Admissions appeal question - theoretical

[toomuchcricket]

I'm preparing my son for the 11+ exams at a local (super-selective) grammar school, but as described on this thread we've started relatively late, and are pragmatic about the chances of success. I want to optimise my son's chances, but without overdoing it.

The school FAQs say the following ....

Q. Do I need to get a tutor for my son? A. We do not recommend tutoring but would suggest that you familiarise him with practice papers.

Q. Can I get specimen papers? No. There are no past papers available. They are designed specifically for us by GL Assessment. You are able to buy GL Assessment books from stationers or online.

So, we have bought the 4 books of practice papers that are available from GL and my son is working his way through them. There are 8 Verbal reasoning and 8 non-verbal reasoning papers. We're following the parental guidance in the books, about recreating exam conditions, and timing.

We're not planning to do any other preparation. However, I'm noticing that the question types in the GL papers don't vary very much - all of the papers have the same format, with the same question types in each. The guidance in the book says: "The papers are presented in a very similar way to many of the test papers used for selection at 11+, and the questions represent the type of questions used, although they may not be exactly the same level of difficulty".

On the other thread, someone suggested that anyone serious about preparing their son for this particular school would also be seeking out other types of questions, from other companies that provide 11+ practice papers. However, my instinct is to disagree and take the school FAQs at their word - they have recommended the GL papers, so those are the ones we will concentrate on.

My question is this: If, on the day of the exam, the tests do include different question types, or are presented in a completely different format to the recommended practice papers - so that any child who hasn't done extra preparation is completely thrown and put at a disadvantage - would that be grounds for appeal?

It's a theoretical question, but I'm curious (and bemused by the whole 11+ "industry" thing ).

No it wouldn't be grounds for appeal. They are effectively stating that they set their own test and don't issue practise papers, so there would be no way to prove any disadvantage by not practising other things.

Agree with inthename. It is very unlikely this would succeed at appeal. GL build their tests from a question bank with over 12,000 questions. It is unlikely they are inventing questions specifically for this school so I would expect the GL books to be broadly representative of the type of questions your son will face.

GL offer VR, NVR, maths and English tests. VR and NVR show potential whereas maths and English show the child's current level. It is therefore possible to spot children who have unrealised potential using these tests.

Tutoring can obviously help with maths and English questions. Properly constructed VR and NVR tests are, however, largely immune to tutoring effects according to research. There is some benefit from having done a similar test previously (and hence being familiar with the type of test) but that is about all.

Most parents are unaware that their child's raw score in VR and NVR tests will increase dramatically at around this age without any tutoring. They therefore engage a tutor, see their child's score improve and congratulate themselves on doing the right thing. I occasionally see parents recommending tutors with comments like, "little Johnny's test score improved by x% within y months". I have yet to see a comment where x is significantly more than the improvement Johnny would have been expected to make without tutoring.

Thanks prh - your views on tutoring are inline with my instincts, which is reassuring. When faced with so many parents like the ones you describe, who think tutoring is the only route to take, it's easy to lose confidence and wonder if we're whistling in the wind, but on balance I think I'd be doing my son a disservice if I didn't give him the opportunity to do the tests.

Although it probably does take a bit more discipline to sit down and do the practice papers at home, rather than paying for a weekly class, so I can understand the popularity of tutoring from that perspective.

Thanks Tiggy. The school only uses NVR/VR papers, not English/Maths, so the test scores won't map directly to NC Levels - as Prh mentioned, they asses potential rather than current level, so presumably that makes it harder to prove a bad day.

He is entering Year 6 at level 5a/b, but I suspect most of the other applicants will be too, as its a super-selective school.

Anyway, all this is hypothetical ... hopefully my faith in the school FAQs will be justified and the tests will go smoothly.

I would strongly suggest that you head over to the elevenplusexams website and read the Surrey Forum and advice about preparation for this school.

While I don't think the school are lying, I don't think that the GL packs in themselves provide enough practice material and in my day when they were NFER (several years ago) did not include all 21 VR question types.

My DD1 is very able and has done well academically but she would not have got into her school without extensive practice over 2-3 months, though we did ours at home. The tests she did were identical to yours.

It may be the case that an exceptionally able child will get in with minimal preparation but that is not the case for most. You will be up against boys who have been tutored for years or been coached at home. I cannot emphasise strongly enough what an arms race it is for these super selective schools.

It may be the case that an exceptionally able child will get in with minimal preparation but that is not the case for most

According to research it is the case for most (assuming they are of the required standard in the first place). All the research available strongly suggests that properly constructed VR and NVR tests are immune to tutoring effects. Parents see a huge improvement in their child's raw score and think it is down to tutoring, unaware of the fact that all children see their raw score improve dramatically at that age.

Sorry it is not the case for the Tiffin Schools. My daughter was scoring around 70% when she first tried the tests - she went up to high 90%s sometimes 100% with practice, over a short period of time - 2-3 months. It wasn't natural progression. You can prepare for the tests by learning how to do the various question types and a majority of applicants do.

Just to add that the girls school has added English and maths to their admissions tests because of the tutoring for VR/NVR.

I was talking about tutoring, not practise. There is a practise effect but it tails off fairly rapidly. So the child's score in the second NVR test they have ever done will be better than in the first but the improvement to the third test will be smaller and after a handful of tests there is unlikely to be any further significant improvement other than that expected due to age. So being up against children who have been tutored for years should not be a disadvantage provided the tests are properly structured and provided you give your child a few tests to practise.