Dyslexic DS - any chance of passing grammar school exams?

[NQWWW]

Hi, my DS is dyslexic but bright (IQ was on the 99th centile when he had his dyslexia assessment), does anyone have any experience of a child like him managing to get through the grammar school tests? His spelling is pretty awful and the VR tests are very hard for him. I'm hoping they'll give him extra time in the exam, and have sent them a copy of his dyslexia assessment, but suspect it won't help much given his problem with spelling.

we are in kent so one exam dd didn't want to do it.

why is grammar school so important?

Selective schools who are only interested in written tests are signalling that they can only cope with 'normal' people

That's a pretty sweeping statement and completely wrong for my DS's school. It's a grammar that relies entirely on three multiple choice tests, i.e. Maths, English, VR, and has no form of interview or anything else to determine who is offered a place.

As a result, there is a relatively high proportion of SEN kids, I obviously don't know what diagnoses these have as my information is second hand from my son and from the school website, open-days, etc. In my son's form of 28, 7 of them are SEN who have different lessons/teachers in the SEN classrooms, 1 of whom has all his lessons there and just joins his form for registration and games/PE, the others have some lessons with the form and others in the SEN rooms.

My son tells me some of these have behavioural issues, including light violence, uncontrollable shouting/swearing, etc. Others clearly have autism. All presumably got a place because they are high functioning despite their special needs!

But the main thing to note is that the school supports them, even though it's a top grammar school, and they aren't either left to slide or "encouraged to leave".

It might be better to not worry about getting into a grammar school if he would struggle so much to pass the test. Although there will be fewer high achieving children in a secondary modern there will be some children who have had a bad day, parents did not push them, family going through a bad patch etc etc and so did not perform to their potential

Secondary modern schools may have a good practical departments e.g. dt, art which might give him a more fulfilling life rather than making him feel he must always struggle to try and be academic.

Basically your ds is being failed by the grammar system. I suggest you make a fuss locally so people realise how bad the system is for the majority of dc

eyebrowse, I disagree. The tests are just tests, and to some extent they are a test of how fast you work. Some dyslexic kids may do well enough to pass, but if your processing speeds are very slow you are likely to struggle. Our experience has been that dyslexic DD has done far better at school than any aptitude test has ever suggested. Her GCSE and AS results and A level predections are far better than the Tiffin average, yet she was placed 800th on the Tiffin wait list. Ditto her CAT scores were sufficiently bad that her Prep School Head, who apparently did not believe in dyslexia, took your view and suggested she did not apply for selective secondaries.

She has had the same experience with the medical school aptitude test where she did not get a great result, but was lucky to be accepted by two places where the tests are not used much in selection.

If a bright dyslexic gets through a grammar school test they have done very well indeed and should be fine in the classroom. My advice would be to practice, practice, practice as timing will be an issue. Also get some support for either english or maths if they prove a problem, as these are building blocks that affect access to other subjects.

We were lucky in that some private schools take a broader view when selecting and will take pupils with a spikey profile. And there was plenty of support in school.

I am so glad we did not listen to the Head, and essentially "give her a more fulfilling life", but instead keep doors open so she would still have choices at 16 and 18. My instinct was that she would want to go to the same sort of school as her friendship group, who were bright, purposeful girls. In DDs case at least, I was right.

OP both my DS's are dyslexic with IQ's in excess of 140, (neither are statement ec) the younger one can't don't VR at because he can't spell at all and doesn't understand how words are formed, if that makes senses. Luckily he never had to sit an VR test. In contrast his NVR is right off the scale he can do a test that takes everyone else at least an 1 hour in 15 mins.
Extra time is becoming increasingly difficult to get at public examination level, I suspect the system was being abused so the criteria I was told has tightened up a few years ago. DS1 who has very significant processing problems got it easily but I was surprised DS2 got it, I suspect the same applies to grammar school entry exams.
I agree talk to the school, we did when we looked for a senior school for DS2 if they're totally unsympathetic then Ihink you need to question if it's the right place for your DS because it doesn't get easier as they go through their school life.
Re: spelling I understand that you cannot be penalised for poor spelling in public exams if you have a report saying you can't spell, this means that you effectively don't loose a couple of marks.
On a positive note DS2 has coped really well at a super selective independent school where reading is very much part of the everyday curriculum (he hates reading) and I'm praying hoping he'll get very good grades in his Pre Us this summer.

Secondary modern schools may have a good practical departments e.g. dt, art which might give him a more fulfilling life rather than making him feel he must always struggle to try and be academic.

Some grammar schools also "have good practical departments e.g. dt, art" too you know! At my son's grammar, they have excellent practical departments alongside the academic. Last Summer, 44% of year 11's took Resistant Materials to GCSE, 25% took Art, 19% took food tech, 17% took drama. They actively encourage 1 or 2 "arty or tech" subjects for GCSEs, although not compulsory.

This idea of grammars only doing academic stuff is just another myth perpetrated by the anti-grammar lobby. It's nothing new either, the ex-grammar I went to (just turned into a comp before I joined) had woodwork and metalwork labs, fantastic art classrooms, etc., and that was a very old building, so grammars have always done the practical stuff alongside the academic.

OP The key requirements for extra time under the new regulations for public examinations is a history of extra time being the normal way of working in time controlled tests and activities, evidence of that need not go back to primary school and indeed I would think it was quite rare to have got that in place since so many are diagnosed at secondary stage, AND crucially that their test scores for Working Memory and Processing are below a certain level. I forget the figure, it may be the 85 mentioned in the form you got from school, but it means they are in the bottom 14 % of the population. It is totally unfair as far as the Ed Psychs are concerned, because the results for ability (NVR and VR) could also be in the bottom 14% and therefore as you would predict and would not merit a diagnosis of SpLDs whilst many very bright pupils may face considerable handicap with scores that are not as low as that but considerably lower than you would predict for the level of their ability.

I certainly would not assume a selective education is not for a Dyslexic DC. SpLDs affect 1 in 10 of the population regardless of ability and good schools appreciate that with support they can achieve their potential which is why in the region of 10% will be getting support following diagnosis in some of the most selective schools in the country. I am another with a Dyslexic /Dysoraxic DC who got into selective schools and now at a top university

chalkhearts with all due respect your comment that those with SpLDs will tend to have a discrepancy between VR and NVR is a little wide of the mark, and rather playing to the stereotypes. VR tests exactly what it says, and whilst extreme spelling difficulties will make the test difficult to access it does not mean that a pupil is not good at reasoning verbally ie understanding the meaning and nuances of words and how to use them (sorry I am not an Ed Psych but I am a Dyslexic with high VR scores so I am trying to articulate my strengths and weaknesses. ) Pupils with SpLDs will have a range of issues and the key issue is the spikiness between tests of ability like VR and NVR and tests of attainment along with areas that they are likely to have weakness in is speed of writing, working memory and processing. All of which points up pupils with ability in key areas and that can be verbal or non verbal reasoning, who are not achieving their potential because of significant disability in certain areas. My DD is Dyslexic (now more narrowly defined than the term SpLD as encompassing spelling and reading difficulties) and Dyspraxic. She had considerable problems with reading, writing and spelling, though thankfully much helped by early intervention, but still finds it hard to spell accurately / read and write quickly, has working memory, processing and speed of writing scores in the bottom 10% but her VR scores are actually higher than her NVR score, though both are in the top 95%. Not surprisingly she is now reading English on one of the top university courses in the country and is on the First /2.1 borderline as a result of the quality of her ideas and reasoning . She is far from unique and I know two Dyslexic pupils who had quite profound difficulties at primary school who are now at Oxbridge studying Humanities.

I deliberately sent my ds1 to a selective school in year 7.Our local Comp would have put him in the bottom set with a lot of kids who really don't want to learn.He was labeled thick in his state school and wasn't recognised as being Dyslexic.He's got a pretty high IQ and is perfectly capable of doing well if taught appropriately.A Comp. would have been disastrous for him.

chalkhearts The use of VR / NVR tests in Grammar School tests was originally with the intention of them being a genuine tests of ability so bright students who did not have parents with the motivation and resources to prepare their DCs were not disadvantaged. A good effective VR /NVR test, as used by private selective schools and employers is not predictable and so a genuine test of ability and where it lies (because most people's ability will be more verbal or non verbal), so you cannot improve your scores aside from a few (no more than 5 -10) practise tests to familiarise yourself with the format etc. Many Dyslexics who would have failed a test of attainment at 11 went on to very selective grammar Schools as a result (including my father and I ) where they had no idea how to teach them or what to make of their bright ideas, which never translated to exam success, except to label them lazy and naughty

Unfortunately the Grammar Schools cannot afford properly developed tests and they have allowed them to become predictable hence the massive tutoring racket industry, and some of the grammars, finding themselves with too many who are tutored rather than bright, now changing the regime.

A lot of interesting posts! My DS is terrible at spelling and a bit rubbish at VR. He has a long history of being on school action plus and having assessments which show that he is dyslexic. There is no dispute about his Spld. He was failing very badly in a state primary, so I put him in a prep (which I cannot really afford) and he has absolutely flown. The assessments that have been done on him recommend extra time. However, the state grammar (super-selective as they are called on here) needs educational assessments that are less than 2 years old so I guess I will have to get another one done as they are older than that. More money! However, they ask if he gets 25% extra time as a matter of course at school now, but since he hasn't done any public exams at his prep then of course, he hasn't had extra time, so it seems a daft question.
I'm waiting for a reply to my email. I think he deserves extra time because his SPLD is very well documented - I'm just not sure that they will accept the evidence I have.
Oh, and I hate this grammar school rubbish. I wish they didn't exist but all his friends are taking the exam and are being prepped like hell. He is desperate to pass and get in. His siblings are at the local comp. They had no interest in trying for the grammar.

Ds1 prep school gives him 25% extra in all internal exams as well.At the moment he has common Entrance exams ( past papers) every term.He was also given 25% extra time in his SATs following a Dyslexia assessment.But he is in year 7 where they have to do frequent exams.I'm guessing your DS will be year 5/6?
I don't think the requirements for a Grammar School wil be as stringent as those for Gcse or A levels.

Yes - Yr 5

The other point about my son's grammar is that they will offset a high score on one of the tests against a low score on another. You don't need to hit the pass mark on all 3 papers. That allows someone, say, good in Maths to get a high score, well above the pass mark, in Maths, to compensate for a below-pass mark in say English or VR. (Obviously as long as your mark for the lower test paper isn't too low!). From what I could gather, they compile a list of those who "pass" in all subjects who are offered a place, and then they do a list of "average" marks across all 3 papers for everyone else, and offer remaining places to those at the top of that list. Sounds to cover the scenario when someone is weak at one subject but strong at the others.

bunny Yes - they average the scores, so I'm hoping his maths will get him through. It would still help if he got the extra time though.

I've been doing some research into medical school admissions. The statistics are complicated to say the least but this is the best I could get:

About 30 % of medical students are educated privately. As 17% of sixth formers are in private school they are over-represented but perhaps not as much as you might assume.

It proved very difficult to find a figure for grammar schools but the best guess seemed to be about 20%. As grammar schools educate about 15% of HIGH ACHIEVING STUDENTS this is a slight over-representation but again perhaps not as much as you might think.

What the figures do show overwhelmingly is that medical school students come overwhelmingly from well-off backgrounds, about 80%

None of this stopped the Daily Mail from announcing that these figures "proved" that we must re-instate grammar schools when of course they do nothing of the kind. (sigh)

Very interesting HPFA Just goes to show that background is almost everything. So much for social mobility and natural ability!

and of course grammar schools have very few pupils on free school meals - so the Daily Mail is talking rubbish.

so the Daily Mail is talking rubbish No surprises there of course!

The constant comments from certain posters that ' Grammar schools' are only for middle class families are very irritating .

People are always posting that grammar schools have such a low number of FSM pupils to back up this point. That assumes that because a family has an income of over £16k PA. A figure which is only £2k per year over what a full time minimum wage salary is of £14K.

We can therefore only say that grammar schools are not 'overly' represented by children from these families. We do not know how many grammar school pupils come from families with incomes between £20-50k I.E one/two parents in average paying jobs /careers . These familes can not in any way be considered , 'elite' or well off.

I wish posters would stop citing FSM numbers regarding grammar school admissions , because i think it is irrelevant !

There are a number of reasons has to why certain families/backgrounds are under represented at grammar schools . The fact of whether their family income is £14k or £25k PA is not the most significant one.

P.S my DS passed his 11+ with both Dyspraxia /Dyslexia .

Correction.

Families are somehow considered middle class because they have incomes over £16K and no longer qualify for FSM.

A lot of the 80% of medical students from well off backgrounds may be the children of medical professionals (doctors, dentists etc are high earners so probably will qualify as being "wealthy") though, so it may not necessarily be the wealth that opens doors for them. It could either be the tendency to follow in your parent's footsteps, i.e. perhaps children of doctors are more likely to become doctors themselves, and/or it could be that a doctor or dentist understands what is needed to get into medical school (as they've done it themselves) and so nurtures their children to do what it takes (i.e. work experience, out of school activities etc).

So it's a bit of a stretch to say it's the wealth per se that causes the gross over-representation - in actual fact, the wealth may have little or no impact, it could well be the parent's knowledge and influence that has more impact.

My dh is dyslexic/ dyspraxia and went to a comp and is a Doctor! ....but only diagnosed when he was 37! (IQ of 160)
Dd1 dyslexic / dyspraxic / dyscalculic went to comp which really floored her...went to independent school and is about to graduate with 2:1, then doing post grad at Edinburgh - statements so got extra time (IQ >130)
Dd2 dyslexic/ dyscalculic...went to local comp ( her choice!)but then did BTEC at FE college- continuous assessment rather than A levels , now doing MAsters degree in human resource management
Guess what I'm saying is there are many routes for education .... One size does not fit all and Grammar schools are VERY selective ....good luck with the exams and fight for your ds x

sandyholme I agree with you that The FSM measure is a very limited statistic- and that someone just above or even quite a lot above it is not rich. However I think this statistic is mostly used to counter the argument about grammar schools promoting social mobility, a belief for which there is no evidence.

Badbadbunny I think you are probably right here.

I wasn't intending to derail the thread into an anti-grammar rant but so often I see statements that are either factually incorrect ("more state school students went to Oxbridge when we had more grammar schools" being my particular bugbear as it is provably false) or unsupported by evidence.

I dont think any conclusions can be drawn about social mobility based on current grammar schools. Our nearest is hugely selective. Either a child needs to be exceptinally bright, top 1 or 2%, or needs to be coached for years in advance. (And kids really are coached for years and years.) I am not surprised that lots go on to read medicine. It is profession many of those pupils will have been actively encouraged to consider by their families or their peers.

Back in the day a good proportion of kids in an individual state primary class had a chance at grammar. Lots did from mine from quite ordinary (shop assistant etc) backgrounds. Even my dad, who came from a very unskilled working class background in New Cross passed for Grammar pre-war. Primary schools would support and encourage able kids. It was their golden ticket to the professions.

My big surprise given the combination of bright Grammar students who are reaching exceptionally high standards at the age of 11, and who have motivated and supportive families, is that the results are not as exceptional as you would expect. There were plenty of kids who had failed the 11+ at DDs independent school (lots of bitching about the infamous Mrs W and her daughter at Y7 coffee mornings) yet the independent had better results.

People will say this is down to small classes, money or whatever. In DDs case the important thing was a school where teachers were aware of dyslexia and who encouraged and supported her. Yes, she has been offered a place at medical school. No she probably would not have if she had been in a school, from whatever sector, that did not encourage her, set targets based on weak CAT results, and failed to recognise her potential.