Super-selectives: how do we know if we're kidding ourselves?

[teaandthorazine]

"There were 1458 boys applied for admission to Sutton Grammar School for the 120 available places for entry in September 2011. 404 of the boys tested were deemed to be of selective ability."

So, over a thousand boys took the test and didn't even reach the pass mark? I knew it was competitive out there but honestly didn't realise it was quite this bad.

How do you/did you know that your child was 'grammar material' (horrible phrase but there we go)? Because I can't believe that anyone would put their child in for an exam they didn't think they could pass. And yet... a thousand kids...

Did your primary school give an idea? Or did you just think, hell, let's give it go, nothing to lose? I feel really naive and a bit shocked now!

That does not say that 1054 failed just that they did not meet their selection criteria though doesn't it?

'deemed to be of selective ability' - doesn't that mean 'passed the exam'? Maybe not - can anyone enlighten?

To comment fairly on this we'd need to know what the spread of scores was. It could be that absolutely loads of the children scored very close to the pass mark. With so many children taking the test, one or two marks means the difference between a pass and fail.

Is it just me who finds the phrase 'deemed to be of selective ability' odd? Surely 'selective ability' means an ability that you use when you choose to (like 'selective hearing' or 'selective reading'). What they mean is 'able to be selected' which is quite, quite different.

I don't know about super-selectives - but in our area (Kent - 25% will be 'deemed suitable for grammar school') most schools refuse to give any advice on the likelihood of passing the Kent Test.

The head at Wilson's during his speech on the open day a couple of years ago gave some guidance on this. He said if a boy was working at level 5 or above in English and Maths in year 5, then he stood a good chance of passing the entrance tests. Went by that, and guidance from DSS's teachers.

404 passes (or, sorry, "deemed to be of selective ability") out of 1458 is not far off from Kent's 25%. In fact, slightly better at 27.7%.

I'd have thought a decent grammar school could come up with a better phrase than 'deemed to be of selective ability'. I read that as poor paraphrasing for 'passing the test' too.

OhDearConfused - in Kent (at least in the part I live in, which doesn't have super-selectives) about half the children sit the Kent Test. Of those, about half will pass.

I think (but I could be wrong) a much lower percentage of children sit the 11+ for super-selectives.

It depends what is meant by being deemed of selective ability.

Did you see the various Graveney threads at the moment? Their 63 places are set to go to the very top scorers, say 98% or more. I don't think it unreasonable to put a child who is likely to score over say 90% into an exam. But in these fiercely constitute exams, even that high a performance may not be enough.

Sutton is a super-selective and entry is based on performance on the day. There will be loads of people who missed out by a few marks (near the passmark it is common for there to be 30 or 40 boys each of whom have the same mark).There will be boys who pass one or two of the Sutton grammar schools but not all 3. There will be boys who fail all 3 and will still come out with 10 A*s from Whitgift or Trinity. Yes, it is all apparently random and uncertain, and far from guaranteed for anyone.

Most of the grammar tests are very narrow and many favour those who have a mathematical mind. Sometimes quite plodding children can pass because they are good at that kind of test- while other very bright children who are at level 5 and above don't pass because they aren't. I know of many children who have passed the 11+ and been "deemed selective" in one area and not in another - there are always surprises and it's quite arbitrary.

Just shows how unfair it all is.

Sooooo... basically what you're all saying is that it's a bleedin' nightmare, right?

I'd vote to get rid of grammars and my DDs both went to a superselective.

Our Primary was no help but when DD didn't make it her teachers were very surprised (She was solid level 5a's in year 5). However, she could never get her head around the NVR papers enough to do the questions quickly enough. I often wonder if I had got her tutored she would have got in, but I am so glad I didn't as she had a fantastic time at her secondary.

Having just gone through this process I would say if you wanted your dc in a super selective gs or a top indie then they need to be a grade 5 across the board ( English, maths, writing) by end of year 5 and working towards level 6 in all areas by the time they take 11+ in january of year 6. At gs which takes top 25% of pupils or less academic indie then level 4a across the board by end of year 5 and working towards level 5 in year 6. Dc from state schools do require tutoring for ss gs and top indies because the 11+ exam contains topics they would not have covered in class and they definitely don't get enough practice in essay writing and punctuation, grammar, spellings. Most state primaries will also not teach pupils beyond level 5 for maths and English as level 6 is seen as for secondary school despite the level being achievable for the top 5%. Academic private preps teach their pupils 1 year ahead of their state school counterparts and do loads more practise so a child from there will be working towards level 6 by the time they take11+. I don't think you can tutor a child beyond their capacity. When we were tutoring ds he could do work a year ahead of his actual age but not 2 years ahead as his brain has to go through further development for that to happen. Once we identified he could pass 11+ Tutoring for us meant teaching him additional stuff he needed for the exam, practising exam questions regularly, teaching and practising exam technique. Throughout the whole 6 month process he still did his after school activities, had lots of free time and it was pretty relaxed. However I know another family who are desperate for their ds to get a scholarship at the local indie and he does extra work at lunchtime, weekends and after school on top of which he also has to practise 2 instruments. IMO that's far to much.

DS was level 5 across the board in year 3. He was tutored for an hour a week and the tutor set 3 hours homework. It was his tutors asessment that convinced us he had a realistic chance for his first choice grammar. He sat three mocks and achieved a score that would have gained him entry in any previous year.

I am awaiting offers day.

I am surprised that many parents have put their DC forward without having any idea of the levels needed or if their DC can achieve them. They all seem to be against tutoring at any cost.

DS got in from State primary with just doing practice papers at home (we did more practice than with DD though, as learned from that). He had to do Maths & Eng papers as well as the reasoning, but DD's exam was JUST 2 reasoning papers, so hard to compare them really. DD would have had more luck if she could have shown her English & Essay skills.

Interestingly I felt the 11+ exams felt similar to O levels in that they are designed to fail you rather than to pass you which is logical as selective schools only have a finite number of places. From looking at previous past 11+ papers there were definitely some trick questions to sort out the sheep from the goats. To those that are against tutoring I would say I wouldn't have passed O levels without practising past papers, having timed mock exams and teachers taking us through some of the trickier questions all of which we did with ds when he sat 11+.

Lynli if your DS was level 5 across the board in Y3 why on earth waste 4 hours a week of his life on tutoring stuff and money as well? Clearly he's going to walk it, probably could have done in Y4.

We live very near Tiffin and lots of children take it from our state primary with a "may as well have a go" mentality - and from what I've seen over the years, the (very few - about 2 per year) children who get in are either a) staggeringly bright (not sure of levels but easily level 5 in yr 5, probably before) or b) pretty bright but have had tutoring for Tiffin for years and years (year 2 in some cases, summer courses etc). We gave it a go with DS 1 - he got into the local academic private school with ease but was half-way down in the Tiffin results - nowhere remotely close to a place (although to be fair he didn't do the Tiffin-specific tutoring). With DS2 I didn't bother!

If your child is level 4a/b at the start of yr5 got a buy the Bond books which give 11+ style questions.

Then make sure they take some practive exam papers for technique and working at the correct speed. After that they should have a good chance of passing because by the time they stary yr6, they should be working at level 5 and be up to speed with the types of questions (verbal/non verbal etc) that they will have to answer.

mumzy

"Having just gone through this process I would say if you wanted your dc in a super selective gs or a top indie then they need to be a grade 5 across the board ( English, maths, writing) by end of year 5 and working towards level 6 in all areas by the time they take 11+ in january of year 6. At gs which takes top 25% of pupils or less academic indie then level 4a across the board by end of year 5 and working towards level 5 in year 6. Dc from state schools do require tutoring for ss gs and top indies because the 11+ exam contains topics they would not have covered in class and they definitely don't get enough practice in essay writing and punctuation, grammar, spellings. Most state primaries will also not teach pupils beyond level 5 for maths and English as level 6 is seen as for secondary school despite the level being achievable for the top 5%. Academic private preps teach their pupils 1 year ahead of their state school counterparts and do loads more practise so a child from there will be working towards level 6 by the time they take11+."

I would be surprised, and there would be an outcry (or should be one), if any state school set an admissions test that requires knowledge of maths or English which is above national curriculum level 5. Clearly, indies can do what they like - but surely not the States (superselective or not). Of course, a DC operating at level 6 will be more proficient at the level 5 stuff and quicker at it and absolutely take your point that they would be at an advantage - but not sure its a question of not knowing advanced trigonometry or whatever would be covered in level 6.

"I don't think you can tutor a child beyond their capacity." - definitely agree with this.

ohdear the reason for being a level 5 at the end of year 5 is that the 11+exams cover level 5 topics and not that they are requiring additional post level 5. However, these exams happen in the autumn term of year 6 therefore you need the level 5 standard at the end of year 5.