Please can someone answer this simple question about state selective schools?

[Hakluyt]

If selection at 11 is such a good idea, why do wholly selective authorities not produce significantly better exam results than demographically similar wholly comprehensive authorities?

IME the 11+ was far less discriminatory against dyspraxic kids than the national curriculum is. However had NVR been part of it that might not have been the case - who knows? Dyspraxic kids get special consideration in the 11+ anyway, I'm sure dyslexic kids do too. There is no suggestion that kids at the comps in super selective areas don't get academic educations, either. As several posters have pointed out, their results are similar to or better than some grammar schools in wholly selective areas, at least so far as the high and middle attainers go.

meh
this is the official site with NI results on it.

this report suggests better results at A level in NI, but I know that's not exactly an in depth analysis.

It is also interesting that the best performing schools in NI are not just grammar schools but Catholic grammar schools. Not sure exactly why that is, but it is widely reported to be the case.

Rabbit. DD1 is Dyslexic 'Failed' because of NVR DD2 Dyspraxia Scrapped through because of 119 on NVR 'lowest score allowed' very lucky.

At the moment NVR is a part of the Kent test , I know they are trying to change the test, I don't know whether NVR is going to stay in the 'new test'

NVR/VR are possibly the worst tests and probably the ones that are tutored for, they give the 'prep school' children an advantage because state primary schools do not teach technique.

If you would send your children privately if they failed the 11+, you do not support the system of selection. You support a cheaper alternative to private schools for yourself.
Sec mod schools must have loads of pleasant children in them, who didn't quite make the grade but whose parents weren't so frightened that they would fail that they paid for tutoring. Children like laqueen's in every respect but the tutoring. What, do they all turn into hooligans the moment they start a non selective year 7? And if you think that, how can you possibly support selection if you feel it has that effect on previously perfectly nice 11 year olds?

smokepole I'd have thought NVR was right up the street of a person with dyslexia (my dyslexic DS would love it). Both my DDs - severely dyspraxic - passed the 11+ for our superselective (DD2 we know passed with ease, DD1 we have no idea whether she flew or scraped because in those days they didn't give the placings it was just yes or no). They had to do VR, maths, English and DD2 also had to do SPAG which DD1 didn't have to do because it didn't exist in those days. Neither DD had problems with VR, they would both have had issues with NVR though because of their dyspraxia. However, kids with SEN conditions get reasonable adjustments when they take the 11+ so that should even things out.

Disruptive kids go to grammar school as well, you know. So do violent ones, sometimes.

I'm not so sure LaQueen.I have twins.1 G&T,the other picked for nowt as he is shadow child.Want to guess which got 92% in the first VR mock he ever sat with zero tutoring then to speak of? It wasn't G&T boy,it was shadow boy.He has trumped his twin(a lot more confident and vocal,picked off everything) several times.

Going on Sats would disadvantage those in the more mediocre primary schools.

Right, so there's stuff they couldn't do if not tutored? And then they'd fail? But perhaps there could be some nice children whose parents couldn't afford that, do you not think? Better safe than sorry though, I guess, when it comes to mixing with them.

Hak - if you really feel strongly about selective schools why on earth did you allow your children to take the 11+?

If you really feel that strongly move to another area that has the schools you are looking for

If you don't like it,move, seems a very inadequate solution to me! Of course, one could move and still somehow remain concerned by an unfair system in a place you didn't live, couldn't you? No grammars here, thank Christ, but I still think it's a crap system and have feelings about it!

I too think that the system in Kent is crap. I don't think every single system in every single county/LEA is crap though. But whenever we have these threads we are all forced to debate through a Kent prism. And I suspect nobody thinks the system in Kent is good. Except possibly the county council.

Why would you allow your children to take the 11 plus and appeal when the second one doesn't get in and then claim you cannot move house. Isn't that rather convenient, it allows you to pontificate about selective education and then state you cannot move!

The parents in Bucks like the grammar system.

I know Rabbit.

My dad,uncles,aunts and mother went to Kent grammar schools.

My dc are miles away.The choice and system re 11+ are a world away.

I don't pretend to speak for anyone else , but I suspect that wherever Haklyut was able to live, her thoughts about selection at 11 would remain unchanged!

Do 11+ packs and free internet stuff require a lot of parental patience and ability at tutoring? That's a pisser for a lot of kids then!

I don't think you can make a sensible comparison between selective and comprehensive area based on GCSE results. Grammars tend to offer I-GCSE, offer a different range of subjects and you cannot show you are adding much value when 90% or more of your year 11 scores A or A* in most subjects and the students' KS2 results were at the top end. There is no more value available to add! It's comparing apples and oranges.

Around here it would be unfair to allow a child to turn up to the 11+ without some preparation. It's just no one talks about it yet the well known tutors are booked up months and months in advance