Super bright kids

[Abirdinthehand23]

Where are all these super bright kids who are getting multiple offers at 11+ coming from? It seems from reading all these threads that there are so many super bright kids who seem to pass these entrance exams with ease.

Is it innate ability or have most been highly tutored or prepped and how are these children so compliant and willing to sit down and be willing to prepare?

Surely statistically the distribution of intelligence means that there is a disproportionately high number of uber intelligent children.

Are CAT scores really a determinant of future success or provide some form of proxy for how well children will do at the school?

People who have lots of offers tend to post because partly they want to show off and partly they have the luxury of choice and as such a decision to make. In the same way people who can afford private schools or to move house into an area with great schools will post more often because they're the ones with decisions to make. If your didn't pass any 11+ and can't afford private or to move house you really have to stick with the school you're allocated.

I have experience with selection and there are definitely children who perform well with almost no revision at all - a few tests over the summer to familiarise them with the format and that's it. Some parents manage to scrape their children through with at least a year, sometimes two of tutoring and the summer holiday as a full time 11+ boot camp.

The 11+ definitely isn't a perfect test of ability. They are very standard tests that need to be performed quickly and carefully. They suit a certain type of intelligence (you need to be bright but not exceptionally talented). The top London selective independent schools actually have much more rigorous exams which really test understanding to a greater depth.

To elaborate a bit further a child who performs very well in 11+ will likely perform very well up to GCSE and do at least quite well at A-level (assuming they maintain a decent work ethic and weren't overly coached) but when they begin to look at getting the top A-level grades and doing university entrance exams is often the first time they begin to struggle as they begin to need a little more creativity and depth of thought which they may or may not be capable of.

Dd currently has 3 offers, with 3 scholarships, and waiting for one more result.

She is naturally bright and found maths, vr and nvr a total breeze, but English was her weakness despite her early age exceptional reading and writing skills. There’s no way she would have got this far without tutoring on 1) exam technique 2) learning additional stuff that her prep school hadn’t yet taught her in maths 3) increasing her vocabulary through a wider range of reading books than her prep school were recommending but also using vocabulary flash cards as it increased the range of words she used in her creative writing pieces 4) a lot of focus on her comprehension skills.

I’m sometimes surprised how badly children at super selective schools do in the end. PP above saying their DC was in a superselective grammar but was only middling there and outshone by those with ten top grades at GCSE. I would expect everyone in a superselective school to get ten top grades. That’s the point of them. Why are children at these schools doing relatively badly? One of my DC was only in the middle set in an inner city comprehensive and still got 8A* and 5A.

I would expect everyone in a superselective school to get ten top grades. That’s the point of them

The point for us was single sex, size of school (tiny) and the range of subjects offered. The fact that the education is superb is an added bonus. Our first priority was a school where DD would be happy and enjoy her educational experience.

@daisypond Totally agree. But as @HolesinTheSoles says above, these grammar selection tests are highly flawed. They are not tutor proof at all, and the vast majority of kids are tutored. Certainly around here they are, starting in year 3 is not unusual. Usually year 4. It’s utter madness. And if they don’t scrape through, it seems they are getting through appeal processes rather easily these days too. Holding back the bits of data they don’t want them to see, and only presenting the good bits. I know so many people whose kids have had mediocre results at grammar. The grammars are becoming too populated with average ability kids...which isn’t quite what they were intended for. But at least it keeps the tutoring industry afloat.

I would expect everyone in a superselective school to get ten top grades. That’s the point of them. Why are children at these schools doing relatively badly? DS is a classic case in point. I would say that some of the teaching is less than exceptional, a lazy child (DS) won't work as hard as they're capable of (and they're not pushed in the same way as they might be as the brightest in a comprehensive), and you cannot underestimate how many achieve top grades with the help of additional tutoring.

My Daughter has been offered an academic scholarship to London school.

She is at state primary.
She took part in a scheme in yr 5 so she had 3 hrs of challenging subjects outside her normal school stuff once a month.
I have no idea what her scores are only that her results we were told were very high and she had excellent references from school and a good interview.

No one in our family has ever considered a private school before now.
The scheme was designed to identify kids that would not normally sit the 11+ but were thought suitable by their head teachers. The borough we live in doesn't have Grammer schools.

She sat one school exam as we couldn't afford to do more.
For her it paid off.
we are very lucky.

she didn't do any other lessons except homework set by scheme. She reads a lot.
Not pushy, she has a natural ability and fortunately for her the right teachers noticed and helped her to improve her potential.