Are superselectives for the very able or only for geniuses?

[Ouluckyduck]

because my dd is very able, but not a genius or a prodigy. Will she fit in?

I'm interested in the idea of the head of St Olaves referring to a meritocracy. If only it were - would have to see info on intake, but my own observations/understanding is that pupils from "feeder preps" and also who have had pretty extensive tutoring are perhaps over represented in the SS schools here.

I obviously don't have hard facts on this, but that is my feeling. I don't believe that it is a genuinely level playing field. That is not to knock the state primaries (I know of 4 of which have NO children going to the SS schools next year), but the fact is that children who have not been tutored or coached towards the exams, either professionally, via prep school or by parents, are at an inherent disadvantage. IMO.

Not sure how/if my background makes me suitable but I'll look into it. :)

pooka - it is possible to move away from a system you can be tutored for - you can reaarange the format of the exams each year for example - a hassle but possible.

I think you will find that is a complete myth that only your bright, gifted child from all backgrounds gets into SS schools. My observation is that a few gifted get in on the day, a few from more disadvanatged backgrounds but the majority come form tutored children who are quite bright and prep schools who thoroughly prepare.

SO to answer original question, if your child is averagely bright, they will do fine in a SS, there will be the few who are super achieving for a range of reasons but many are just capable, supported kids.

@andisa my observation speaking as a parent of a child at a super selective is that most students there were not tutored. There are an increasing number of posh school refugees but they are still a minority.

That is interesting thetasimamum. It really is the opposite truth in my daughter's super- selective.

For original post: my daughter was tutored once a week for 10 months which I thought was enough and a shame that we had to do so to be competitive. We found out her friend was also doing 3 papers a day in the last 8 weeks before the test and this seemed to be common. So we did 15 mins prep a day in last six weeks which I resented. It also made my daughter worry all the girls would be swats or off the scale in intelligence.

My DD finds it very easy to learn and once at the school which we decided would support her as her communication skills are particularly strong and we thought the level of discussion would stimulate her, she sails by.

She does not do an excessive amount of homework, just enough and finds her self generally scoring top scores across the board ( she is bright but not a genius) not that she is bothered by that - she enjoys the environment.

I have found that a huge majority of children at the grammar schools my DCs are at were heavily tutored and taught how to pass the test, a lot of them started tutoring from year 2-3.
That must put them at an advantage, surely there are many children who would do exceptionally well at grammar school but do not get in because they were not tutored from age 6.

Personally I do not agree with tutoring for these test but I know I am in a minority of parents, my youngest dc is in year 3 now and will sit the entrance exam for the grammar and SS in our area without being tutored, he will do the practice papers at home and luckily has 2 older siblings who have both been through the entrance exam process. He is very bright and IMO that should be enough, if he does not pass the test, it will not be the end of the world, I would rather not put him through hours of learning how to pass a test.

I wanted to add, at a grammar school in area of grammars, not all children appear to be tutored. What is interesting is that some children pass the test who clearly find learning a challenge.

My friend who had a fairly bright child did not tutor on principle, she did not get in to DD's SS and her equally bright friend did who was heavily tutored. The first mentioned child was devastated as her two BF's were going to a different school and she really wanted the SS. She was clever enough to fit in.

I think it depends on how much the child wants the chosen school as to whether you should tutor - I sense the parent feels guilty eventhough the girl has gone on to a very good comp. and I'm sure will do very well there.

Depends on your definition of 'tutoring' - doing papers at home albeit with parents and not a 'paid for' tutor is still tutoring and is only sensible to get children familiar with the format of the test and practice doing questions at speed.

No one would think of undertaking GCSEs without at least doing some practice papers!

Most children at SS schools have not been tutored since Yr 2 - many do however start practice papers and familiarisation with techniques from about 6 mths before the test

I for one am definitely in favour of grammar schools, having been to one, and also with my niece at one and DD just passed too.

I agree wholeheartedly with the posters who say that the top 10% (in behaviour and ability) are ignored at primary.

I really have no idea about the other kids at my dd''s grammar as funnily enough when I meet the parents on those rare occasions we don't swap stories about whether or how much we tutored ouur dcs! So I don't really know how other people seem to know so clearly - as far as I know the dcs never discuss it with friends at school either.

Off my dd's friends from primary school, the only ones who passed the entrance exams were those who HADN'T been tutored professionally ie just helped by parents in the few months prior to exam - all those I know who went in for years of paid tutoring were the ones who failed.