Child not clever enough for grammar school- what do you do?

[BurnTheBlackSuit]

Not my situation, but something that cropped up in a conversation with a friend who lives in Kent.

A child who is averagely clever and without intensive tutoring is unlikely to pass the 11+. Many/all of friends at school are doing going to sit 11+.

What do you do? Tell your child they are not clever enough for grammar school or let them sit the test knowing that they will fail?

I have 2 boys, one is in a super selective grammar and the other who won't be going down that path.

1st child was always working above level at primary so I checked with the school to see if they thought grammar would be a good fit before proceeding.

2nd child is not a good fit for grammar, not because he isn't bright but because he wouldn't thrive in that environment and it would probably do him more harm than good. As a result I didn't put him forward for any of the 11+ exams. From my perspective I didn't want to put him through all that pressure and stress when I knew it wasn't an option.

Grammar schools are stressful and high pressured environments, and I cannot tell you how many kids are being tutored in every single subject.

My advise is that if grammar is not the right fit for a child then really they shouldn't be put through the 11+ as there is nothing worse than telling them they haven't passed and seeing the look of failure in their face.

My advise is that if grammar is not the right fit for a child then really they shouldn't be put through the 11+ as there is nothing worse than telling them they haven't passed and seeing the look of failure in their face.

I disagree, to a point. If the child is totally unsuitable, fine.

I have one at super selective and one borderline. What would've been worse than having the child cry and be sad at the result would be if they hadn't had the opportunity to try.

We have a result in the end that we are very happy with, and DCs teachers and HT at primary have all been blown away by their resilience, dealing with at first failure, then seeing all friends get offers, and then waiting until July for appeal place.

"Protecting" our children isn't always the right thing.

In a fully comprehensive system you might have say 5 sets for English and Maths and Science. Children can be in different sets for different subjects, and can move between them.

Perfect world, yes, but in reality, how often does that actually happen?

At my son's best friend's school, they have 6 sets per subject. 3 higher and 3 lower. You have to be in either all the highers or all the lowers. You can't be in the top set 1 for Maths but a lower set 6 for English - they'd either put you in set 4 for Maths and 6 for English if it was really bad, or set 1 for Maths and set 3 for English if it was average. There is also no movement between the top 3 and bottom 3, so you may hit a Glass ceiling in the lower tier for example, if you improve in your better subject(s).

But also, in reality, how many people move up through the sets? Moving down is easier if you start to struggle, but it's very difficult to move up, because higher groups usually work at a faster pace and will have done topics not covered by lower groups, so there'd be a lot of catching up to do. I'd love to see the figures, and suspect that relatively few move up and even so, will only move up one set so may well be being held back from their potential.

Kazzy
It happens. A lot
Kids in both my childrens' years moved up and down the sets (as every time somebody moves down, somebody has to come up to fill the space)
and sets are done for 4 subject blocks so kids can be set 1 for maths, set 5 for sport and drama, set 2 for languages and set 3 for humanities

Kids in both my childrens' years moved up and down the sets

Was that during GCSE years?

I think my Comp was unusual but they streamed (8 classes) us for everything from years 7-9, with exams at the end of each year and people moving up or down accordingly. There was always a lot of movement. Then in year 10 and 11 we were streamed for Maths, English and Science and setted (3 sets) for options. It wasn't a case of all higher sets or lower sets, you could be in the top class for maths and a lower one for English. It was a big school though so they could accommodate this in the timetable. Worked well as far as I could see.

kazzy
not in year 11 not much in year 10
but lots and lots in years 7, 8 and 9
as by then they knew where people were heading

with two streams each of 5 sets for the KS3 years it was the norm

Sadly, friend can't afford private school or even tutoring. And she needs to live where she does because of her and her DHs jobs.

You don't have to be particularly bright for 11 plus, just well practiced. Plenty of people go to selective schools and then not allowed to continue onto A Levels there because their GCSEs aren't good enough.

You can practice 11 plus at home using practice tests and a timer. Could probably get most kids to pass after a year or two.

I'd agree with Nutty. There's this misconception that to pass the 11+ in Kent you have to be really bright or on top tables. For a super selective score - yes. Not for the normal grammars.

What you do need is either a tutor or a very motivated parent, who will source books and practice papers, work on weak areas if necessary, ensure child does the practice, and do this consistently for Y5 (and the holidays!).

So in reality you also need a child that is motivated, but it sounds like your friend's DD is.

I'd agree with Nutty. There's this misconception that to pass the 11+ in Kent you have to be really bright or on top tables. For a super selective score - yes. Not for the normal grammars.

Exactly. Too many people cite the situation at the super selectives and use it to criticise the entire grammar system. Out in the regions away from the stupidity of super-selectives, you have "normal" grammars which have much lower entry requirements where "normal" children who are bright have every chance of achieving a place, and yes, without 5 years of weekly intensive tutoring!! As I've said, at my son's primary, 9 out of his class of 30 have gone to the local grammar, and most of those were without professional tutoring. Yes, I'm sure parents took the initiative to buy practice papers etc., but also the head did a lunchtime "11+" club where he handed out practice papers one week and then went through the answers the following week - he did that about 3 or 4 times - no tutoring, just facilitating the kids, maybe to help those whose parents weren't as involved or unable to buy practice papers (even though they're cheap). Away from super-selectives, the brighter children just need to be made familiar with the type of questions, exam practice & technique etc.

in the regions away from the stupidity of super-selectives, you have "normal" grammars which have much lower entry requirements where "normal" children who are bright have every chance of achieving a place, and yes, without 5 years of weekly intensive tutoring!!

what about those who are bright but not "normal"?

I hate the idea of grammars and the elitist ideology that comes with it. I would have still supported my DC, if that's what they wanted. They didn't. I was happy with that. They are academic. I was. My DC and I attend and I attended a comprehensive. I enjoyed school, sixth form and university.

Actually I think the super selective grammars are the better ones, maybe the only ones that should exist. Our area has one grammar, usually only about one child per local primary gets in, as a consequence there isn't really any resentment from the other parents about the school and the fact their child didn't get in, only two or three children even take the test. Our local comps are also excellent though. Also I don't really go with the view that failing the test is damaging for children, I'm sure it's very disappointing but life has disappointment we should be preparing them to cope with this not sheltering them from all failure.

We live in a grammar school area and my son has just started at one of them. If DD was bright but not quite 11 plus standard I'd be happily sending her to the outstanding local academy.

Our problem is that she is not at all bright and really struggles with the basics. The academy is very results driven and I fear she will be unhappy and under too much pressure.

Before it became an academy it was a typical secondary school that pushed things like art , drama , performing arts and sport. My DD would have been in her element.

Really struggling with where to send her when she leaves primary.

Yes the whole system is awful, I agree, but the system in Kent isn't going anywhere soon, and we are answering the OPs q as people living with the system.

Sure it'd be great if we lived in leafy Hampshire but we don't!

Move, I guess, if at all possible. I know for many it won't be.

I suppose also I would want to see what the schools children who didn't pass the 11+ went to were like (are they comps or secondary moderns?). DS1 would not have passed an 11+. DS2 definitely would do. No idea about DS3 as he's a toddler. A grammar environment would not suit DS1 at all so if the alternative was something he would benefit from I could be OK with it. I wouldn't even have had him sit the exam though. The SATs alone were bad enough (every night that week he went into screaming on the floor meltdown).

Most people can't just move.

As a parent in a fully grammar county with a borderline child, your friend has my empathy. It's the worst situation - and you have to make your decision about it weighing up so many different things: what the sec modern alternative is like & how it would suit them, how motivated they are to achieve, how academic the other students at the grammar are likely to be, how the DC would feel if they weren't given the option to take the test, how the DC would cope with possible failure. And how much emotional and educational input you as a parent have the time and energy for. And that's before you look at transport and all the other usual stuff!

It's a rock and a hard place, sometimes.

No offence but Unless you try to coach your dd through the test you can't gage her ability. I have coached several kids, at the bottom of their reading/maths/ability sets at the local comp, to pass 11 plus after a year or two (I just require a child and parent who will follow my revision instructions). At normal grammars any 11 plus pass is good enough to be considered.

My son missed a place at a Surrey super selective grammar by less than a point. I know full well that he is brighter than some of the heavily tutored boys which is why it was hard to deal with. He wasn't mature enough for the exam we realise now as a lot of the boys who got in are older and much more comprise than him (it makes a difference). We toyed with the idea of a local comp which has an outstanding but he is now at a private with an academic scholarship.

Sorry meant 'more competitive' than him 🙄🙄

Sorry just to add the Super selectives certainly in Surrey are basically full of kids with nutty parents who will sacrifice their kids childhoods at the altar of that place at Tiffin or Wilsons. I realised very early on that I couldn't do that as I never had a pushy parent myself!

we live on the edge of an area which has some super selective grammars. My kids now go to one. But I would not want to live in any area with full grammar system for exactly thins reason OP.

In fact I would be very tempted to move. The problme with a full grammar system is that the non grammar schools suffer.
An area with a good comp system would be much better for a family in your friend's positon.

sorry, hadn't read the last page with al the posts about super selectives.

This really depends on the area. Where we are, there really isn't such an enormous pressure etc on the super selectives, but then there are some excellent comps in the area too, and many would chose the comp over the grammar.

Mine weren't heavily tutored, we did DIY prep in second half of year 5. They aren't super clever, they made it into the grammars.

i have equal ability twins. Both were in top sets and have got 120s and 119s in SATs etc.

However one has just started a grammar (1300 took test 150 places. The other got a respectable score but not as high as expected probably due to nerves. And with the bar set high with so many places did not get in.

He started comp yesterday.

He was gutted when he found out. Had to see his equal ability brother start. It was hard as the more confident twin who got in to grammar always wanted to take the test more and the other was led more by ths.

It's been a tough year. Nothing sadder than seeing the pain of not getting in having to see your twin go to the grammar.

We were at the opticians and he asked where they are going to school. When DT2 said the grammar, optician praised him and said well done. When DT2 said the comp, optician was silent.

I know our situation is different but my DT1 has a constant reminder that he did not get in despite being just the same ability as his brother.

We"ve been mindful about this as much ad we can to the point where we have been.unable to get excited over the gs for DT2 as much.

DT1 loved comp yesterday and was pleased to be in top sets. I think this has boosted his confidence.

The whole experience has been quite divisive and to feel 'rejection' at a young age is always hard.