Preps suppressing performance to retain students in early years?

[GoodbyeToAllOfThat]

My son recently sat the 9+ at a pretty well-known selective school. I was surprised that he wasn't asked back for an interview, mostly because he's had pretty high INCAS (from 127 - 138) scores and does very well at school, but it was a super-tough year and I didn't think much about it.

Later, I had lunch with some friends whose son sat the same exam (at the same school as my son) and they told me that they were shocked that their son hadn't been asked for an interview because he's at the top of his class etc yada yada and they told me they had asked for feedback - he wasn't even close. They told him that our kids' school was well-known for not stretching the kids in the early years so as to prevent defection prior to the 11+.

So, I asked the school for my son's scores and they were shockingly low, like 25% in areas they were looking for 75%.

Then a second friend whose son sat the exam in year 3 told me that this same school told her the same thing - that the school was known for this tactic.

Is this normal?

Obviously I feel pretty aggrieved by this development, and what's even more vexing is that you can't really address this kind of crap at your kids' school because eventually you need the head to back your kid when the 11+ comes.

Any insight would be much appreciated.

Tbh it sounds pretty unlikely . Dc prep (non selective) would still wheedle out those who would struggle with 11+/13+ entry. More likely is that the existing children are being taught different skills to NC and extended. If the school are looking for current ability rather than potential (which for 9+ seems likely as their opportunity to add value is more time limited) then external candidates could easily fall short.

Thanks Liz for your response, what is NC?

National curriculum

Ah.

My son is also at a non-selective prep that is actually selective by stealth (gradual weeding). I can't understand how the skills brought to bear in the 11+ (and it's forebears) aren't consistent with general prep skills, though.

What did the 9+ test involve? Was it just English and maths or was there VR and NR involved? If it's that he didn't know the English and maths content expected then that might indicate a problem with the prep but if it's just that he wasn't familiar with the types of questions I don't think that is their problem. Mostly they are set up to get children through 11+ and 13+, so that's the point at which more thorough practice on papers tends to happen. If they are deliberately not teaching English and maths contebt, that would be different. But it would be totally nuts because it's bound to have a follow on effect on their 11+/CE results.

It was English, Maths and NVR. His English score was particularly bad.

I realize this sounds nuts and it's not a theory I jumped into bed with immediately, but it's hard to ignore a crazy comment when you hear it twice, from two different sources, at two different times.

I also have a 12 year old at the same school and with hindsight, it seems like they kick into high gear in year 5.

I've worked in prep schools and can say that this categorically hasn't happened anywhere I've worked.

We have worked on the 'long game' which is preparing children for common entrance into the senior school of their choice. Common entrance is a different kettle of fish to 7,8,9 and 11+.

Put simply, we don't prepare children for other exams. Year 5/6 is when the 'prep' begins. Before that is all about building solid foundations.

Did you do any bond books or anything prior to the test? They are always a good idea :-)

I assume your son is at a school that goes up to 13? It's best to judge a prep school by looking at its results at 13+, if those aren't up to scratch either then you have a problem.

You'll find that content does vary too, for example kids in yr2 wanting to do the 7+ would have to know about divison, in some depth. In my school we didn't look at division past grouping until the end of the year. At a school that preps for the 7+ exams they would be looking closely at all the entrance exams, working out the knowledge needed and adapting their curriculum to suit.

The same would apply for English, they wouldn't necessarily be doing loads of written comprehension exercises, maybe a few a term. In a school prepping for the exams, they might do one a week.

I hope that all makes sense :-)

Hi Working, thanks for your post - I've been away. I'm reassured that you don't think this is the case. The head has become a bit mercenary as of late, and it makes me question the ethos of the school.

He did quite a few bond papers, between my husband and I we can cover NVR and maths very well (English is tricky for obvious reasons).

The school does well in the 11/13+ (they send about a third of the boys to "super"selectives) but it seems that the most successful kids have the most pushy parents. This is not reassuring when you're fed a steady diet of "don't tutor, leave it to us".