11+ is going to ruin me

[AlwaysReadyNeverSteady]

Hi, sorry if this is garbled, I've had a very emotionally fraught morning.

DS is due to sit 11+ this September. He has had a 1:1 tutor for around 18 months. She comes very well recommended and is known for being upfront with parents if she thinks their child might not be quite right for the process/test. She assures me he is able enough.

He's been doing well across all areas, although slightly less so on the maths. He has a LOT of homework which I try to spread out across the week, so we're only doing a couple of (set pages) of books a night and the corrections for practise tests he'd done to previous week with tutor.

Its not always been easy to get him to focus after school, which I do understand as he works hard at school too, but we get through it. Lately he has been so emotional about it and I've apparently just got to the bottom of why... Sat with him this morning, going through corrections of test he'd sat last week. Just burst into tears, beside himself, wouldn't tell me why... Gave him some space and afterwards he told me it's because he doesn't like the way I explain things to him and that I'm "too positive."

For context, I've been a primary school teacher for 14 years. I know how to teach children and what works for different children. My kids at school always achieve well, above national expectations and I've never had any complaints about my teaching style. I never get frustrated with him, am supportive and encouraging and always try to approach the work with a positive attitude, explaining misconceptions patiently.
I'm a single parent and work full time teaching, so to be completely honest it's a massive slog for me to keep motivated and positive for him doing all this by myself. His father is utterly useless and does NONE of the work with him.

I just don't know what to do. This whole process is killing me, I am utterly exhausted. Hearing what he said has just knocked me for six. All this money and time I've invested and endless motivation when I've been on my knees after hard days at work. And I've upset him.

I'm sad and confused and I don't know what to do. I have asked him multiple times if it's because he doesn't want to carry on and he always says he doesn't want to give up.

What do I do?

I do think in general grammar school will have slightly more engaged parents in terms or percentage.

I am not saying that. I am saying that grammar schools attract engaged motivated parents, the same could be said for faith schools or private schools.

Not that engaged parents aren't found elsewhere, but no one in a grammar school is there by default. It manifests in all sorts of ways and is really notable.

I think his choice of words (you are too positive) is quite revealing.

He senses you ideally want him to go to this school. He wants it too. But he is afraid he will fail the exam and your upbeat positivity is just reminding him of what his failure would take from you.

You need to let him talk. Stop the tutoring for a bit and see what bubbles up to the surface.

He wants to make you happy because he loves you. And he is scared he won't be able too.

@nobodysdaughternow - I agree that phrase stood out to me as well. I suspect he is feeling your rising panic at the thought of him going to one of the local schools and in his heart does not think he will pass the exam. He does not want to let you down.

@Goldencup well having lived in various areas of the country and mixed with various types of parent I can safely say that engagement is everywhere.

And neglect too. And bad behaviour.

My longer post was really to reassure (an obviously highly anxious) OP that her world won't implode if her son doesn't make it into the grammar. I'm so grateful for the wide variety of classmates my children had. And proud that they all seem to have found useful and it interesting things to do.

@AlwaysReadyNeverSteady I think you are putting way too much pressure on yourself, if anything.

You've been to crap schools and you don't want that for your son. I get it. But you succeeded. You are a professional woman with her own house. You are a success.

Your fear about your boy is unfounded. He'll be ok. He's a bright lad, so he should get in. So he's not as hot on maths as other subjects...ok, but you are working on that.

Try not to worry so much. You are a good mum. You are trying to support your lad as best you can. But please, take the pressure off yourself.

These threads never go well.

OP you sound like an amazing mum and a great teacher. I'm sure that you will continue doing what is best for your child.

His recent years and comments about you being 'too positive' sound like he was feeling overwhelmed at that moment. Doesn't mean that he is overwhelmed per se. Don't forget that once the current Y6 have done their SATs, Y5 are suddenly inundated with 'it's you next year' etc and the reality of leaving primary starts to sink in.

Best of luck with it all.

Thank you for the positive comments, they've really helped this morning ❤️

I'd just like to clear things up about my thoughts on comprehensives.
I categorically do NOT think that comprehensives are a substandard choice. Far from it. The town in which I live has at least three which are brilliant schools. One in particular is absolutely fantastic and is extremely highly regarded, I would LOVE him to be able to there. The catchment is around 0.6 miles on a good year. You cannot get in unless you have the means to live in a £350,000+ property. Inflated prices because of the standard of the school. I simply don't have the means.

The others, again are great schools, great Ofsteds (I know this is not the be all, before anyone jumps on me) good behaviour and very good results. I know this because I have friends with children at these schools. I respect my friends opinions and have seen for my self how their children have developed and progressed. Again, the catchment is small with very expensive housing.

I happen to live in a borderline area where it's a big risk as to whether he'd get either of the other two options. What he would definitely be offered is the dreadful school 0.25 miles away. Which is awful. I know this because I have read Ofsted reports, which have never been good, I have seen the children myself and know staff who take sports teams there to compete and there are always fights and it has a generally very poor work culture.

Just because this is the case does NOT mean I am saying all comprehensives are bad. This one categorically is. I'm unsure as to why some posters seem to think it is my child's responsibility to be a support human in essence, to be the bright child in a poorly performing school in order to drag it up. That's not his job.

I went to a crap school. Yes, I've done well but I know it was a LOT harder to get there, having to battle through absolute chaos most days in order to learn, than it would have been if I was in a better school.

So, I'd like the defenders of comps to actually listen to what I'm saying - I'm on your side, I defend them too! I'd like DS to go to a good one, not one that I KNOW is very poor, with poor outcomes.
Who on earth would actually want that for their child???

OK, I'll bite.
I don't think smart children will do well anywhere.
But I think the number of really poor schools is not as large as most people on MN seem to think it is. I think smart children will do well at the very large proportion of perfectly ok-if-not-amazing schools and a lot of parents are frightened by hype.

[To justify my opinion being worthwhile according to your criteria,

1. I have a smart kid (9-7s at GCSE, predicted A stars at A level)
2. Have a 19 and a 17 year old so are au fait with secondary transition
3. DC attend(ed) the local comp that takes a genuinely diverse range of children from all socio-economic backgrounds and last year achieved GCSE results below the national average.

]

However, that said, if I had younger children I would be genuinely worried about cuts in school funding and how that will affect state schools in the very near future. It should be noted, of course, that grammar schools are also reliant on state funding and are not immune to any such impacts.

(I cross posted with OP and agree that her definition of her local school probably puts it in my "really poor" bucket).

My comments have not been aimed at OP, who sounds extremely sensible and to be making an informed choice, but at the other posters who are using "comprehensive" as a synonym for "bad".

Genuine comps are not bad in general at all. By genuine I mean they genuinely have a mix of all abilities / backgrounds of pupils.
However, if you live in a grammar area (kent, Bedfordshire for example) and have had kids that go through to secondary there, you will know there really arnt many genuine comps there.
How can there be when 30% are all creamed off to grammar. It creates a very imbalanced school system. Personally I don’t agree with grammar areas at all. Genuine comps give such a more balanced approach.

This too mirrors our experience I wanted and DS wanted to go to an Outstanding comp, which his best friend from primary and all his football team were going to. Sadly we were outside catchment and were not offered a place off the wait list.

I don't consider such schools to be comprehensive - as you've pointed out they are not "comprehensive" in that they cream off the top % of the ability range. Perhaps the "secondary modern" term should be reprised to point out out more clearly the downside of a selective system.

Bedfordshire (or parts of it) has the middle school system, so children change schools at 9 and 13, but there are no grammar schools, so I'd say that a secondary school there would be comprehensive.

I’m kent where I live there are grammars which 25-30% of pupils go after passing the 11+. The rest go to all the other schools which are called comprehensives. The term secondary modern is not used here at all.

Think yourself lucky, in most Bucks grammar catchments the cheapest house is more than £400,000 and likely two bedrooms. A very high percentage going to the grammars go to private primaries. The parents see this as getting a free private secondary education. The nearest private secondary charges Years 7 & 8 £6,900 Per Term Years 9,10 & 11 £8,425 Per Term Sixth form £8,500 per term!

People get very defensive when they discuss schooling for their children. They take other people’s choices as implied criticism of themselves and some kind of instinct emerges to fight and defend. People sometimes use phrases incorrectly and often don’t see the nuances and that their local situation might be very different to others.

• Many areas don’t have any selective state schools at all. In these areas, the system is genuinely Comprehensive and all abilities are catered for in one school.
• Such Comps vary a lot. Their overall attainment is largely correlated to their intake with more affluent and invested parents resulting in higher attainment for children. Although people don’t like to always acknowledge it, disruption can be a major hinderance to progress and some schools have more disruptive pupils than others. In some Comps more setting occurs and in these, it might be easier to escape from the disruptive element than in areas with less setting.
• Some children get stellar results from Comps, including from those with lots of disruption and deprivation. Their ability and/or support from home means lots do well and some do extremely well. At the same time, in some schools, there are a sizeable number who don’t reach their potential and for whom disruption and other features of that school make it difficult to make as much progress. In some schools the culture isn’t that it’s cool to do well and this can make it much harder to reach your potential.
• Anecdotes about individual kids going from average Comps or sink Comps to Oxbridge or other successes in life do not alter the fact that these are not the norm and lots of clever children who would have done better elsewhere, do less well than they might have whilst in some schools.
• Some parents accept the local school that is available to them. Some will want to defend their choice to do so and criticise those who find ways to access alternatives - moving house, tutoring, faith, paying fees etc etc.
• 11+ is not one thing and the same across the country. In some areas there is just one state Grammar admits many many other schools. Super selective means admitting purely on ranked admissions tests - no geographical limited at all. Most state grammar schools are not super selective.
• In areas with one or very few super selectives, it’s very hard to get a place as competition per packed is high. In reality, especially in the south-east, few children get a place without some form of preparation. It can be paid for tutoring or family provided support. This can vary from several years of pretty intensive work to simply showing kids the papers and doing very light ‘familiarisation’. In these areas, the non-grammars can be close to being true comprehensives as so few children are ‘creamed off’ and a much wider ability range still exists in the non-grammars.
• A few areas are fully selective areas. All children either sit the 11+ or it is an opt-in system. In these areas, whatever the non-grammars are called, they are not Comprehensives because they don’t have the full range of ability. Some children go onto become academically successful from these. The selective or Grammar schools in these areas won’t be as selective as the super-selectives, taking a higher proportion of the population. Their results won’t be quite so good. Tutoring/preparation is usually common and the norm in these areas too. It is not the case that the majority who get in haven’t been prepared in some way.
• Some children are tutored extensively for entrance exams. Sometimes it is a cultural thing and some cultures are more focused than others on prioritising education. Some children are tutored inappropriately and pressured. Many children find elements of their preparation for the exams unpleasant. Most are not harmed by having odd moments of disliking it or feeling a bit under pressure.
• Some families do not value education and are not interested in any issues about education or see schools as the enemy. Some families want their children to do well, but are not personally invested and don’t put time or effort into helping their children to succeed. Some families see anything that involves some hard work, possible stress or chance of failure as things to be avoided. They might decry anything that results in these as ‘cruel’ - sometimes they genuinely feel this and other times it can a way of justifying why their children haven’t had the opportunities to access certain schools.
• Parents can become very invested in the 11+. It is particularly the case when the perception is that the alternative to selective school is a poor local choice. Perceptions of what is a ‘poor’ option vary. A few people will see all non-selectives as poor, but most recognise that many non-selectives do a very good job. A key motivation for many is to remove their children form a learning environment with a significant disruptive element, which is seen as a severe detriment to learning and reaching potential.
• People in selective areas who can choose to out their children in for 11+ and don’t, can be very critical of those who do and of tutoring/preparation. They can feel an implied criticism that they do t value education or love their children. Sometimes those who put their kids in for 11+ do wittingly or unwittingly imply this.
• Those in non-selective areas are often critical of grammar schools and of preparation for 11+. They can feel that their child is missing out on an opportunity that children in other areas might have. They might feel that their own child would have done better in such a system or that their own child did very well in the system they were in and therefore the grammar system isn’t needed.
• Many people forget that whether their child had a good experience or a bad experience of type of schooling they received, many others might have a different experience in a similar type of school. Many find it hard to think about the experience of most rather than their own child.
• Tutoring is especially contentious. It costs money and people don’t like the idea that money is required to get a place in a school. It also requires time and effort and people entering their child without tutoring or home preparation can feel no implied criticism that their child hasn’t been prepared equally to others.
• Tutoring and preparation can be emotional for parents. Most parents doing it feel the selective school will be better for their child. They want to help them prep and most don’t want them to be stressed. However balancing that and keeping a child moving forward is difficult. Children know it potentially high-stakes and a one-time opportunity. They know it’s important to their parents and it’s often important to them too. It is difficult for them not to feel stressed at certain points.
• Things that can help parents and children to navigate through the process include the parent taking responsibility for the schooling options the child has and making sure that they as parent will be ensuring a good school for the child and it isn’t all on the kid. Valuing the effort not the outcome - no gifts on results day, only during the process if at all. parents retaining a sense of perspective ….that all is not lost if one doesn’t go the grammar school…remembering that supportive caring parents who get invovled make a massive difference and these children already have that huge advantage. Making sure maintaining the parent-child relationship remains central and 11+ never comes to dominate and potentially create damage to what need to be a lifetime relationship.
• Myths spring up to help support those who have a feeling their child has lost out in some way. These include the idea that children who have received any preparation or tutoring will always fall behind and struggle. They include the idea that a bright child will do well in any school.

In the end, the system is unfair. There is inequality of type of provision and quality of provision across the country and even within a couple of miles. It is still the case that those with money and inclination are more likely to be able to get their children into schools where better outcomes occur. Not surprisingly it causes anxiety and annoyance and anyone who is trying to further the opportunities available to their child can come under criticism or certainly feel it. In the end, defending choices isn’t necessary and doesn’t really help. A bit of humility and recognition that not everyone has the same views and that the system is inherently unfair and that those accessing grammar schools are not better parents than others, goes a long way. And crucially, not saying too much about it all in public or getting drawn in is important. It is controversial and painful for lots of people.

No sorry, I don't think myself lucky at all. I'm surviving on one wage, a teacher's wage. In an area where the house prices are ludicrous and yet I still can't get into a decent state comprehensive.

I have worked my arse off, tutoring in the time that I can and going without anything other than the bare minimum for the past 2 years in order to pay for the tutoring that grammar school requires.

I don't feel lucky because there should be perfectly acceptable comprehensive state schools available in my area. In EVERYONE'S area. The reason there is not? - piss poor parenting.

There is no shortage of fantastic teachers who are more than capable of delivering everything our children need. Regardless of their ability.
That is a fallacy.

What IS in short supply are teachers who ARE fantastic and more than qualified that are not prepared to put up with dreadfully behaved children who run the schools and disrupt day to day teaching because their parents cannot be bothered to raise their children properly.

It's an uncomfortable truth, but one that needs acknowledging.

It’s all part of a broken society and system isn’t it.

Piss poor parenting is often due to poverty and lack of opportunity on the part of the parents themselves. Schools are massively under-funded and teachers are leaving in droves….even from good schools as the pressures of working with such poor resources make it intolerable for many. We have decades of poor funding and low achievement and it flows through the generations. Most people want to do what seems best for their kids….but that’s not clear-cut. People looking out for their own kids (understandably) who remove their kids from the local schools to access better, leave those remaining in the other schools in an even worse situation. But most people want to put their own kids ahead of bigger principles.

Absolutley, there should be great schooling available for all kids. There isn’t and the causes of that are multiple and complex.

Honestly, I don’t think being furious with families who are often at the bottom of the heap in terms of their own opportunities is the key.

Absolutely. I so, so wish things were different for those children, I truly do
I teach children everyday who come from families who's situation breaks my heart. I'm plugging gaps left, right and centre.

But... Of course people put their own children above the bigger picture. Little children are not support humans. It is not the responsibility of bright children from good homes to raise attainment in schools were they will have a terrible experience and not achieve their potential. Adults need to plug that gap.
I don't know what the answer is. But it's not sacrificing bright children's opportunities in order to raise the attainment of such schools.

I'm not furious with anyone. Apart from the government.

*whose

Well other countries don’t have this problem so it’s the school system in the Uk that’s the problem really.

it sounds like you are doing your best. What more can you do?

You say 'You know how to teach children' yet you use the services of a tutor. YOU can't do both! I can only imagine the pressure the poor child is under with effectively two tutors.

Either you step away and trust the tutor, or fire them and DIY.

You say the school in catchment is ' categorically bad' because leary sports team and you seeing kids ( I presume on the streets)...and Ofsted. Do you even know anyone who teaches there? Any Parents??

You may be a teacher of x number of years, but teaching and parenting are two different things , a good teacher can still be a terrible parent. (And I don't think you are, just a bit too tiger...)

I used a tutor because I can't be both to my son.

I simply support him should he need some help. I don't tutor him, he has one tutor and one parent. Just like he has one teacher and one parent who helps him with his homework, should he need it. No different.

Yes, I know teachers who have taught there and it is a poor school.
Unsure as to why you would suggest I haven't done extensive research around my child's options. I have. The behaviour and attainment ARE CONSISTENTLY POOR. I have that information from several reputable sources, including the consecutive Ofsted reports. I'm more than capable of making that judgement.

Please stop referring to him as a "poor child".
It's just silly.

Good god I wish people would read the full thread.

Supporting my child through this process is easier than having to break down everything I've said over and and over again.

No one is bashing comprehensives as a whole.
The school I don't want to send my child to is a continually underachieving school with poor results, poor behaviour and while we're at it, poor safeguarding. You're more than welcome to send your child there. I don't want that for my son.

No thank you.

I am entitled to make that choice free from judgement. Actually, carry on, you can judge all you like, I honestly don't care, because I don't generally heed the advice of people who are talking nonsense.

PPs are correct to say that in fully selective areas, the alternatives to grammar schools are not comprehensives, since they aren't taking the highest-scoring 25-30% from the 11+ exam. They are Secondary Moderns. That term may not be in use any more, but that precisely defines what they are.

That said, DD2 went to one such school and her entire friendship group of 8 went on to university because they had a) very good teachers and a strong SLT, b) supportive home environments (even the households where English isn't a first language, the parents were keen on education) and c) a peer group which was uniformly aiming to go on to get degrees.

2 of them (including DD2) went on to get absolutely stellar Masters qualifications, another is in medical training and the others are variously in professions all requiring degrees.

Of course there are some poor schools around, but as @redskytwonight says, not nearly as many as MN would have you believe.