11+ process has to change...

[Gorobe]

Dd took 11+ test at Wimbledon High last week. Sadly dd didn’t pass first stage. I suspect she did ok but not well enough to get through to the second round. Although dd is not highly academic, dd is an all rounder. She throws herself at sports, music and drama. She spends a few hours every week training. She loves it and is especially good at swimming and music. She has a full and well balanced life but now that she didn’t pass, I’m wondering if we should have spent all those extra hours revising instead? I know her friends who got through to second stage have tutors and definitely do lots more revision after school. I didn’t realise it’s that competitive! We don’t have a tutor. I believe she has done enough at school and comes home with an hour of homework everyday. My dd is bright, her scores at school are good albeit not the strongest but she’s creative and full of curiosity and drive. WHS advised against tutoring and yet they have put girls who have been heavily tutored through to the next stage. We have a few more weeks to go before dd sits for more tests in Jan. I’m panicking and think I need to find dd a tutor but don’t even know where to start. Does this mean there’s no place for well rounded children in 11+? How can schools even tell that these academically ‘gifted’ children have been tutored? Schools should look closely at children who have invested time in equally healthy pursuits. If my dd had spent more time revising, I’m sure she would have passed first stage. But is this what senior schools want from children? Am I too late in finding dd a tutor?

It's neither rude nor hilarious to not address something which is a completely different issue to what the OP is posting about. Other people have misinterpreted what process she was talking about. But it's very very clear of you read on. You could start a thread about the injustices of the 11+ grammar process and I'm no word ignore the posts.

I went to a private selective school.
Such places can do what they like on admissions.
The OP's focus on the 11+ was misplaced

I was just messing about by mentioning Comps as there are hardly any of them in London

My DD failed the 11+ grammar school test and yet got a place at Oxford. She is well rounded and not just academic. We also believed the story about not tutoring and found out afterwards that all the DCs who got in had been heavily tutored in one form or another. A bright and determined child can does not have to go to a grammar school to do well.

Can you please advise if there are any tutors or classes that especially prepare kids for WHS exams.
Keen for her to get into WHS.

We live in a full grammar area - my daughter had a choice of three grammars and my son had a choice of two. My son's grammar school is more interested in the rounded individual - my daughter's grammar school said they were but were really an exam sweat shop so we just pulled her out. But regardless of my son's grammar school being interested in well rounded individuals - they still need the children to be academically capable. They are a grammar school after all - they take the children through the material as fast as they can go to then make sure they learn the material indepth at the higher levels. By the end of year 7, my daughter and many others were getting grades of 4 and higher which in theory is a pass for some GCSE subjects. Its was nuts. I think the whole grammar school system is flawed because most people tutor now - but regardless these tutored children have proven that by hard work they can perform at the higher levels and can pass important exams while feeling under pressure. Whether they want to continue working that hard at for the next 7 years of high school is another thing!

Sheonas You should start your own thread - people won’t notice your post at the bottom of this old one. FWIW, I think any of the VR and NVR tests (a mixture of the various types) are what you need for WHS. It’s probably more DIYable than the exams for similar schools, which are looking for more of a breadth of knowledge and skills across English and Maths as well as some VR / NVR. From what I heard from the school, they listed the children in order of their marks on the VR and NVR, took the top half through to stage 2, and then adjusted the ranking slightly based on their performance on the day.

Speaking as someone who’s been through the system a few times in several different configurations now my main conclusion is that what all the academic schools (grammar and selective private) want are children who will work really really hard. And that usually means they need parents who will engage and encourage/make them graft. And at the end of the day an average child who works really hard will usually do better in public exams than a gifted one who spends more time ‘playing’ (sport or otherwise) so I suppose it all makes sense.
One of my daughters was at a super grammar and the work ethic of the girls, probably instilled by the parents, was breathtaking.
So if you want your child to be in those top schools (and I’m not saying anyone should) you have to play the game and compete with the preparation.

And of course many children will do well at a non selective school if they are encouraged or are brilliant.

Not for every child and only a parent can decide if it’s right for their own.

Why does it have to change because you chose to spend money on other things?