Dcs who were deemed average at primary but excelled at secondary!

[Gingerfudge]

Tell me your stories please!

Yes, lots of examples over the years. It works both ways with some of those excelling in primary becoming rather average in GCSE/ A levels. Its one of the reasons I'm not so keen on G and T labels as sometimes the students struggle to keep up with their predicted grades so constantly feel like their are failing, despite them working hard.
It is lovely to see somebody who always considered themselves average suddenly make that jump in ability, often happens when the work gets hard and they get it and the rest of the class is struggling.

Mine was on the average/below tables in primary. Always did well in the tests and shocked the teachers but still I was told that DC was bordering on below average at aged 9 and would never be a high flyer .

Once in secondary school was labelled G&T at aged 11, top performer out of the year at GCSE and the only one of a handful in the local comps less than impressive 40 year history to make it to an RG uni to study medicine!

I have a DS who has gone from way-below average in y2 (y6 sats pedictions were that he might scrape a level 3 by then) to average in y6. May the upward trend continue

My ds in y6 is very average at school. But there are signs now that he's beginning to 'wake up', a bit like his brother who seemed to be a pleasant plodder academically for a long time. He ended up with 9A1A GCSEs and AA* AB at A level. Now at a top university.

Boys especially bloom when they start trying later on at about 14 and they are working towards 'real' exams.
The biggest shake up comes between GCSE and A level IME

Personally, I would say that the success has depended on what they are testing, ie, the 3 Rs at Junior School were not strong points for DS. Now the GCSE success criteria has moved on then so has the success. DS was always clever but he wasn't being tested at what he was good at.

Me. According to parents i was very average through primary school and year 7/8. For those two secondsry years i was in a high performing comp. we then moved across the country and i entered a medicre comp. by end of yr 9 in all top sets, finally got 4 a's at alevel (20 yrs ago so rare occurance then) and went off to oxbridge. I can't remember much all this, but my parents were rather baffled.

My sister however (5yrs younger) was academically top from start to finish.

DS was working in the just below average range at Primary but, around Year 9/10, things started improving and falling into place for him.

He achieved 1 A*, 8 As, 1 B and 1 C at GCSE this year and is now doing well in Year 12.

I think for DS, who has AS, realising what he wanted to be (a chemical engineer) and then recognising what he needed to achieve this, meant that he has become very focused on this goal. I also wonder whether his AS has helped him - the black and white approach to everything means that hard work = good results= good university= good job? (I hope it works out like this for him)

That said, he worked bloody hard for his GCSEs.

My son, his dyslexia and messiness and difficulty copying from the board were more of a handicap at primary school. At secondary school his strengths in maths and science started to shine and his ability to grasp concepts was more useful. He had to work hard at showing his knowledge on paper though and would never write 3 sentences if one would suffice (and would be pulled to pieces on mumsnet for his appalling spelling).

Yes, and this is why I'm all for proper comprehensive education and against selective grammars. My dc would have really missed out without good comprehensive education.
The primary school told me not to bother tutoring dc1 for 11 plus as at best she was average, best to go for the good comprehensive and not waste a choice on grammar. Dc1 went to the comp, was fast tracked into the top sets (to our amazement) and is in second year of med school now, having come in the top 15% in last year's exams.
Dc2 Sat 11+ and did really badly, the cat could have done better, poor sats results as well. He also went to a comprehensive school by year 8 he'd gone from the bottom English set to the top just done GCSE s and got 2A* 8A .
Primary school was an osfsted outstanding school. My dc are just slow burners, but also I think they found primary school very dull, dc2 recently told me he wrote his own comics in school instead of working in class.
Many of the other children in primary who were higher achievers than mine seem to have peaked in year 6.

Yes I am 200% pro proper comprehensive also. Selective and settings in early years only suitable for certain types of personalities and parents.

DS did sit the 11+ although I knew there was very little chance he would pass (his father pushed for it) and if by some fluke he had passes, I don't think grammar would have suited him at that time.

He's now in the 6th form at a local grammar and the pace is so much faster than his old comp but he's thriving.

Bacon that s why I think selective at age 10 /11 and settings in early years are unfair and stressful for many children and parents.

My ds was never average (too much of a PITA) and his teachers said he would do better at university than school, so obviously saw his potential, but has really thrived at secondary school and is now getting good academic and effort grades. He has enjoyed the specialist teachers and having started to get good marks is now very motivated. It's great to go to parents evenings and not worry about what he has been up to - we used to have long and worryign conversations with his teachers, now they are full of praise.

I on the other hand was lazy and underperformed right through school and university, didn't really work until I took my masters, which was much harder work than I anticipated.

Do / can secondary school teaching really make a positive difference to children's progression?

My dc did ok at comprehensive because both schools had sets. Every term the top six kids moved up and the bottom six moved down.st the end of year 8 most kids are working at the right ability level for them. Differentiation within a class for different abilities isn't as effective as different classes for each ability. My dd was in set three for maths and still for an A as she was working at the right place. She struggled in the higher set as they were going too quickly and the top set were encouraged to do further maths, that wasn't for her.

nickname yes,that does make sense re selective at 10/11.