If your child won a place at a competitive secondary….

[LeopardPJS]

… was it obvious from the start of primary school that they were academically gifted?
I’m just curious because in year two, my daughter is sort of middle of the pack/ not great on reading / definitely not one of the top kids in her class (though she is lovely and creative and we wouldn’t have her any other way obviously!)
She is an enthusiastic learner who loves school, and clearly takes a lot of the learning in, but is only ‘at expectation’ for most subjects and is ‘at the lower end of expectation’ for reading (though not actually ‘behind’ according to the teacher just lacking a bit of fluency and confidence)
I think this all probably means she isn’t going to be super academic, but my mum thinks it’s too early to tell and academic talents can make a later showing.
Who is right?!

For DS, yes totally obvious. Not that it counts for much in the long run. He's a happy loafer now. It's the DDs who have the remarkable careers. DD1 just as clever but less of a boffin. DD2 an artist.

My kid is at a selective grammar. I wouldn’t say she was gifted, but she’s bright, and yes generally got ‘exceeding expectations’ for most things throughout primary. Second kid is the same and will most likely get into same secondary (I hope)

My experience of primary school is that if your (usually female) child was progressing acceptably and not causing any trouble, they would be generally ignored.

Don't expect typical state primaries to stretch children academically. They simply don't have the bandwidth for that.

I know a few dc who were bright but not exceeding who got into grammar’s & dc who were exceeding & didn’t 🤷🏻‍♀️

Dd was not considered academic for most of primary until year 6. Only got into selective school on appeal. Finished secondary one of the top in her year. It is possible. Orally though she was inquisitive, just took a while for the reading and maths to slot into place.

They all develop at different times and have different things which motivate drive and inspire them at different points in their development. Never assume anything, never give up on them and certainly never stop encouraging them!
Because you never know when they will fly

DS1 was doing a lot better in year 5 than year 2 - we all put the work in

Yes they were obviously bright early on, and yes they got into grammar.

But some of the other bright kids didn’t pass the exam because their parents didn’t bother to prepare them properly 😢

And a couple of kids who seemed fairly thick in reception until yr two passed the exam because their mums spent huge amounts of time educating them - not just prepping for tests, but real brain stretching developmental education after school and in holidays.

What was extremely clear in our class was that all the kids who weren’t allowed sreentime Mon-Fri passed the test, and all the kids who were allowed ipads/tv after school failed the 11+ test.

Yes my first son and daughter were definitely going to pass the 11+ my third I was not sure about. They all did get to grammar and my youngest is the highest earner but the two older ones are in the job they dreamed of .

You don’t ‘win’ places at state secondary schools based on academic ability unless it is a grammar school or has grammar stream banding. For other secondaries, you apply and your application is ranked in accordance with their specific admission criteria.

My brother went on to amazing academic success (Cambridge/Harvard for STEM - Firsts/Distinctions) but was actually absolutely terrible at primary school - so much so that my parents were super worried that he was very behind and paid for private secondary school (I went to state school) because they thought he wouldn't be able to cut it in a state school.

We live in a grammar area and DS1, along with 3 or 4 classmates was battling out being top in spelling / maths tests since reception. Him and all of those kids are now in y9 all at one of the very selective (ie pretty much no catchment) grammars locally so I'd say it certainly helps being bright from a young age. DS2 is middling academically and there was no way he'd pass the 11+, even with tutoring.

Children develop at different rates. I was always top of the class primary and secondary and my brother middling. My brother is a physics professor went to Oxford, taught at Stanford and fluent in another language. I got good grades too btw but am proud of DBs achievements.

So ds1 went to a bog standard comp but is now at Oxford University. He is incredibly bright and it was obvious from early on. A thirst for knowledge, photographic memory, everything came easy for him academically.

Ds2 is not quite as bright but not far off exam result wise. It wasn’t as obvious with him, he just quietly got on with things.

There was a correlation for my DC - greater depth across the board throughout primary school, then on to a selective school.

But I think that’s only partly academic ability and partly being ‘school-shaped’, so ready to learn, able to sit and concentrate, independent at things like doing their own coats and changing for PE. All of those things make school a much easier experience from the start, and if they’re not in place (eg undiagnosed SEN) they can hide that a child does have a lot of academic potential.

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful. Your DD sounds very like mine @Unexpecteddrivinginstructor

DS was always top of the class and an obvious candidate for a selective school. DD was always at expected level, prob until Yr2/3 Ironically it was lockdown and home school that gave her a boost (I'm not giving myself the credit here btw) and since yr 4 she has been certainly in the top 5 or 6 of her class academically. DS got a place at the super selective grammar, she narrowly missed a place but did get a place at several other grammars. So no, it's not always obvious from the start of school, children take different time to acclimatize and thrive in school, also gender, age in year, neurodiversity can have an influence.

Mine spoke early, learnt to read early, and were ‘greater depth’ the whole time they were at school.
Grammar schools are different in different areas though, some are easier to get into than others.

Both DC were obviously bright from an early age as were our GC. We always read to them and talked to them and tried to give them a lot of experiences without spending a lot of money. They both got into highly selective secondary schools. However, one of my friend’s DD seemed to be a genius when she was young but gradually became little more than average. She was just being coached by her mother.

It's not always that easy to tell. Kids that seem very switched on can regress and a lot of the time pushy mum's make kids out to be cleverer than they are (remembering one 4yo who had apparently read ALL of the Roald Dhal books and knew her tables, yet failed her 11+). I know plenty of kids who seemed average or just above who aced the 11+ with little or no tutoring and personally I think those kids are the ones who will swim at Grammar, rather than the obsessively tutored who need tutoring support through senior school as well. There's something quite sad about children who spend extra time trying to keep up with a certain level in school and knowing they have to do so to keep a place must be hugely concerning for them.

The handful of children from my kids' primary school classes who got into a nearby super-selective secondary were not necessarily the ones I would have earmarked to do so - and I knew the classes quite well as I volunteered at the school.

I think this kind of "success" is often a lot to do with parental attitude and constant tutoring. But it does depend on the target school as some are super-selective and others just on part of a LA grammar system (you don't have to be as clever for the latter)

Do you mean selective grammar schools?

dc1 - was obvious in reception year. He got a good 11+ score (we live in Kent) and got into the super selective.

dc2 - was going ok, not as clear but obviously doing better than many of classmates. covid hit, the school wasn’t great at home schooling info. I wasn’t sure but she has done really well in her 11+ this year and should comfortably get a place at a super selective.

if you live in an area with grammar schools, there’s a temptation to intensely tutor, but unless there’s an area of weakness, don’t before year 5. The best thing you could do is play maths games (times tables rock stars was popular but I think from year 3), and reading- read to her, get her to read to you.

@Leopardpj one thing that really has helped dd is because she had struggles she learnt to persevere and that hard work, for her, paid off. This really helped in sixth form when some children have never been used to working hard suddenly find that something is challenging. She is on a very competitive course and some others are struggling because they have always found school easy and don't realise the step up and that at some point everyone has to work.

Oh and heavy tutoring to get into a super selective grammar might feel like a good idea, but dc1 is in year 9 now and several children he knows are really struggling- and I know they are the ones who were v heavily tutored. It’s not always a good long term strategy.

DS is 19 on course for a first from Oxford in a stem subject, so yes unusually bright
( best estimate is IQ around 160). He was always inquisitive and his language development was at the top end of normal. Colours by 18m, never misused pronouns, stuff like that. But not keen on writting or reading until 6 ( halfway through yr 1). He learnt his timestables by October halfterm in yr 2. His yr 3 teacher took is aside and suggested we should consider a superselective.