Is it unreasonable to think the seven plus exam is a scam?

[londinium6473]

Apparently you’re not meant to tutor for the exams? But reading some of the questions , I see no way a child could answer some of them without tutoring? (Eg how would a seven year old know what an alliteration is)
seems more like a test of which parents have money to spend on tutoring their child,on top of private school fees, rather than a test of general intelligence.
some parents I know are tutoring from Reception

Although in principle I agree with you, alliteration is taught in Year 1 in state schools!

You're not wrong but in a way it tests what they are looking for - parents who are committed to their child succeeding academically and are willing to both pay and put the time and effort into ensuring that success. Private schools can't survive on gifted pupils whose parents aren't invested.

It’s not a “scam” though is it. Yes tutoring has raised the bar to a silly height for kids this age, yes lots of people do it, and those not doing are at a disadvantage. But that’s not a scam is it? Because the kids who come through it and win places are generally pretty bright. So are plenty who don’t. It’s an imperfect tool
for testing young kids, but that’s not a scam.

It’s not a scam it’s selection.

My Y1 knows all about alliteration.

But yes if I wanted DD to take it I would tutor. If you are going to spend money on fees you will spend money on tutoring - you have to be sharp elbowed if you want to maximise impact.

We won’t be going private but if I wanted a scholarship and bursary I’d be making sure DD got top results. That’s what her father’s parents did almost 50 years ago, it’s not new.

The scam part being told you’re not meant to tutor, but in fact everyone has been tutoring since reception . So those who follow the guidelines stand no chance. Why not just be upfront about the tutoring

Who says you’re not meant to tutor? I hear that a lot for 4+, but never (from school or parents) for 7+.

Generally agree, but my DS is 3-ish and knows all about alliteration

Every 7+ school I'm aware of claims that it's not necessary to tutor for their assessments and that they prefer untutored children. Bute House, for example, state (in response to the question Should I get a tutor if my daughter is behind/in a state school/at school in another country?):

If your daughter cannot speak, read or write English fluently at an age appropriate level, a language tutor to help her to achieve this may be helpful. Otherwise, we discourage tutoring as we look for academic potential on our assessment days and are interested in a child’s natural aptitude and curiosity.

And it's claimed that Bute ask parents (and the girls) to declare if they are tutored.

Strictly speaking, I'm sure the schools are telling the truth. There do exist some children who can gain places without tutoring and schools would prefer to assess untutored children. However, they know full well that many, perhap most, parents will tutor and lie about it. But that London selective school admissions is an arms race is such common knowledge that I don't regard the situation as a scam in the sense of fraud, more blatant hypocrisy.

How?

Because kids are inquisitive about different things and some like words and letters and will therefore ask questions that lead to them knowing what alliteration is.

This is the answer.

Well, the whole selective private sector is a scam, if you want to look at it like that. They cherry pick the brightest students from supportive families to ensure they achieve top results with minimal effort on their part. Yet, because of the great results, people see private education as the 'best' option. The private sector is a business and is therefore run as such. In order to encourage more people to pay for it, they have to ensure they achieve the top results. The easiest way to do this is to be very selective about who they let in.

I have no personal experience of the 7+ so do not know what the advice is regarding tutoring. I have not seen an exam paper for the 7+, but based on what you've said I would assume it's a case that a naturally able child would likely be able to pass without tutoring. A more average child would probably need tutoring to get there. The example you give is not the best to be honest, as they are taught about alliteration in KS1. So to answer your question "how would a seven year old know what an alliteration is?", they are taught it in school before they sit the 7+ 🤷🏻‍♀️

This is exactly what the exam does though, it wheedles out the average children to ensure they only offer places to the elite, or those whose parents are prepared to pay tutors to boost their child's attainment. As I said, when you look at it like that it is a scam in a way. Not in the way you are suggesting though.

Loads of state school kids know this FFS.

I don’t think it’s a scam but it’s also not a test of a child’s potential…..7 is far too young to determine that, and most are heavily tutored for the exam anyway. But as others have said, it tests what some schools are looking for. Personally I wouldn’t put a 7 year old through it or send a young child to an institution that places such strong emphasis on academics at that age - sounds joyless and uninspiring.

That was precisely my point.

Really? Because I have 3 dc and they were never taught alliteration in state school.....first two are in secondary now and third currently in year 1 at the state school my older two went to.

It is the same for 11+ I find it so ODD! They even have head of admissions from the school telling parents at the talks not to tutor for it. Seriously it is a joke. Some of the math on there is so difficult it took several adults until we solved on of the questions! Some of the topics were not taught in state school until after the exams finished.

We were going to send our dd to do the 11+ w no tutoring until a family member who has her dd at Bute convinced me otherwise. They explained everyone tutors for this. Either hire someone or the parents tutor. A child will not know this stuff on their own.

Same goes for 7+, as I know someone who just went through it. The dc that got into St Paul's, Kings and Westminster were tutored like crazy.

And some dc continue tutoring once in the schools. My dc don't, but tell me about classmates that do.

Really? In year 1? Mine never mentioned alliteration and same with my third who is currently in year 1. The school did not go over literary devices until the later years. And just because some kids are taught alliteration in year 1, does not mean they cover everything that you need to know in year 1 in time for the 7+ exams. We never did them, but know someone who did and children were prepping like crazy. The topics being covered went way beyond year 1....such as division, fractions and percentages.

Perhaps some state schools teach this in year 1. Ours did not. But in any case, it does not really matter as kids catch up in the end whenever they are taught. My older two ended up getting into top academic secondaries via the 11+ and were taught a lot of this stuff towards the end of primary.

Yes SamPoodle123, really.

Whilst the awful alliteration angst (see what I did there) isn't really the point of this thread, I just want to say that Year 1 love learning this. Even the lower ability children enjoy thinking of an example - and often come up with some stunning examples, verbally.

Poor little rich kids. YANBU, but the real scandal isn't that wealthy parents can find yet more ways of splurging money to give their kids a leg-up, but all those wasted childhood hours spent being tutored and doing practice exams rather than running around, playing and having fun.

The amount that some people pay to stress their children out always bemuses me.

It's even worse than that...The 7+ exams are held in the autumn term of Year 2, so most of the kids will still only be 6. And will have been 5 at the start of tutoring if they start a year ahead (which is common for the super selectives).

Some schools do. In fact, a friend’s child was asked in the first round whether she had been tutored or not. We were also advised by two schools not to tutor our children.