Should schools/ teachers advise on suitability for 11+

[PastSellByDate]

Hi I'm bringing a conversation (so I'm not interrupting another thread) over here:

I raised the point on another feed that for many parents, we are highly uncertain of whether their child is or is not 11+ material and worry that taking the 11+ is setting them up for disappointment/ teasing. We do turn to the school for advice and find it frustrating that teachers will not comment.

A teacher 'WellThen' - has written in response:

When I said they're not allowed to get involved in the tests, I meant it. Teachers should not be discussing it with parents and certainly suggesting it.

You also dont seem to consider the fact that maybe the teacher doesnt WANT to mention it to the parents of bright children because

a) It isnt anything to do with them - I dont know any school where teachers get involved in secondary school choices. Hugely inappropriate
b) They dont like grammar schools
c) They may not live in the area and therefore may not actually know much about the schools
d) I dont know how to stress this enough: They are not allowed.

Now I'm not trying to start a parent vs. teacher battle here (and respect that as staff if the HT is saying NEVER talk about this you are in a difficult situation) but what do people think? I'm also saying that this is seeking an opinion not a hard and fast verdict - the teacher could say 'it's borderline' or 'based on their performance I don't think they have the core skills' etc... and a parent can chose to listen or not as they like - but this is about seeking a second opinion from a professional in daily contact with that child, on their child's academic potential.

Should teachers/ schools encourage their best and brightest to sit the 11+ (especially in cities like ours where state grammars are free, as is sitting the exam)?

[I stress - not speaking about preparing for exam/ just about suggesting to a family that this is an option they should be considering for their child].

[Smithlings]

My DDs will be in Year 5 next term and I fully expect the school to offer some advice on potential secondary schools. After all, they've been sending kids to he local schools for years and know more about them than we do. And they must know more about their academic ability - all I have to go on are all the reports saying 'DD has made good progress this year...' I bet every child gets those!

[eddiemairswife]

my area still has a Choice Advisor [introduced by the last government] .I don't know how effective she has been. Most teachers are not familiar with the Admissions process, and some have given misleading or even wrong advice.

[Wellthen]

they've been sending kids to he local schools for years and know more about them than we do

Why do you assume this? We know about their transition arrangements, what some of the staff are like and what kids have gone previously. Children with younger siblings sometimes keep in touch with the school as well. But otherwise we know the same as anyone else from ofsted reports and word of mouth. I wouldn't consider this a proffessional opinion.

[Feenie]

I'm with Wellthen - I can tell you who has the best transition arrangements imo, but that's all; otherwise, it's just word of mouth, same as any parent. Also, stuff changes - what was regarded via gossip as the best school in the area 15 years ago is now in special measures, whereas one I wouldn't have sent my dog to in the past is on the up.

You know as much as we do.

I have had a parent in my class who teaches at a local secondary school come in all guns blazing because her perception was that I had referred to her school in a negative manner - I had commented on transition arrangements in the briefest of terms, but her school was struggling and she was very cross. I was in the clear because that's all I had commented on - but she would have had grounds for a formal complaint had I said any more. It's a minefield.

Yes, I would expect a caring teacher to give sufficient information, in meaningful terms, to Parents to enable them to make the right choices for their child

That really pissed me off. As if a caring teacher can only be one who gives information re grammar schools, fgs.

[LatteLady]

I took my 11+ 45 years ago at a time when everyone did the 11+ and there were 43 children in my class of whom 12 passed. This was back in the time when tutors were unheard of, although we did have 30 min lunchtime lessons three days a week which you could opt in to.

We took the exam in February and during January the HT went to visit every parent at home in the evening to talk to them about how he thought their child might do... my mother was somewhat non-plussed to find him walking up our garden path. He told my mum he was honestly not sure if I would get through... she told him she knew that not everyone could breed a genius and she was quite happy with me!

I did pass but I often think that I was really lucky to have Mr Webster as my Head, a man who cared enough to talk to parents in their own comfort zones whilst setting their expectations.

[Feenie]

Again, it is nothing to do with a 'caring' barometer - we are not allowed to do this.

Not sure why some posters can't understand this, and instead choose to equate this as teachers/Heads being caring/uncaring.

[pickledsiblings]

Feenie, not everyone is aware that you are not allowed, perhaps make that clear before accusing posters of not understanding.

[pickledsiblings]

You are allowed to think it's wrong though. Do you?

[cluttered]

Well I will be forever grateful to the Year 4 and 5 teachers of my DS1 who advised us to consider sending him to a super selective in another borough. I wasn't educated in this country and had no idea there were any London grammars! None of our friends had older DC and I wasn't familiar with the secondary system at all. Even if I had known of the super selective I would have been put off at the open evening when the Head said that the vast majority of children would not gain a place. However the fact that his Y5 teacher had recently said that she really hoped he was going to apply encouraged us and DS1 is thriving there, in the top third of his year for everything. Have the rules changed recently or have teachers always been supposed to refrain from giving such advice?

[Feenie]

Not really, for the reasons I have specified.

If the posters concerned genuinely did have an understanding, then they wouldn't refer to 'caring' teachers giving out this information.

[pickledsiblings]

Yes Feenie but if you were allowed to guide parents in their choice of schools (for the children that YOU teach) then you would be expected to be informed, so your reasons alone don't answer the question. If you would see it as just another job to do and you're glad that you don't have to do it then that's pretty uncaring given the valuable insight that you could contribute.

[GrimmaTheNome]

Private schools seem to manage to give this sort of advice without too much problem. Its part of the education package the parents are paying for. Because its important.

We have plenty of threads with people - quite reasonably - bemoaning the over-representation of children privately educated at primary schools getting grammar school places. The issues aired on this thread are contributors to this. I am not in any way blaming the teachers - its the way the whole system has developed. The state system is letting children down by this gap in joined-up thinking.

[Feenie]

And just how do you suppose I should appraise myself of said choices - over and above any other parent? It's subjective, and very much a parent's call. And one parent's valued choice, for whatever reason, is another parent's living nightmare.

But you can choose to use it as a stick to beat caring/uncaring teachers with if you wish. But you will risk making yourself look like total knob.

[Pyrrah]

I'm sure there are some parents who could gather more information about local schools than you could, but there are many parents who won't have a clue and thus you will know more than them.

Primarily, a teacher will know about the child and how that child performs against their peers and against targets.

If you have a pupil who appears to be really good at science and maths, surely it is a good thing if the teacher suggests to the parent that they might wish to look at the local school that has a specialism in that - especially now that some schools can partially select on that basis.

This is particularly important in areas where a large proportion of parents are unfamiliar with the UK education system or perhaps don't even speak English.

These things are vitally important if people want to narrow the gap between who does and doesn't get desirable places at schools by playing the game.

[GrimmaTheNome]

And just how do you suppose I should appraise myself of said choices

I don't think you should. I think there should be someone within a school (or an area) whose responsibility it is, in the same way that secondary schools have careers/tertiary ed advisers. (I said something like this earlier).

Can I ask something please? Is this prohibition on advice just in relation to GS or to secondaries in general? It strikes me that while this thread was about advice on schools for possible 11+ candidates, there is at least - probably far more - of a necessity for advice for children with SENs. Is that allowed?

[Galena]

But having one person responsible in the school means it is unlikely that person knows about each child in detail.

And children with SNs often have input from people like ed psychs and advisory teachers, who are more able to advise, as they have far more contact with similar children in most of the secondary schools.

[Wellthen]

We appear to have moved from suggesting grammars to advising on secondary schools generally and I think this is where the problem lies. What Feenie and I are trying to get across is that suggesting specific children go to specific schools flies in the face of what primaries and state comprehensives stand for.

I think most primary teachers would baulk at the idea of saying that children are 'definitely St Joseph's material' or 'oh no, the High school isnt for his type'. It happens, definitely from parents and staff but to do it at an official level I think would be wrong. How can you say where a child should go at the age of 11? Is this not the kind of 'life route mapping' that was the whole problem with the triparte system?

Schools will be better or worse in terms of results but state comprehensives SHOULD all offer roughly the same and therefore attract the same children. There certainly are schools that are more sporty, academic, inclusive, but the fact is that actually this shouldnt be the case. At least not at a level to mean that teachers should be pointing children towards schools.

Parents and children should look round, get a feel, think about which friends are going, how far it is etc. If a PARENT is thinking 'my likes maths, this school has good maths scores lets go there' then that is completely different because we can assume the parent has the childs best interests at heart. A teacher knows the child well but they don't love them. Unfortunately teachers are known to use phrases like 'kids like that' or 'well its the X family isnt it, what do you expect?' This is the reason they shold not be allowed to comment. People lable and pigeon hole. The idea of children being described as 'appropriate' for certain schools is exactly what I dislike about the private and grammar system.

I completely disagree that this will narrow the gap. It is already the case that those who can afford tutors get in and those who dont, dont. Being the most informed person on the planet does not buy you a tutor.

Schools giving out FACTUAL information such as 'your child is academically able to have a good shot at the 11+' or 'these are the schools in the area and how you apply for them. Some have exams or requirements which you need to look into' I think is fine. Telling people where to send their kid is wrong.

[Wellthen]

Grimma - yes, Feenie is talking specifically about Grammars. We are obviously allowed to talk about other secondaries but as Feenie says, most dont as they are simply not qualified.

For children with SEN however the situation is quite different. In my LA at least, the transition process begins in Year 5 and the parents are very well informed about which schools (specials included) would offer the best for their child.

I am not completely opposed to the idea of a unbiased kind of 'careers' advisor giving out info and agree it would very useful for parents new to the area or those who just feel out of their depth. But I think they need to work in facts only and actually, not knowing the child would be preferable.

[GrimmaTheNome]

flies in the face of what primaries and state comprehensives stand for.

But the OP wasn't talking about comprehensives.... if you're in an area with a significant number of GSs then - for better or worse - the other schools are not properly comprehensive. The situation she describes is that some kids who would probably benefit from the GS are by default going to what is in effect a secondary modern. Is that really right?


teachers are allowed to talk about other secondaries but not GSs... - this makes no sense at all, they are all part of the state system. Whether they fit in with political/educational ideology or not.

Schools giving out FACTUAL information such as 'your child is academically able to have a good shot at the 11+' or 'these are the schools in the area and how you apply for them. Some have exams or requirements which you need to look into' I think is fine. Telling people where to send their kid is wrong.

yes, absolutely.

[PastSellByDate]

Feenie/ WellThen:

I think you raise some really important points and I personally hadn't realised your predicament in terms of advising on schools (Guessing your London? I'm in a large city in the Midlands with State Grammars) - especially in terms of other schools taking offence/ reacting negatively to it.

Now my question is this:

Our state primary is having whole day visits (often more than one) to local secondary comprehensive schools (sports days/ arts days/ see what it's like to be Y7 student days etc...) as field trips during school day for entire class to attend.

For grammar schools - they put up a poster regarding open evenings & exam sign up information with hand written come talk to Mr. X or Mrs. Y about this. When parents do they say they don't (can't or won't - not sure) talk about it, but provide flyer.

That is what leads me to question what is going on (after all here at least grammars are part of state system and also offer free education to pupils but entry is selective by performance on exam).

I do understand Feenie/ WellThen the whole caring/ uncaring thing was upsetting - and unfair - I'm more interested in equality of information.

Why is it o.k. for a school lay on visit, information packs, freebies (rubbers, bracelets, pencils, etc...) from local comprehensives but do nothing with grammars. Now of course it could be that local comprehensives realise they have to attract students (reputations are not good - typically 40% achieve A-C at GCSE so parents are wary generally) but why support communicating information on one type of school and not all?

[Feenie]

Taster days/sessions/free rubbers are entirely down to the secondaries/grammar schools concerned, ime - some make an effort with primary schools and some don't bother.

[spanieleyes]

Because, certainly in my area, the grammar schools don't have to and the other schools do. We have one grammar for each sex and 6 other secondary schools that the children can go to, each grammar school has an open evening and the secondary schools all lay on taster days, open evenings, visits to schools, the lot! These are arranged by the secondary schools and, in our case, the grammar schools do sod all!

[Elibean]

Excellent point.

Why don't the grammar schools invite more discussion/visits? Shouldn't it be up to them to disseminate information to primary school children and their parents?

The comps seem to work pretty hard around here (London) to attract students, and make transitions smooth. I don't see why there shouldn't be equality from secondary down, as opposed to primary up.

[Elibean]

I mean, I know they don't have to - but they damn well should. In the interests of equality.

[spanieleyes]

Grammar schools aren't equal!