledge on the paper.

I think these days there are probably more children at grammars who have taken the place of others more able due to the amount of tutoring that goes on. Even back in history when I went, there were girls leaving having not passed any O levels at all simply because selection at 10 or 11 is rubbish. I know the %s are very high, but the fact that few grammars get 100% 5x A-C at GCSE proves there are children in most grammar schools who by rights should not have been there.

Grammars don't test for industriousness & tenacity which may also play a part in A star GCSE grades. Perhaps they should interview?

I personally believe (I'm a non-selective teacher in a grammar area) that it is best to be 'top' at a non-selective than 'average' at a grammar, for self esteem purposes. Non-selectives stream and set students based on ability, so your DD would be with those of a similar ability.

@Rosemary and Thyme. I wouldn't 'flame' you at all. In fact I think you have hit the nail on the head. Ask my dd to explain something longwinded and mickey mouse then she'll do it no problem - give her an 11 plus paper which you think would be easy as pie to her and it isn't.

Sadly, we can't all afford to tutor. And as I said earlier I didn't want to push it down her throat 24/7 although admittedly I could have done a bit more I guess.

You've got me wondering if she will struggle with future exams now though, think I may raise that concern with a professional so thanks. x

A few points:

DS is at a superselective grammar. He got a 3A in writing in his year 6 SATs although he did have level 5 in everything else. He was not tutored for the eleven plus. The SATs measure an entirely different thing to the eleven plus. We put him for the eleven plus on the advice of his teacher. He is predicted an A in English language and literature at GCSE, but his inability to write at length (which is the issue - he didn't have a problem with grammar, spelling, punctuation or meaning) did make it difficult for him to write History essays in year 7.

The eleven plus is not a test of innate ability, aptitude or intelligence. The creators of most of the eleven plus tests, GL assessment, make it clear on their website that it is not a test of innate aptitude and that it would be impossible to create such a test. It must be obvious to anyone that any child who has been exposed to a large and accurately used vocabulary, and has been taught to understand word roots is likely to do well in a verbal reasoning test. Primary schools don't seem to teach much about word roots, so an otherwise intelligent child will not be able to work out the meaning of 'edict' from knowing dictionary because they have never been taught what 'dict' means.

There is research into how children who are the least able within the grammar school intake get on. They are actually the group who most benefit from the existence of grammar schools. Children who are very able tend to do almost as well in a comprehensive school area as a grammar school area. Children who are the least able within a grammar school make much more progress than children who had the same ability at 11 in comprehensive areas and in secondary moderns in grammar areas. Why that happens is speculation - it may because they are pulled up by the presence of the more able children. It may be because the teachers have more time for the less able which they wouldn't have in a comprehensive because the grammar school less able would be seen as reasonably able in the comprehensive and the teacher would focus on the children who were really struggling. It may be that the ethos and expectations of the school have more of an impact on those children.

You have to be shown how to do the verbal and non-verbal reasoning questions, and then build up speed by practising papers.

The maths is not all covered at state primaries.

It's a shame you didn't look at the 11 plus forum online as that has FREE tuition and videos to teach kids how to answer the questions (so that money doesn't advantage some children with tutoring)

My friends daughter is not long out of a good grammar and she told me there is a large number of girls with eating disorders. She thinks that a number of these girls have been pushed to get into the school and constantly struggle to keep up. Not sure how accurate the correlation is, but certainly something to consider.

It is very difficult where the choice of secondary schools is poor as you naturally want the best for yoru child.

I don't know much about 11+. However someone I know her dd didn't pass the 11+ despite her dd went to private school and with extra tuitions. But then she kept watching out for a second chance for her dd for the 12+. As it happened someone left the gs so her dd took the 12+ test and got in and started gs in year 8. So if gs is what your dd really want then perhaps make some enquiry with the gs to see if there can be a second chance. Or try again for A levels. One of my relatives did not pass 11+ but went to gs by appeal. He was the very bottom of his class from the start but with his A levels ended up with two As and one B .

It's not fair sadly :-(
Its a system, a game if you like, you have to play it to win (tutors or home tutor)
If you don't do this they are doomed to failure, dissapointment, resentment.....sadly you disadvantage them by taking the higher moral ground.

It is not what grammers were about, but it is now:-(

Btw they often have 11 plus tutoring from 5 here!!!