Any early signs that a child will be capable of passing 11+?

[NumptyNu]

Potentially a question for teachers really, but feel free to chip in mums and dads with any useful info and experiences. My question is, does it follow that if your child is doing well in year one or two, that you can extrapolate out a few years and assume they will be 11+ candidate? Or vice versa, would a slow reader at age 5 result in a lower potential for passing the 11+?

Is this a classic case of primary schooling being a marathon rather than a sprint? Or is there a clear correlation between bright kids at age 6 going on to 11+ success?

Well educated parents?

Parents who can afford tutoring.

That's an irritating response. I passed and so did both my siblings. I was not aware of anyone in the grammar school we went to who had been tutored.

Thinking this myself, Numpty. We have one GS in the borough, a super selective. DS is only just coming up three so many years off but I do wonder how we'll know if it's worth him preparing for 11+. I guess the teachers may have some input?

That was indeed the case years ago, lorne, but things have changed (for the worse).

Many grammar schools are currently trying to design tests that don't favour children who have been tutored, although it's not easy to level the playing field.

I don't know the answer to passing-11+ specifically but I remember seeing figures showing that there wasn't a huge correlation between prowess of early reading and SAT scores later on.

Thanks Fish - I think you understood my question. Thanks everyone else to, although I was thinking more about the correlation between the child's natural ability in the early stages and their capacity at age 10/11.

Yes to the educated parents and yes to tutoring, although i really do hope that a test is devised that evens to playing field and can discover the potential of any child from whatever background.

I'm not sure you can really tell in year one or two to be honest, there are 7 of us in my immediate family who have taken the 11+ and its not always been the ones who were bright in KS1 that have passed.

my baby sister and DS both took 11+ this year, baby sister was much much smarter than DS up to about the end of year 4 when DS suddenly caught up but baby sister didn't pass and DS has passed by quite a lot.

In previous years my middle sister, who is in sixth form now, was fairly average til the end of year 2, and middle brother who is in year 10 had always been top of his class, both passed. I didn't really get reading until late (I was still getting books out the reception classroom at the end of year 2, it suddenly clicked for me in year 3) and I got into super-selective. Baby brother is in year 7, he could read and write very well before he started school and was top of his class for everything and big bro got offered a scholarship age 7 and was exceptionally bright but both failed their 11+

None of us were tutored and the only friends we've had who were really struggled once they got into the grammar (which is why I didn't tutor DS) for what its worth the headmaster of Dbro's school/the grammar I'm hoping DS will go to actually discourages tutoring, as do the teachers at Dsis' school, they suggest doing some practice papers to get used to the style of the test but say that if you have to tutor your child to get them in then it is not the right place for them.

I think you have to wait until year 4 (ish) until you get a more reliable indication of ability for 11+. The system will have changed by then, but chances are a successful 11+ candidate will be a year or so ahead of the average attainment levels for their year.

That said, I recall reading a Sutton Trust report referring to research that showed the "educational divide" between high and low attainers started as early as 22 months - i.e. high correlation between educated, motivated parents, wealth, aspiration even before schooling.

Most of all, don't get caught up in the school gate gossip and competition. Some kids might be tutored for years and not get in or, even worse, get in and not be able to keep up.

i would listen to teachers but 30 years ago my brother had a tutor to get into grammar school so its not new.

I wouldnt write any child off before a certain time, they may start to fly in year before exam.

however I am sure you can tell the dc whose brains are working quickly and easily on subjects...from year 1 and 2.

My dd started to fly in year one, and before that her progress compared to her peers was slower.

But whilst I always read to her, exposed to book and so on, I didn't school her from early years like some peers. I heard them saying at 3
" at least he holds the pen properly now" and I remembered going home and once again trying to train her to hold the pen but she didn't get it.

Some peers parents had them knowing numbers, alphabet, writing name before nursery.

So you would have said comparing her with them, she wasnt 11+ material, but now, she is storming ahead.

Her writing is beautiful, quick at Maths, amazing reader, vocab brilliant, natural aptitude for spelling, we don't even do her spellings properly at HW because once she sees a word she seems to remember how to spell it.

So NOW I would say, so far ( as long as her enthusiasm keeps up) she is 11+ material.

So those that are showing no signs before exam wouldn't write off, but certainly ones like DD who have clicked now, I would say have a good chance at it.

Well the standard mn resonpse must surely be "I knew the monent they came out of me and started reading the signs on the wall..."

We're not in a grammar school area, however my dc (year 9, 6 and 3) are all top sets.

They all talked well and early, which is a good start, but by no means a guarentee. They all were reading some stuff by 2yo, again could be taken as a sign, but I think all it showed was they wanted to learn, which probably helps.
But I would say either of these things mean that they necessarily would be ahead of the crowd at 11. I would have thought if your dc has been consistantly at the top end of their form (say top tables) from say year 2 onwards, it's probably a good guess they'll have a good chance, unless the teacher is saying (as happens sometimes) actually this is a poor group and she won't.

My dm tutored for the 11+ over 30 years ago, so it isn't a new thing. However I think it's a new thing for it to be so intense. She tended to take 2 categories.

1. Those who were borderline
2. Those who were going for assisted places at private so needed to do well not just pass

She never was asked to take a child before they were in year 5, I don't think she ever had a child for as much as a year, and the exams were February. Typically they started at the beginning of year 6 and had 30-45 minutes a week.

Now I think it's more common for them to have tutoring, plus they're starting younger and younger (dm only does A-level now so I don't know from her point of view)

neither not either!

Well said Bramwell. I think realistically end of year 3 is a good time to start thinking about it. That's when ds's teacher suggested it to us ( he has just passed 40 points above pass mark :)). Ds was average or below until mid year 2 (aged 6) then something seemed to click for him and he has been doing very well ever since.

I think being April born and male he just wasn't ready to learn before then. Having said that he did speak early and well.

They all talked well and early, which is a good start, but by no means a guarentee. They all were reading some stuff by 2yo, again could be taken as a sign, but I think all it showed was they wanted to learn, which probably helps.

No neither talked early or read early in our case. Mine have overtaken the early talkers and readers, except one child who is genuinely G and T.

actually this is a poor group and she won't
V good point.

and hopefully you can even have this convo with teacher

I disagree with most here. I could absolutely tell who was likely to go to the grammar schools in my DD's class, definitely by year 2. The parents always talked about thier goals! We have about 30% at grammar schools here so not super selecive, but anyone struggling with reading in year 1 definitely did not go. The tests do not really spot potential.

One of the reasons for children not getting a grammar school place is that their understanding and processing of the questions is too slow. Often slow readers can be slow at decoding and they just do not get through the questions fast enough and therefore these children do not finish the papers or they rush the answers, which turn out to be wrong. I have seen very few children suddenly put on a big enough reading spurt to go from only 1 year above chronological age to 4 above just before the exam.

It is not just reading age of course, but processing instructions, figuring out the answers and having wide ranging general knowledge and intellect all help. Here we have plenty of chidren at level 5a (from poorer areas) who never get near a grammar school, but other children get a place on 4a. The 5a children have been well taught in school but the 11+ is different to SATS and their exam technique, opportunities outside the classroom, general knowledge and ability to practice the tests all count against them. Tutoring and parental input giving other learning opportunities make a huge difference, even to 4a children. Our grammar schools do have some middle attainers.

I think you may get more of an idea in year 4, but my DD was 4 years above expected reading age by that time and was a child who was intereested in everything and a very retentive memory. She was not tutored at all but she did an exam familiaristion course about timing the exam, leaving out tricky questions and going back to them and making sure she worked quickly yet methodically. Late spurts without general knowledge and examtechnique willnot be much help I thik.

I don't think there is much of a relation between how they are doing in KS1 and the 11+ to be honest.

Both my DDs have passed and on both occasions there were a fair few so called high flyers, who had always graced the top tables and did not pass. DD1 never made it to top table at primary but is now top set at a GS.

As an ex-teacher, and with two DS's at Grammar School, I would say look at their problem solving ability - e.g. in maths. The ability to problem solve and work things out for themselves is a huge part of Verbal and Non-Verbal reasoning. Attitude is another big part - both of mine are voracious readers, and the knowledge and vocabulary they pick up from this is vital.

In answer, I think you can spot some very young (DS2's reception teacher said as much to me when looking at some problem solving at his second parents' evening), but many will catch up later. DS2 did get in only dropping three marks, but others did as well as him who were not showing the potential so early - they caught up.

In a way yes, I think you can. DS was always running out the classroom n the middle of lessons to sneak into the school library and was almost always top of the class. He was the first to learn to read in his year group and had been an early developer as a child. Teachers always said that although he was a quite disobedient, he was clever. He could find ways to climb every tree in the playground and make sure he got the best instrument in music class (He used to hide the thumb piano every week when he was four).

He took the 11+ and he passed.

But I don't think this is the case with every child. DS had a best friend who was never as bright as DS in primary school and was better at less academic things. But when he took the 11+, he got a higher score than DS, even though DS always got higher than him in class. Now they are at equal levels. Sometimes children just take longer to develop than others but can be just as bright.

Here we have plenty of chidren at level 5a (from poorer areas) who never get near a grammar school, but other children get a place on 4a. The 5a children have been well taught in school but the 11+ is different to SATS and their exam technique, opportunities outside the classroom, general knowledge and ability to practice the tests all count against them. Tutoring and parental input giving other learning opportunities make a huge difference, even to 4a children.

Thats really sad and annoying.

Schools should be helping children with G potential!Education is their business after all they should be helping and directing them.

My DSs couldn't read or write a word before starting school as neither of them showed any inclination to learn. As far as very early potential there was none to show. They weren't just slow readers at 5 - they couldn't read at all.

DS1 did better than average in his KS2 SATS but probably wouldn't have been grammar school material. DS2 is in Yr 6 now and predicted level 6 in his KS2 SATs and would almost certainly have no trouble passing the 11+ if we had it around here. I think he was beginning to show potential by Yr 2 so when he was 7 (September born so old for his year).

I think children develop at different rates and whilst some who show early promise might still be ahead at 11 there will be others who were the opposite and showed no promise at 5 or 6 but blossom in later years.

I thin you can ask the question of the teacher but I am not sure they will necessarily be able to give you a meaningful answer at this stage. I am sure for some children you can spot the potential and know that is is going to be sustained as far as 11 and beyond but not for all children.

She was not tutored at all but she did an exam familiaristion course about timing the exam, leaving out tricky questions and going back to them and making sure she worked quickly yet methodically
with such fierce white hot competition this sort of training is key.

I would say look at their problem solving ability - e.g. in maths. The ability to problem solve and work things out for themselves is a huge part of Verbal and Non-Verbal reasoning.

This is probably a good indicator because your born with that sort of brain or your not, you can train and work at it, but if your break easily computes this sort of thing you are going to have a huge advantage on person whose brain does not understand that sort of thinking, like mine!

I would never ever have been 11+ material because my brain will not compute those problems.

Being 11_ material and passing are two differnet things though

I thin you can ask the question of the teacher but I am not sure they will necessarily be able to give you a meaningful answer at this stage.

Unfortunatly we see many threads on here where the teachers or school are very discouraging of the 11+ and are not keen to even discuss it.

if a pupil is showing talent its the teacher in the first place who should by law be raising it. not squashing it due to political beliefs. THEN state school and poorer pupils will have more of a chance to actually get it.

its no wonder they are falling at the gate.