Things you wished you had known about the 11 plus process

[Goposie]

For me, that the numbers applying are crazy and the sheer odds stacked against getting in.

“The main driver of results, as any fule kno, is a school’s intake

Indeed. We know it but we need to be reminded of it as this fact often gets drowned out in the perfectly laudable conversation about how to improve educational outcomes for the less fortunate.”

Really? In my experience, it’s mostly drowned out by the paens of praise for the amazing exam results grammar schools produce.......

Pressed post too soon.

Wanted to add: and no that’s not fair on the well behaved but didn’t manage to pass the test / have parents who prayed. We can serve all our children better but removing badly behaved kids from mainstream. Then we might find people will be happy to support comprehensive education and get rid of grammars and faith schools.

Born, you have hit the nail on the head; when you say they are numerous reasons why parents might be happy using restricted range comprehensive schools.

I also think talking down such schools with outdated terminology, especially when children at these schools no longer leave at 15 is unfair.

Am I the only person who thinks preparing your child for the 11+ totally takes away from the point of grammars? I'm not talking about showing them a few past papers, I'm talking about the incessant tutoring that sometimes starts in year 3! They are meant for the naturally bright children, not the ones who have been coached to pass a test, but not keep up with the workload.

“BertrandRussell - surely moving to a small Kent town from a London suburb counts as “choosing” a High School? Obviously once you have bought your house your choice is already made.”

I know plenty of DownfromLunnons. They either didn’t realize til too late that selection still exists or have actually done it for the grammar schools. I honestly don’t know any who moved for the high schools.

The ' Secondary Modern' school or model effectively become defunct after the introduction of GCSEs . We can call schools what we like, but the whole point was to offer separate educational pathways;not to look for different grades on the same exams....

School Behaviour Management for Dummies* states:

1. Have a sensible behaviour management policy
2. Make sure it’s applied consistently, with senior management actively involved in supporting teachers
3. Provide suitable support for students with learning, emotional and behavioural difficulties

(1) and (2) are often undermined by senior management not agreeing on what a sensible policy is and/or being inconsistent in or not supporting teachers. This is solvable with common sense. (3) is undermined by lack of funding and/or suitably qualified staff. This is solvable with more money. Unfortunately common sense and money are often in short supply in education.

*I’m sure this course exists somewhere

I know plenty of DownfromLunnons. They either didn’t realize til too late that selection still exists or have actually done it for the grammar schools. I honestly don’t know any who moved for the high schools.

Well I know plenty who could not get out of London quickly enough leaving a highly regarded London comprehensive school.This despite the supposed shortcomings of a 35% GCSE Pass rate school their children now attend.

Correction: leaving highly regarded comprehensive schools in trendy lefty London suburbs ....

I'm a teacher and tutor in a full grammar county, and have my own primary aged children too.

I'm regularly contacted by parents of 6 and 7 years old requesting 11+ tuition. I tell them to go away and read books and practise times tables and come back when they are in Yr5.

I'm constantly asking parents to really consider whether the grammar is the right school for their child, regardless of ability. I've taught some bright children who probably would have been much better off not going to grammar because of the ridiculous amounts of pressure placed on them from day 1. Many of our local grammars are grade factories, nothing more.

“Well I know plenty who could not get out of London quickly enough leaving a highly regarded London comprehensive school”

Fair enough. Not my experience, though.

Ah. “Trendy lefty” Quite understand why they’d want to escape that.

Am I the only person who thinks preparing your child for the 11+ totally takes away from the point of grammars? I'm not talking about showing them a few past papers, I'm talking about the incessant tutoring that sometimes starts in year 3! They are meant for the naturally bright children, not the ones who have been coached to pass a test, but not keep up with the workload.

Depends on the area. I'd agree with you in the super-selective areas. But in our area, it's really not like that. We have a couple of huge faith schools which take the majority of the "pushy parent" population and have good Ofsted reports. Our grammar isn't particularly "attractive" as it's an ancient building, with leaky roof, dark austere wood panelling, antiquated tech/science labs, etc. On appearance, it doesn't stand a chance against the faith and comp schools who've had millions spent on them with new shiny sixth form centres, theatres, sports complexes, etc., so it puts off a lot of the superficial parents who like shiny things! There are usually only around 2 applicants per place so it's not ultra competitive to get into either with "entry" marks usually around the 70-80% range in the 11+ test. Having said all that it still regularly appears ranked about 50th in the state school rankings, so actually does exceptionally well given poor facilities and a lower than typical grammar ability intake.

If the 11+ was actually a test of academic ability and not a test of the ability to do tests then you might have a point. But generally speaking, if you come from the sort of background that gets you through the test you’ll do all right at grammar school. They’re not the Sorbonne, you know!

No, the Sorbonne is much easier.

And this was my point about grammars not being great for working class families.
DD is exceptional, and I know a lot of people say that about their children, but she is. She passed the Kent test without ever having seen a practice paper, and no tutoring. We are very much a low income, working class family. The type of 'background' where she wasn't prepared for the test.

She was offered a place at a SS in Kent (begins with T if you know the area) but we moved to a county with no grammars so she now attends a comp. And she is still doing brilliantly. Her teachers differentiate the work as appropriate, and they seem genuinely excited to have her in their classes (with the exception of drama and music, which she hates). But here's the point, she manages well socially as well. And she really wouldn't have done in T grammar school. The atmosphere and air of superiority we felt as we walked around, is not something I'd want her to ever experience. I don't agree with a PP who said the prejudice isn't there, because it is and I've felt it. I experienced it myself as a child, and I want to protect DD from that at all costs.

Am I the only person who thinks preparing your child for the 11+ totally takes away from the point of grammars? I'm not talking about showing them a few past papers, I'm talking about the incessant tutoring that sometimes starts in year 3! They are meant for the naturally bright children, not the ones who have been coached to pass a test, but not keep up with the workload.

That huge bucket phrase “naturally bright children”. Without turning this into a discussion about learning theory, that could mean many many things. The 11 plus tests particular aspects of that “brightness”, including application, and is governed by logistics, time and cost etc..

I actually think it’s not a bad test all things considered and if some children need coaching to pass it because their “brightness” shines in an area not covered in the test, so what? They are not born with the knowledge!

Of course, a better way of identifying suitable grammar children would be from SATS exams taken in primary school, or by teacher selection. But with the latter, you'll have the bias/political views of the teachers which is probably just as bad as an arbitrary 11+ exam. And with the former, it again comes down to whether the teachers place enough emphasis on the SATS teaching to let the pupil achieve their potential. So, rather than it being about pushy parents, it would become about teacher attitude. I don't think that's any better.

I could look at a reception class in Kent and make a fairly accurate assessment of who was going to grammar school based on entirely non academic factors.

You wouldn't have picked DD bertrand. I was a single parent on benefits, DD was in second hand uniform, received free school meals and pupil premium. Not your typical grammar school child.

IIRC, there are a few grammars in Kent which accept pupil premium children with a slightly lower score, in order to increase the social diversity of the school. It also takes into account the idea that there are academically most able children from low income families where tutoring isn't financially viable. Had DD not have passed, she still would have been offered a place at another grammar, even though we were out of catchment based on FSM entitlement.

“You wouldn't have picked DD bertrand. I was a single parent on benefits, DD was in second hand uniform, received free school meals and pupil premium. Not your typical grammar school child.”
I might have had to have a brief chat with you and see what you brought as a post school snack....But I did say fairly accurate. I would have picked my own ds without hesitation!

Ahh that would have been the giveaway. It was a sliced up pitta and some grapes...

I could look at a reception class in Kent and make a fairly accurate assessment of who was going to grammar school based on entirely non academic factors.

You wouldn't have picked my DD either @BertrandRussell. Sorry no pitta and grapes here, getting vegetables/fruit into DD is a long ongoing work in progress.

But all the Uni Educated Parents of the DC in my DD's school whose DC ate pitta and grapes quite happily, didn't get in to our closest Grammar School. However DD, who is highly averse to vegetables/fruit however much I try to get her to eat them, did get in.

So what else would you base knowing "just by looking at a Reception class", which DC would get into a Grammar School?

RE: tutoring, the 11+ test in my area is sat at the start of September in Y6 and relies heavily on Y6 maths and verbal reasoning, which isn’t taught in primary school at all.

Given the test filters for (arguably but for the purposes of this post) grammar suitability not precognition, parents here would be unreasonable not to prepare their children at all and still expect a rank high enough to get a place.

My child did an hour a week from the end of March until the test, it doesn’t have to be intensive to be effective. Of course there were parents grilling their kids with flash cards in the queue for the test, which struck me as ridiculous and stressful for the child on an already out of the ordinary day.

Several grammars here automatically place PP children who’ve achieved a qualifying rank within their PAN. It doesn’t seem to make much difference, sadly; often the PP children are those whose parents don’t encourage them to take the test.