DD Year 8, struggling at grammar

[BaconAndAvocado]

Had a heart to heart with DD earlier this evening. She feels that she shouldn't be at grammar school as she finds it really hard. She sad that her recent test scores have been very low.

We haven't had any feedback from the school recently (for obvious reasons) so I don't know how she presents in class etc.

Before lockdown she had found it hard settling into Year 7 and had friendship issues. All seems loads better on the friendship front but now this!

I'm not sure whether I should contact the school or accept that she may always find it hard.

[quote TagMeQuick]@Ecosse I completely agree. Tutoring can be a real confidence boost.

Why does anyone think there's something wrong with a bit of extra learning outside of school?

@AndThatsNotRight may have been blessed with a 0.0001% genetically gifted child - but that camp of kids is extremely small.

Grammar school is mostly made up of tutored kids.

Still don't think he'd pass the Tiffin test.[/quote]
The idea that he's 0.0001% gifted makes me laugh, he's nothing unusual! I love him, but not blinded enough to think he's a genius...

The point is that normal kids can do well, and if there were less tutoring going on just to pass a test then everyone would know where they actually sit on the spectrum of ability that is measured.

SJaneS48 I agree the grammars could do more, but it's also the case that unfortunately educational disadvantage begins right from the start, so there's a limit to what you can achieve by tweaking the grammar system at Year 6. Poorer children are already statistically more likely to have fallen behind academically by then. And, as discussed on this thread, grammars can be a fast-paced environment where children need to keep up in order to thrive - and children on low incomes are disproportionately likely to face other issues such as lower parental educational attainment, less chance of a quiet space at home to work, less access to technology, lower attendance, more chance of having caring responsibilities etc etc. Of course many of these things are not true for many children in receipt of PP - but statistically it may be true that children from lower income families are not only less likely to get into grammars but in some cases may also cope less well once they're there. Giving 50% of places at Judd to children on FSM is not going to solve those problems. It's a bit similar to the issue of contextual offers to Oxbridge. Very few people would argue with the principle. But equally there's no point in sending a student to Oxbridge who's not going to be able to pretty much hit the ground running and thrive academically in that environment. Designing a system that's sophisticated enough to identify students from failing schools who have the ability to do well in a very academic environment (and also to weed out those who have over-performed in outstanding schools but also wouldn't really suit that environment) is exceptionally difficult.

@samuraimyths exactly what a Tiffin maths teacher said to me. The very bright ones sometimes don't do well as it comes easy to them. They coast along never having to try too hard. But the slightly less bright and more average ones know they need to work and therefore get into a good pattern of doing the work. He said they do best and in the end it's only people who are prepared to work hard that do well consistently.

I think it cam be a bit of a shock for quite clever kids to go from primary where they're in the top sets for everything to grammar where there are a much bigger proportion of really academic high fliers. So they go from being always at the top to sometimes being in the middle and occasionally near the bottom.

I also really feel for kids who started secondary last year because it's such a step change from primary and they had so much time at home.

I hope your conversation with the school reassures her.

@AndThatsNotRight

"The point is that normal kids can do well" not in London, not anymore.

But well anyway let's agree to disagree. No point going around in circles.

Some children tutored close to GCSE standard with parents who have degrees in maths from Oxbridge etc. For the 11+...

You have no idea what it is like here.

Grade 8 piano and grade 7 on another instrument, still not good enough for a music scholarship...

The level at all things is insane here...

Pleased for your son though, sounds like he's having a more normal existence than us lot in London! I'm trying to create a normal existence but it's near on impossible...

[quote TagMeQuick]@AndThatsNotRight

"The point is that normal kids can do well" not in London, not anymore.

But well anyway let's agree to disagree. No point going around in circles.

Some children tutored close to GCSE standard with parents who have degrees in maths from Oxbridge etc. For the 11+...

You have no idea what it is like here.

Grade 8 piano and grade 7 on another instrument, still not good enough for a music scholarship...

The level at all things is insane here...

Pleased for your son though, sounds like he's having a more normal existence than us lot in London! I'm trying to create a normal existence but it's near on impossible...[/quote]
My point is though that it shouldn't be like that x

It can work for normal kids, but never will with that sort of tutoring.

@turlstreet, I’m not advocating ring fencing PP places, I’m advocating a return to a system where Primary children are all coached in their schools on the 11+ or intake is based on SATS. No external tutoring or coaching. That way you have a democratic intake based purely on ability.

Also while I don’t disagree some PP are educationally disadvantaged, that’s some not all. I’d also say that many working class parents are educationally ambitious for their D.C. My MIL (barmaid, single parent, brought DH up in a tiny council flat) was very much so for DH - as he ended up with a Firsr from a Russell group Uni, it paid off. I’m pretty sure the status quo of bright to average but coached for 2 years middle class D.C. going to grammars isn’t what we as a society should be aiming for.

I do absolutely agree that access to grammar school for disadvantaged DC needs to be improved.

You could either ring fence places for DC whose parents have not attended university or provide tutoring for those who can’t afford it.

Yes, ok, you're right, of course, ladiessmock. You can play Xbox and love French grammar! And yes there is less 'stigma' attached to doing well, because it's kind of assumed they should, although I still maintain it's not particularly cool to be seen to be trying too hard. You can still be considered 'nerdy' even at a Grammar, I'm afraid. Just my experience. I'm probably jealous that none of my dc ever wanted to talk French grammar with me! However, I have known families who have not put their bright children in for the 11+ with the attitude that 'it's not for the likes of us' which is a damn shame and compounded by the image of Grammar school children as somehow 'other'. Not the case, in my experience.

I’m in a grammar county. I know most get tutored now. It’s changed wildly in the last 20 years or so. My DD wasn’t tutored and got 1 mark off max. Only the very over invested tutored then. I went through the type of questions with her. Now, because the exam has changed, I think I would have to get a tutor.

Having been a governor at a primary where virtually no one got to a grammar school, the big issue was parents affording tutors. They couldn’t. We reckoned (back in the day of the 121 pass mark) that tutoring was worth 5 marks. Now I think it’s worth more. The only way to even up the playing field is to have free tutors in schools. Nothing else would work. Dc can do very well at Sats but not get a grammar school place. Timing issues with the exams and technique are major issues.

We used to rank children in the school for extra info for the 11 plus decisions at review. The county would review the near misses. Also don’t forget not all pp children are from families who are underachievers. High ranking forces officers have dc too that get pp. Some very very bright parents have low paid jobs and devote themselves to tutoring. Their dc get to grammars. These people would even game the system for a year!

I resigned from being a governor at one school with fairly high fsm partly because the head wouldn’t support dc at appeals. She thought they were not right for the grammar schools. She pulled a face when I said dc deserved a chance. They were 4-5 marks off but had had no advantages at all! Not even the school gave them a chance. Awful.

There is also the question of over tutoring for the exam and being unhappy with the pace of grammars. I’ve seen it a lot. Bed wetting. Crying. School refusing. It means so much to the parents they don’t listen to dc. Around me, most primary schools don’t have 25% pp in the schools so you couldn’t make up 25% in the grammars with them. There are some high achieving pp, as I’ve said, but few. A few more would get in with free tutoring. No chance of that though. If pp DC are not tutored to get a place, having a % available for them is meaningless. They cannot access them.

SJane I totally agree on your second point, which is why I kept saying 'statistically'. Of course there are lots of PP children who are very well supported and whose parents are academically ambitious for them. But it is also inescapably true that poorer children are statistically more likely to face other challenges and to be already academically behind their peers by the time they reach Year 6.

As to your first point, I've no idea what the answer is (other than ditching the selective system, but that's a whole different argument). If the test is based purely on the national curriculum/SATS then it's hard to differentiate at the top level (lots of children would get 100%). If schools are allowed to coach then that doesn't solve the problem that some schools are just better than others and have more resource to dedicate than others (esp preps). Even if schools are all allowed to coach, how on earth do you actually prevent parents from tutoring on top? KCC have clearly tried to take the position of an untutorable test as the fairest option, but clearly it hasn't worked! God knows how you solve it. Perhaps base your test on innate reasoning skills but make it so completely different every year that it's hard for tutors to predict the content??

Where I am, you opt out.

Nah, DS doesn't talk to me about French grammar either HunkyPunk, that bit was wishful thinking. He talks to his dad about prime numbers instead. I have to talk about French grammar to myself .

I meant opt out of taking the 11 plus. Lots of parents might think school tutoring wasn’t good enough and still pay. When I took the 11 plus we were tutored every morning in school - state school. That was outlawed. It should come back. Then at least the suitable poor children whose parents are not capable of tutoring would get a fair crack. At the moment they get nothing.

SjaneS48 yes, they have just done a week of tests so you ma be right!

May be right

@turlstreet like you I have no idea of how you solve the problem either! I’m not sure that loads of DC would be getting 100% in the SATS though. I can only go on what I know from the cohort of my friends but my DD got higher marks in her SATS then a friends DS who had a 390 11+ score and is at Skinners (although both got over the 110 Greater Depth) and DDs friends at Grammars (not the local super selective got similarish results. All good but none 100%. It just (to me anyway) seems a fairer more democratic selector. But I agree, it would be hard to stop the additional tutoring if not impossible!

Most preps don't even do SATS at the moment. Imagine how hard they'd practise for them if they determined 11+ outcome...

Samuraimyths thank you for your comments, they really helped

@Guymere interesting post about children being 5 marks off but not given entry. That's sad. Whole post is sad.

Also think we have such a stark set of choices in the UK and there's a shame associated with no being 'traditionally' academically bright and good work options closed off to you. Like you're already binned before you started out.

German system that allows as many bright children to go onto academic schools as want to, can (no limit on places) and those that want more training-on-the-job teaching can go to different schools. There's no shame either way as both seen as valid entry points to working life. Much less classist thinking and less of a gap between rich and poor because people treated more equally. No 11+ rush or pressure like we have here. Education needs a complete overhaul in this country. Wonder when or if it will ever happen??

I went to a grammar school and from personal experience I would say that there is an adjustment to be made. Like someone upthread said, I was used to always being the top of my primary school class and having no problems with any subjects and then suddenly found myself in the second from bottom maths set! However, it was temporary and I did manage to come to terms with the fact that whilst I wasn’t necessarily going to be the best at everything anymore, I was still able to hold my own enough to do ok in most subjects in a grammar setting so must be doing ok. It also becomes easier as you go up in years because you get to leave behind some subjects that you are not as keen on.
One last thing - friendships are quite tricky in year 8 from memory. In year 7 everyone is wide eyed and keen and friendly but by year 8, some of the cliques have formed and that can be tough depending on who you’ve managed to make friends with by then. You say your DD does have good friends so that’s half the battle. Some girls did tend to be hard on themselves when they didn’t think they were getting good enough marks but it’s all a process and a learning journey and hopefully you can in-still some self confidence and set her off again on the right path.

@AndThatsNotRight, sorry that was probably my sense of humour fail. I’d been reading about the Uyghurs in China and it didn’t feel appropriate to compare their experiences with a bit of algebra and geometry.

TagMeQuick: I have found that many parents are happy with the secondary moderns here. However a handful are not great. Where I was a governor, there wasn’t a decent secondary modern in the town. So our higher performing dc at Sats didn’t get a decent secondary education. When I arrived at the school they had, bizarrely, put a couple of their brightest dc up a year. So for them it was the 10 plus effectively as the parents believed they were really bright dc and would refuse to repeat y6. Of these children, not a single one went to the grammars! You cannot take the exam twice, so off they went to the secondary mod. Not sure that would be allowed now but it was unbelievable!!

We do have some truly excellent secondary moderns here. Several of my neighbours dc went to our local one and did very well. Maths degree at Exeter. Chemistry degree at Nottingham, Engineering at Bristol. (All these had highly educated professional parents). Add in Sociology at Portsmouth and Nursing at Bournemouth where parents didn’t have degrees. These dc are not written off. They have achieved admirably and the best secondary moderns are as good as lots of comprehensives. But - we are in an affluent county. The secondary moderns can have up to 40% high achievers! Results match that and the best add value too. That’s why some parents don’t lose too much sleep over the 11 plus results. There are other decent schools but the top group of high achievers is missing.

In my view it wouldn’t matter if some dc were double coached. It would help the ones that need it. Others at the top of the academic tree get there anyway. It’s the margins that need change.

Perhaps the point we are all trying to make is that children should not have to be tutored to pass a test at 10/11 years age. This is a situation that has essentially been created by parents. One parent does it, another finds out and doesn’t want their child to be at a disadvantage so signs up too and so it spirals onwards. The tests for these super selectives needs to be so hard because if it was at the right level for children just going into Y6 then right now huge proportions would pass with 100% because they are working two years ahead of where they should be. Because of tutoring.

I agree that this is a situation created by and upheld by parents - or rather more affluent parents (because let’s face it, no one aspires to keep a system in place that disadvantages their child and gives them a place at an underperforming school with less qualified teachers). It’s probably no coincidence that counties like Kent and Bucks who didn’t ditch the grammar system are very Blue counties. Two interesting articles about ability and the effect of tutoring (SATS v 11+) and how the system could be changed. From reading these, I think either all schools in grammar areas should coach all pupils for the 11+, the marking/question format could be reviewed or we scrap the entire thing! There is something fundamentally wrong in a system in which access to the best schools is determined by parental circumstance and class.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-39786477

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/kent-11-plus-coaching-ban-private-primary-school-application-a8522251.html%3famp

@BaconAndAvocado - sorry this has all gone off thread and into a debate about the entire system! At least your DD will shortly have a week off to recharge her batteries which by the sounds of it she needs. Nor am I directly criticising any parent who went the coaching route, we all want the best for our children and while my DH wouldn’t let DD sit the 11+, her Music Place at and out of area Secondary wouldn’t have been achieved I’m sure without the years of music lessons she has had!