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.

Oh christ this old chesnut. Ds is yr10 at a superselective grammar in a neighbouring county. In the "comprehensive" he was assigned non selective here is no way at all he would have done as well. In his school he is doing 11 GCSEs in the comp they all do maximum 8. They offer 2 MFLs and latin ( one MFL only at the comp). I went to a good comprehensive in the 80's and was in the top stream, but was similarly limited in my options which massivesly disavantanged me when applying for medicine. I repeat this was a good school with an exceptional reputation. They couldnt meet my needs i would have been better off at Grammar school.

Comprehensives no matter how good can't meet the needs of the most academic 10%. Or to be fair those of the least accademic 10% either.

“Comprehensives no matter how good can't meet the needs of the most academic 10%”
Why not?

BertrandRussell, So you disagree with grammar schools but agree with setting? I’m not sure I follow. Isn’t a set just a grammar school within a comprehensive to a large degree? You say children are traumatised by not passing the 11+, but wouldn’t those children experience exactly those same feelings if the system was different and they didn’t get into the top set? It’s the same effect - they haven’t got into the top %, regardless of whether that % is taught in the same building or a different one.

B&R the cohort isn't big enough, unless the school is enormous (10 form entry or so) which people have other ojections to. Because of the shpe of the distribution curve there is greater variation in those 2 deciles than the others. Google 7 tribes of intellect he explains it much better than me.

The school I went to was/is a comprehensive. Today it has better outcomes than the grammar schools my dc attend - excellent GCSEs, great A levels, and a significant number of Oxbridge successes. Which rather suggests that they don’t fail the top 10%.

I only wish my dc had had the option of a comprehensive - but living in deepest Kent my children are part of a selective system whether or not they took/passed the 11+.

Mcdc of course it is. You would have to teach all abilities at once when when you get to teens who need more support this won't work.

Why always focus on failure etc why not simply change mindsets, focus on different needs and so on.

The comp system was an experiment. Does anyone think it's worked or been massively successful.

Bertrand Russel do you work in education?

Matilda we have great comp near us too but it's flailed the bottom 10%

mcdc Thing is, if you’re not in the top set, the whole world doesn’t know it. I live in Kent, and when people ask about the schools my dc attend, there is an implicit question - is your dc bright? Of course some children do very well at the high schools (secondary moderns). But until they actually achieve they are judged as being lower academically. I hope I don’t need to say this is simply wrong.

“BertrandRussell, So you disagree with grammar schools but agree with setting?“
Yes I do. Well, I agree with setting for academic subjects. There is a big difference between setting and segregation. In an all ability school there is the opportunity to move up and down sets. Children work together in the non academic subjects-art, drama, sport, PHSE and so on. It’s an opportunity for them to see in real life that people have different abilities in different things and to learn from each other. Very different from telling a child at 10 that they are better or worse at everything. Don’t get me wrong- I don’t think the comprehensive system is perfect. Like democracy, it’s the least worst system we have. And the things that are wrong with it will not be fixed by slicing off the top and putting them in a different school.

In an all ability school there is the opportunity to move up and down sets.

Not necessarily true. In the 2 all ability schools I worked at the heads absolutely did not agree with set changes unless they went up and obviously there’s a limit to top set sizes, because if their targets were to get top grades it was up to the teachers to get them those.

The previous head in one school didn’t mind and I remember quite a few lazy but able boys sliding down the sets and causing a lot of problems as they were perfectly able to do the work but refused, ending up with kids who really struggled to do the work (and who may or may not have been trying). Set changes are not necessarily that easy.

But children work together at art, drama and PE in grammars with differing abilities. My dc are all dire at art, drama and PE. The range is massive in these mixed ability classes in their school. Nobody is good at everything.

From what I’ve heard from friends today and remember from my comp experience there is a certain amount of segregation in comps between top sets and the rest. The comp experience is very different for a top set child in comparison to a middling or bottom. Some of my dc’s friends have had a tough time as they never see old primary friends of differing ability.

And as for movement between sets it seems to be incredibly limited.

And what pp said re not banging everything on the Kent model. Outside of the SE life and schools( comp and grammars) can differ hugely.

Quite a few comps now have a “grammar stream” as well.

The other issue with comps is that quite a lot tend to have “bands” so that they can adapt the curriculum within them. The top band might do 2 foreign languages, the bottom might spend that time on extra maths and English. This means on the one hand you have a curriculum balanced to need but a “sink” band also, out of which it is hard to move because of course if you haven’t done any MFL it’s hard to suddenly start mid way through.

And actually although Kent has grammars, there are plenty of kids who are very able whose parents don’t want them to go to a grammar school for whatever reason, so if you have an able child it’s not a requirement for them to attend a grammar school - they can go to a high school and still do very well.

I also think kids without stellar Sats results and proactive parents in primary can be at quite a disadvantage when starting in comps. The GCSE aims are lower. Those with stellar Sats can also often spend much of year 7 bored. As you say the company system which selects by property too is far from perfect. With that in mind parents do the best with what they’ve got.

To the op don’t make it the be all and end all of life and do big up the alternative. In my experience those who are’ damaged’ by the system are those whose parents are unrealistic, flog their dc to death with tutoring and slate the alternatives.

Grammar schools don’t work for DC with specific skill sets either. My DS1 would never have passed the 11 plus, but his maths and science skills are excellent. His English and general writing skills are distinctly average. In a Kent-style area he would have gone to one of the secondary moderns/high schools. He wouldn’t have had the opportunity to be stretched in maths and probably wouldn’t have been able to do triple science.

A grammar school system would have failed him badly, as would a ‘grammar stream’ in a comprehensive, because he wouldn’t be in it! Luckily his comp set for each subject individually and he was in high sets for maths, science and computing, and middle sets for everything else. He got 3 x A* in maths, FM and physics in sixth form and is heading for a first in maths at uni.

My DS1 would never have passed the 11 plus, but his maths and science skills are excellent. His English and general writing skills are distinctly average. This is my DS too and he got in without any fuss. He is a very good reader though and there wasn't any writing in the test.

This is interesting!

I failed the 11+ but have two degrees and the MBA. Work in a big corporate.

Have been thinking about my child for the 11+. Not sure if it’s worth the extra tutoring required as I controversially don’t even agree with home work lol!

I think people in business do well due to certain characteristics and drive. I think I got a lot from the hobbies I did rather than my academic stuff but hey!

:)

chosen this is what I was trying to say - people will do well based on loads of factors. Not just which school they went to.

Had an interesting chat with an acquaintance recently about 6th form entrance to highly superselective grammar.

Despite being ENORMOUSLY selective at 11+, having applicants who travel up to 60 miles a day to attend it, and a 3 year KS4 (ie a narrow curriculum from the end of Y8, leading up to GCSEs), a surprising number don't make it through to the 6th form.

This isn't because the benchmark for getting into 6th form is enormously high - for comparison, over 30 children in the local comprehensive meet or exceed the requirement, which is basically an average of 7 - a low A - across 8 subjects (and for every 8 or 9 you can obviously get a 6 or 5). It's because despite those advantages - very low %SEN, almost zero children living on poverty or disadvantage, zero social problems, very tight range of ability, 3 years to prepare for GCSE while having dropped a wide range of subjects, supposedly 'the best teachers' etc etc, they simply don't make the grade. A handful a year, i'd expect - life disasters, illness, home circumstances etc. But at the rate my acquaintance was mentioning, over 10% of the year group don't meet the benchmark, every year.

Rubus, he wasn’t and still isn’t a great reader. Fiction has never appealed to him, much to my sadness. He would have really struggled with the meanings of words and finding the hidden word type of questions. My DS3 was a much stronger reader and passed fairly easily but actually didn’t do anywhere near as well in his GCSEs as DS1.

My very bright creative dyslexic DS would have failed...verbal IQ way above the grammar requirement, maths way below. Luckily we are not in a grammar area and he was able to be in top set English (despite the spelling) and a low set for maths (he scraped a C). He's off to uni (best in its field) to do a creative subject. No need to be segregated from someone like him - he had a lot of creativity and out of box thinking to bring to the table despite not being a straight A* student. And no need to deprive him of his very bright peers either.

Greentent, like the complete opposite of my DS, then!

Being quirky is good!