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.

That the parents that put their children in for 11+ in my area are doing it because they don’t want their child to be at secondary school with people not on their social bracket. Like my child...

Parents may hedge around the truth but their children are often their downfall! “I couldn’t come and play because of my tutor”.

It’s a very specific area, and I know it’s not like that in the rest of the country.

Thanks - this is really helpful!

As an aside, there are very few 'grammar' schools actually in London (as opposed to a suburban enclave in Kent/Surrey/Herts pretending to be London).

Most Londoners who decide to opt out of the state school system (but still send their kids to school in London) pay hefty private school fees.

There's a refreshing honesty in openly admitting to paying your way out of hanging out with the local riff raff (instead of pretending its all somehow happened by accident and 'dd/ds just wanted to give it a go, it was all her/him really').

There's also an honesty around tutoring - everyone's working to pay the school fees, no one has the time to 'home tutor' (whatever that entails).
And if they fail the entrance exam? There's always a school somewhere in London willing to take your money.

Grammar schools are just cheaper private schools. Same ethos.

Rubbish.

All parents just want the best school for their children.

I had a dire comprehensive education and didn’t want the same for my dc. Our grammars are Outstanding with excellent progress levels. As regards our comps one is RI and both have poor progress levels and score low on the gov league table. Both are in far leafier areas than the grammars and contain parents who warned me off the grammars, the local area they are in and the intake.

I loved the ethos of both grammars and the fact my dc would all be pushed from year 7. I work full time and frankly don’t have time to badger schools to ensure my dc are pushed which I had to do continuously during primary( it too had a spell in RI).

I’d love to have the cash to send my dc private or get a house/ job in the catchment of the best state comps so I can brag re how laid back I am but I don’t .

And the lastI heard privates are attended by a tiny percentage of the highest earners with the best of everything and tiny classes.

Grammars have children from Pp levels of income, just above to pretty average incomes many of which will be below private fees themselves. They are also incredibly strapped for cash with huge classes.

Don't believe a word anyone says ... everyone puts their own slant. My DS is truly not super-bright but he got into all the north London super-selectives, then produced mediocre results all the way through. Happy though ...

The most articulate and brightest kids we know are 'academic failures' but i'm 100% certain that they'll do very well in life as they're confident and curious.

@dameofdilemma I also don't agree.

The London/Herts/Enfield selective schools have a much broader wealth range than the nearby private schools, and are harder to get into. They are definitely not free private schools! Compare Habs and Latimer, for instance!

The sports aren't as good and the Oxbridge support variable if it exists at all. In fact the local non-selective schools often have better facilities as the grammars tend to be older and tattier.

All parents just want the best school for their children.

Well, this is not always true. I would like a good school for my children which does not harm the education of the cohort as a whole.

So i would prefer to send my children to a good comprehensive within a comprehensive system than to a grammar within a wholly selective system, for example, because of the harm caused to the 'other' schools within the selective system by the presence of grammars.

I would prefer to send my children to a school which takes its full fair share of children with SEN and from deprived backgrounds, rather than to a school that actively or passively selects against these children and thus disadvantages other schools who then have disproportionate numbers of these most challenging children.

I would prefer to live in a fairer educational landscape, and to do that i would settle for a 'good enough' school for my children if it meant that the schools serving all children from all backgrounds and areas and parentage were also 'good enough'.

Well good enough is not good enough for me. Been there, done that and experienced when good enough really isn’t good enough.

Your utopia doesn’t exist in the comp system. Many don’t take their full share of disadvantaged children. Many grammars not in the wholey selective system with wide catchment areas tick along quite harmlessly.

All parents should have the freedom to aim for schools that suit their children- sporty, academic, small, big, musical etc. I loath the one size fits all approach.

N0rdic,

I support choice and freedom IF that choice does not harm someone else or society as a whole.

My DBros and I attended three completely different secondary schools - one 'good enough', one on paper 'truly terrible, definitely not good enough', one supposedly 'top notch'.

We have almost identical A-levels, identical degrees from universities of identical calibre (Oxbridge), and in adulthood are very similarly employed (in low paid but socially useful professions). We are living proof that level of maternal education is a very strong predictor of educational success!

My children are already privileged - they have enough food, a warm house in a safe neighbourhood full of books, well-educated parents. While not throwing them outside onto the road to freeze while ignoring them, I don't particularly think it is morally right, or right for society as a whole, that i should actively seek to increase their privilege at the expense of others or of society as a whole. I just don't.

I appreciate, by the way, that mine is a minority viewpoint. i only wished to challenge ALL parents just want the best school for their children. Not all parents do.

I don't, because i don't want to disadvantage others.

Others don't, because the 'best school' is hard to access / expensive / inconvenient / not where the family goes / not for the likes of us.

Others don't, because getting food on the table and a roof over the family's head, and being safe, is FAR too much to worry about just now, and a decent school is well down the hierarchy of needs.

I think plenty struggling to keep a roof over their heads do want the best or more than the local school they’re expected to attend provides. Many strive to get it and some succeed.

I don’t think I worded my op carefully enough! I was wondering what parents who had been through the selective 11 plus process (private or grammar) wish they had known in retrospect. Ie what did they lean going through it with their own children? About the system? The process?

@Goposie any thread about selective education will eventually segue into a thread about the social impact of S.E. @cantkeepawayforever I really applaud your social conscience. Maybe I am less socially aware and confident than you ( VERY squeezed middle here) we had the opportunity of a grammar for DS2 I have embraced it and not looked back).

I don't, because i don't want to disadvantage others.

It’s very wrong to think like this. It is the duty of parents to get the best possible opportunities for their own children. It is the duty of the state to support services that assist the greatest number.

Parents who do not understand that they and they alone responsible for bringing up their children (and the law is quite clear about this) need to re-examine their underlying assumptions.

That not all tutors are good. We went through two to three before finding a good group tutor. One tutor didn't even know the exam format for a particular school had changed and yet continues to charge £40 per hour and has lots of clients. Don't be afraid to do your own research and challenge the rotors.
What I learned - that there are many super clever kids out there. It's not enough to be 'top table' in a super selective area. Your child needs to be familiar with the techniques, the format, how to use the answer booklet etc. Speed and accuracy are key and these come with lots of practise.

Rotors=tutors!

*Your child needs to be familiar with the techniques, the format, how to use the answer booklet etc. Speed and accuracy are key and these come with lots of practise.

I agree. In wealthy areas there are plenty of children with every advantage. Intense training for the specific test is absolutely necessary.

So i would prefer to send my children to a good comprehensive within a comprehensive system

Most would, but that's perfect world scenario. Most people live in the real world and have to work with the hand they're dealt, not the perfect world. For many, that means their state option is a crap comp. Faced with a crap comp rather than a good one, a lot of people will make hard choices even if against their values. Not many would risk sacrificing their child's education and future just to follow their principles.

All parents should have the freedom to aim for schools that suit their children- sporty, academic, small, big, musical etc. I loath the one size fits all approach.

Likewise, so do I. In my "perfect" world, there'd be no selection at all. No grammars, no faith schools, no sports-specialist colleges, no tech academies, no arts/music/drama academies. But you can only imagine the howls of anguish! I just fail to understand how academic selection is so bad it should be banned, yet other forms of selection are championed. Selection should either be allowed across the board or banned across the board. You can't allow one kind but not another.

What is the point of selection anyway? You cannot possibly accurately or fairly select at 11. Our local comps have students with straight 9s, As and 4As at A Level who go on to Oxbridge, etc. Why the need to remove them to a separate building?

What is the point of selection anyway?

Actually I agree. So let's get rid of faith schools, specialist sports/art/tech/science/maths academies. Of course, that drastically cuts down the pupil's options, but hey-ho, never mind!

“I just fail to understand how academic selection is so bad it should be banned, yet other forms of selection are championed”
What other forms of selection are “championed”?