Panic: what it's really like to apply for a selective secondary school..

Sally has contacted me to express the astonishment she felt when she recently took her son for a grammar selection test. The scenes, she said, were unbelievable, and she's willing to share them with you. It all sounds rather frightening...

"Like hundreds of other children, my 10 year-old sits secondary school and grammar selection tests this autumn, and like many parents, we’re new to the process. But nothing prepared us for the extraordinary scenes last week at our first test day for entry to a London grammar for boys.

We arrived early and so did everyone else. A mile from the school gates, and with 45 minutes before the test was due to start, we drove past crowds of families streaming in the same direction. Hundreds of people strode along clutching registration forms, their faces set to stony, and behind each group of adults trotted a bewildered looking boy struggling to keep up.

We joined the swarm at the school gates. So did five police officers, who, it turned out, would spend the morning marshalling the crowds and directing the arriving and departing traffic. Three testing sessions were to take place that day; ours was just the first.

A general sense of panic grew, and we struggled to resist the urge to join in. About 300 people gathered in the road. Anxious boys pushed past other boys, on past a barrier and towards the exam hall. "Why are they going in?", we asked the man carrying a clipboard guarding the gate. There was still 45 minutes to go.

“Get him in if he’s ready!” barked the man. ”Boys go in NOW! BOYS HAVE GONE IN ALREADY! Say goodbye, mums and dads!”

The crowd surged as the message was passed back along the pavement.

It all proved too much for one boy, who started to sob. “OK Olly - Go GO GO!” his mother shouted, her face full of forced cheerfulness. He slunk off, shoulders shaking.

Another family clumped themselves into a huddle, arms round one another in the style of Madonna and her dancers before a concert. To the astonishment of the rest of us, they sang a quick and demonstrative prayer before releasing one another then clapping and whooping at their boy. He emerged with a euphoric expression on his face, and then scampered off towards the exam hall.

We hugged and kissed our son quickly before he sank into the stream of stunned looking boys. Then we, and the rest of the wild-eyed crowd, shuffled off to the ‘parents waiting area’, a playing field with a tea stall, chairs and a portaloo, to sit in the drizzle and wait.

We learned later that there was no need for the urgency: the boys had sat in silence for forty minutes on crash mats until the exam started.

While we were waiting, we noticed how some parents had pointed their chairs in the direction of the exam hall and were simply staring in its direction. They appeared to be attempting to will their sons to perform well. We joined the rest at the tea queue, where the atmosphere was still crazed.

One mother solemnly confessed to her friend: “I’ve never shouted at James before, but I did last week. He was playing with Pokemon cards instead of studying.”
“But you’re always shouting at him,” said her friend.
“Not like this. This time I lost it completely.”
Then she started crying and couldn’t stop.

Perhaps these scenes of police crowd control and sobbing parents are unusual. The school is oversubscribed; we are told 2,000 boys sit a test for 150 places. Nevertheless, on that day we wondered what the hell we were doing, and whether we wanted to put our son through this or any more selective tests.

But equally, it was cheering to see parents from different races, religions and classes who all loved and wanted the best for their children, even if that meant behaving irrationally in public. And in spite of the tension, parents were at pains to be very friendly to one another. Once the panic subsided, strangers struck up conversations. Who knows? If our sons pass, we might become lifelong friends. "

Is this situation normal? What's your experience? Why do we put ourselves - and our children - through it? Are grammar schools worth it?

Read School Gate:

Should there be academic selection at 14?

Is it fair to tutor your child when it comes to school admissions?

Comments

[Jayne Howarth]

This both appals me and doesn't surprise me.

We all want the best for our children and we do sacrifice ourselves for them: whether it's giving up a career to go part-time or spending every spare penny you have on extra tuition so they can go for the grammar school entrance exam.

But the poor children.

Even if they have the aptitude and the inclination to go to the grammar, they are being put under the most incredible pressure.

One friend whose son was sitting an exam told me how stunned she was to see mothers gripping their children's shoulders and telling them that they "didn't understand how important it was" and that they "must pass or else".

This is tantamount to child abuse. Why must these children pass "or else"? Is it for the child's educational sake - or is it (more likely) for the parents' sake? So the parent can smugly announce that little Johnny or Jemima go to "the grammar". Oh, the kudos that must afford them.

My daughter is also due to sit the grammar school exam this autumn.

I'm not sure how much of a chance she has (I've not been sending her to a tutor for the past three years, so that would immediately put her at a disadvantage), but SHE wants to try.

This might well be because I went to the school, but she knows it is not the end of the world if she doesn't pass.

I've told her that while the grammar school is a fantastic opportunity, she will be educated to a high standard wherever she goes if she puts her mind to it.

Surely this is common sense?

How dare these people act like lunatics. They are doing nothing at all for the mental well-being of their children.

[Cathy]

Jayne: I agree with your every word. This is absolutely appalling behaviour on the part of parents who are passing their own social greed and insecurity off as being 'for the children's good'. What garbage.

I'm extremely glad that we were able to 'buy' an excellent education for our children by virtue of a relatively large mortgage and haven't the pernicious choice of grammar school, by which we would have been tempted - both having been grammar school-educated back in the good old days when most of our peers were judged at 11 and found wanting. I work as a private tutor and some of my pupils are getting extra help just to assure their places at the top of the class. Why on earth have children if this is the result? Good luck to your daughter. It sounds as if, with your unqualified support, she'll thrive wherever she goes.

[Alison Hill]

If you have to tutor your child for three years prior to the 11-plus just to pass they will struggle once they get there. My eldest attends a grammar school and my middle one sits her 11-plus in November. They have not been coached and have attended the local state primary school. The only preparation for the 11-plus is doing a few practice papers beforehand.

[James]

The reason it becomes such a big deal is that, for many, there are no other alternatives to a decent education.

The standard at most comps seems to have dropped considerably, and there are fewer and fewer grammars, or other alternatives to comps available. Also, the assisted place scheme has gone.

Parents want to give their children the same or better opportunities than they had themselves. Those parents who managed to get a good state education are acutely aware how important it was for their future lives, and also aware how much harder it now is.

[MarkSampson]

it doesn't matter if your child does not get the place YOU want or the education YOU want , why can't you let them live their lives and find their own way ? I went to a crappy secondary modern in the 1970's after dismally failing my 11 plus, my parents were there with love and encouragement but crucially left me to explore my own emotional and intellectual space, Im 49 years old now, have a Bachelors degree and a Masters Degree and I am a partner in a Mayfair Law Firm,I spent my teenage years bumming around doing laboring jobs, traveling around Europe in a Morris Minor van with a mattress in the back and all before I was 20, but when I knew I was ready, I buckled down and did my studies, had my parents forced or cajoled me into doing it when I was younger I would be delivering Pizza's now, do not worry if your child does not get what YOU want them to have, let them find their way into adulthood and grasp their own identity, they will buckle down for those Goals but only when they are clear about what they are.

[Kim]

Suddenly feel very glad my daughter is going to the local comp! It all seems like a lot of unnecessary effort, really. If a school selects children on academic performance, then it's pretty clear it's going to have a better set of exam results. I'd like to know with a selective school how much value it's really adding.

Sarah - I heard you on Woman's Hour this morning. Really interesting discussion.

[Rachel]

Oh how dreadful it all is to be part of that awful throng outside the school. Oh, and how awful not to be part of it at all.

Let's face it, being caught up in all of this 'will-he-get-into-grammar-school-or-will-we-end-up-with-egg-on-our-faces' scenario is what drives a whole lot of parents from the day their children start school if you live in a grammar school area.

I have two of the best grammar schools in the country near me and the way parents go on about it is ridiculous. You certainly can't argue that grammar school entry is the only way to a decent education round here - it's all to do with prestige and showing everyone else that you, as a family, have done it. You've coughed up for the tutors and made the children put the work in and the children have gone along with it too.

Bizarre. Go for it if you want to, but please spare the rest of us the histrionics. And I am finding School Gate increasingly elitist, with threads on going to Oxford and sitting for grammar schools and the likes and not much at the other end of the spectrum. My daughter attends a SEN school. Do you ever feature them?

[Cathy]

Kim: exactly what I've always thought. And I wish I'd listened to Women's Hour instead of going to the gym (wasted effort, to be honest!).

[Cathy]

Racel: hear, hear. Why don't you write something on SEN? I for one would be interested.

I'm a private tutor and have coached children for our local independent school (we don't have grammar schools, thank goodness). Some of the children with aspiring parents are frankly uncoachable and I'm glad to say don't get in. If you read what the heads of grammar and selective independent schools say, it seems to be that they don't want these precious, spoon-fed children anyway, but those who are naturally bright and have good work habits.

At risk of making you scream (;)) I was at Oxford with people who had been coached to within an inch of their lives and they really floundered when they were left to get on with it. I think it's time some parents faced the facts about their children: I speak as someone with a chronically under-achieving son who has no justification - just bone idle. His business, not mine!

[Liz Taylor]

My 11+ exam was taken at my primary school during a normal school day. No need for parents to be present, No extra panic or worry. Just a test in a familiar environment. Surely that's a better method of doing things.

[Anon]

I would be a lot less stressed about grammar school entrance if schools did a better job of preventing bullying. I have 2 somewhat geeky boys who have been bullied mercilessly at the 'nice' local primary. The only sanction seems to be to sit bully and victim together and at one point my son was asked what he had done to cause the bullying ! My eldest is now at a grammar school away from the bullies and extremely happy. I am desperate to get my youngest there (although not letting him see how desperate I am) as I can't afford to pay but will have to get him away from the bullying if he doesn't get into the grammar. I've lost count of times I've been in to talk to the school about bullying :-(

[Sarah Ebner]

Hi Rachel,
I have done some SEN stuff, and am happy to do more. Why don't you write something for me? This post on grammar schools was written by a mum who sent me an email suggesting the idea. I thought it sounded scary but interesting, and relevant to many.
Oxbridge stuff is being posted now because applications have to be in by 15th October. There is more coming I'm afraid, but the last post was very much on trying to suggest that these universities weren't elitist.
I always try to do a wide range of topics, on all types of universities, as well as schools. I don't actually write on private schools very much, and most of my posts are state related.
I hope to hear from you! If you don't want to write something, then please suggest some ideas, and I'm very happy to try and look into them. I have posted on dyslexia, adhd and asperger's.
Best wishes,
Sarah

[Rachel E.]

Let's not be too quick to judge the parents. We are fortunate enough to have truly excellent comprehensives in our area. If our daughters don't make it into the grammars, they will still get a very good education - so we have the luxury of sitting back & letting things run their course, without tutoring or pressure. This is obviously not true for everyone. For some parents of limited financial means, grammar school is their _only_ shot at a decent secondary education for their children.

Instead, let's remember why 2000 boys are competing for 150 grammar school places: the dire state of many comprehensives and the artificial restrictions placed on grammars. If grammars were allowed to expand or if comprehensives were a better alternative, competition to enter grammars would be less intense.

[Cathy]

Rachel E: There's no excuse for what is tantamount to child abuse. I wonder how many of these silly people have actually visited their local comprehensives, rather than give ready credence to half-baked Daily Mail stories? There's so much utter rubbish talked about state schools. And the fact remains, that even were grammar schools the last bastion of decent education, they are DESIGNED to discriminate against 80% of children. That means that most of the offspring of these ludicrous, bullying parents will FAIL.

[Kim]

People often say that they choose grammars because they offer a better education than comprehensives, but I'm not completely convinced that's the case. They do, of course, get better results than comprehensives, but if you only select your intake from the highest achieving 20% of children, then you are bound to get better results, aren't you?

[Cathy]

Kim: That said, it's only fair to point out that some (largely inner-city) comprehensives do have some dreadful problems. But, dare I say it? they tend not to concern Times readers, at least outside London. And their problems are largely the result of their obligation to take all comers from the local area. It's hardly surprising if the 'best' teachers choose not to struggle with the disaffected.

Having said which, I'm still sorry I had to give up teaching key stage 2 at an excellent school of my acqaintance. Sturdier souls than I continue to do an excellent job there and I won't have their fantastic teaching put down just because I couldn't hack it! And I'm sure the same is true of inner-city comps. People who think the teaching's better in grammar schools are viewing it from the wrong end, IMO. Rant ends.

[Emma Fielding]

I'm currently at Durham university and I went to a grammar school and so took an entrance exam. I don't remember feeling particularly stressed - although I did realise that it was a big deal. But then I'm quite a laid back person anyway. I had a tutor to help me do the non verbal and verbal reasoning papers, but the exam for the grammar school tried to look for the naturally bright pupils rather than the overly tutored ones! In an ideal world, all the comprehensives would be good enough that we'd have no need for grammar schools. But as it is, the brightest pupils are not pushed enough in normal comprehensives. In my school it was almost expected to get all A*s and As at GCSE/ A Level, whereas in a comprehensive this would make you stand out as being particularly nerdy, and you wouldn't be pushed to achieve the best you can. For me, my school meant that I could achieve great results, knowing that my classmates would be doing just as well if not better! Our school never pushed us too hard, but you need a bit of competition and I have only happy memories of my time at school. Either we should make all our comprehensive schools better, or we should have more grammar schools for the brightest pupils regardless of their background.

[Ragster]

I have to agree with Emma Fielding (not just because I also went to Durham university!)

When I was at school, there was no option of Grammar schools in my area, so I went to the state comprehensive. And the problems we had there, with classes of such dreadfully mixed abilities, were so extreme that it's a wonder we managed to learn anything at all.
We did have streaming in some subjects (maths, for example) and when we split for GCSEs - but generally it was appalling how much time the teachers had to spend on crowd control (and yes, bullying was an issue - severe in some cases - but when 'students' can't attend a detention because they're in court on GBH charges ... well...)

I was so relieved to get shot of the wretched individuals who made it their goal in life to prevent other people from learning.

So, now we live in an area where there is selective education. Naturally, there are also prep schools who coach children mercilessly for the 11+. It's an arms race, because, like it or not, the education in the grammar schools IS better.
Why it's better is a subject for much debate - preferably backed by some research. (I have my own ideas, and not having the academically dis-inclined there comes high on my list.)
So, the real failing, as I see it, is not that Grammar schools have better teaching but that the teaching in comprehensives is not so good. There is no reason why it shouldn't be good - but I think it should, potentially, be different.
It should be better suited to those in the school - after all, in an ideal scenario they have been 'selected' as much as those in the grammar school, just on different criteria.
(Perhaps more banding - or examination on more than just academic inclination?)

Regarding parents, I have not seen anything like what was described in the main posting. Our children take the exam in their own primary school, as just another test.

Our oldest passed the 11+ and he had some coaching outside the school (very friendly and informal, but he knew what was going on - and to get away from the bullying children he was stuck with in primary school was a good incentive.)
Our second child took the first paper today. He had the same tutoring as the first, and seems to have handled the exam ok (although during one of the practices he had a torrid time - but that was due to constant time reminders which panicked him - but that has been resolved, which I suppose is a good thing to have happened before the real exam.)
We tried to shield them from pressure, but actually the exam DOES matter.

If the Comprehensive education was in any way comparable to the education in the Grammar schools, I would have no problem. But it just isn't. So, as grim as it might be, you have to play the game as it stands.

Streaming is a good thing, so long as you don't 'leave the rest behind.' People are different, have different interests, ways and rates of learning etc, and our schools do not cater for these differences well.

But the solution really isn't to drag everyone down to the lowest level, which is the only offered alternative to Grammar schools.

Given the choices available, we'll try to get our children into the environment in which they'll do best: The Grammar.

[Cathy]

Emma: Without doubt, we should make all our comprehensive schools better. My concern is for the 80% who would/will never get into grammar schools. Most people posting to this blog (with a few honourable exceptions) care nothing at all for other people's children, only that their own 'win'. With that attitude, their children are going to be deeply unlikeable adults - and their generation is going to have an awful lot to fear from the dispossessed. As yet, we've heard comparatively little from the underclass. I've never been more sure of anything.

[Cathy]

Ragster: I appreciate your well-thought-out and informed comments on streaming and can only agree. I would, however, disagree that the teaching in comprehensives is necessarily inferior. As Kim has pointed out, the results will inevitably be inferior since comps don't have the luxury of weeding out the academically less able. That is nothing to do with the abilities of the teachers. At my grammar school the teaching was dire. The teachers were on the whole complacent and lazy, with no interest in any but the most gifted in their subjects. Most wouldn't have lasted five minutes in the average comp. I agree that there's a lot wrong with state secondary education, but please don't blame the teachers for everything. Abysmal parenting has more to answer for than anything else.

[Jos]

I second Cathy and Kim - far better to put energy and resources into improving education for EVERYBODY rather than subscribe to the 'my child's OK and to hell with the rest of 'em' philosophy. In my opinion this probably means

1) more streaming - teaching geared to every child's abilities, but assessed regularly (by teachers, not SATs!) and handled flexibly so that moving between streams becomes the norm, not the exception.
2) SEN provision that is accessible to everyone who needs it - this can be support in mainstream schools but should also mean specialist schools for those who need them. Inclusion is not appropriate for every child and parents should not have to fight or pay through the nose to get what's best for their child.

3) getting serious about dealing with bullying and bad behaviour so that the small minority who disrupt everyone else's learning don't get the chance to continue doing so. Some members of tis minority may well benefit from being in spcialist units where their issues and behaviour can be addressed.

All this will cost money - but in the long run it will save far more money by providing every child with real opportunities, reducing illiteracy and offending behaviour and perhaps finally breaking down the class barriers that still exist in this country.

And lastly - parents should realise that what really matters most is not what happens in school but what happens in the home. no amount of fantastic education is a substitute to a stimulating home environment where a family can talk about anything from what's on telly to music and literature and back again.

[DAVID VINTER]

What wimpy parents some children have. I took the 11+ at the age of 10yand 4m, with no tutoring. It was a normal school day, we had no warning, no crying, just got on with it---but then we had just come through a war, and were made of tougher stuff! Yes I passed, and then cycled to a new school in the September, it's still a grammar school as it has been since 1552.

[Ragster]

Cathy: 'I agree that there's a lot wrong with state secondary education, but please don't blame the teachers for everything. Abysmal parenting has more to answer for than anything else.'

Sorry - I was not as careful as I should have been in my word choice (please excuse me, off work sick and not thinking too clearly, perhaps.)
I didn't mean to imply that the teaching was inferior in Comprehensives - I think the teachers there do a fantastic job under very trying circumstances.
However I do believe that the education children recieve in them is inferior, not through any fault of the teachers.

I absolutely agree that abysmal parenting (encouraged by the current political climate that attempts to remove all responsibility from parents and take it to the state) is responsible for much of the poor learning environment.

The inability or unwillingness to protect those intersted in learning from those who aren't/won't is a present problem however, and improvements in parenting, whilst critical, won't help those currently struggling. The fruits of better parenting will take years (generations?) to arrive.

Perhaps one of the reasons that the learning environment in grammar schools is better is that the children will almost exclusively come from backgrounds where the parents do want them to succeed, and support them academically (however that manifests itself - be it tutoring, prep-school, or just trying to help them learn to think.)
This may be an important (if not overwhelming) influence on the selection process.

Those who 'pass' will have parents who want them to learn, and so the children in general at least try to learn.

[Jos]

Ragster,

Fair enough and well put, but it doesn't address the majority of children who either don't have grammar schools in their area, or aren't able enough to go to one - but DO want to learn. Leaving aside the issue of financial inequity (i.e. those who can afford to pay for tutoring getting places for their child whilst bright but poor children miss out) - don't ALL children have the right to a good learning environment? It's just too easy to assume that the parents of children who end up in schools that do less well aren't motivated for their children to do well. We need to face the facts, and they are that there is no such thing as equality of opportunity and that the current system of who gets what education is very much not based on merit.

[Cathy]

Ragster: No, I'm sorry! A bit trigger-happy there, I'm afraid. I hope you're feeling better now.

[Cathy]

Jos: spot on! I will never shift from my firm belief that the comprehensive dream should have worked (and still could) given the conditions you outline. It always intrigues me that so many parents are happy with their local primary (which works on the comp model) but won't 'risk' their local secondary. Why is this? Is it because they know what large groups of adolescents are like (shudder!)? or is it (more likely, I fear) because they think that nothing very crucial like exams goes on in primary schools so it's OK to save money by using the state version? I'd love to know what people think.

I once had a mum (in a very nice part of SW London) virtually crying on my shoulder because her son was being moved from our lovely, cushy, C of E primary, at the end of Year 2, to a prep school. I was dying to say, 'You don't HAVE to move him, you silly bat' (but I didn't).

[Jenny]

Jos.
Great comments. You'd make a much better minister of education than the current one.

[Rachel]

Wanted to add that yes, round here, the grammar schools are filled with the children of pushy middle class parents. Many parents of bright children refuse to put them forward for the entrance exams because they are put off by the singularity of the intake. They want a more rounded education for their children. Parents who can just about afford it go to local private schools even when their children could have got in to the grammars (lots of allocated places are not taken up because of this). Whisper it, but I have heard that some of the lessons at one of these schools are rather dull and uninspiring, but of course the parents don't complain - the ethos is "we're great, you're jolly lucky to be here, now please let us get on with it". Lots of parents I know don't like that attitude and are keeping clear.

I just think that people shouldn't be seduced by the words 'grammar school' without investigating what they have to offer in a lot of detail.

[Ragster]

Jos - yes, absolutely. I would rather that grammar schools were available in all areas, and that the teaching was excellent in all schools. No child deserves less.

Sadly, that is not the reality we're currently faced with, and (possibly as a victim of my own genetic imperative) I will do what I believe is best for my own child. I would love to be able to give all children the best education possible. I haven't yet found a way.
(I, too, think you'd probably make a better minister for education than the present incumbent - sorry for the faint praise.)

Cathy - thanks, I'm feeling a bit better (although not what I would call well. I was back in work today anyway.)

We have a number of grammar schools in our area. My wife works in one of them - not the one our son attends. We send our son to the one we do beacause, having visited the various schools, met with the teachers, headteachers and a number of pupils in, and formerly in, the schools in the area, we think it is the best one (in exam results, extra-curricular achievement, pupil happiness, curriculum options, facilities, etc.)
Certainly it's not a case of the magic 'grammar' title, or any of them would do.

I, too, wish that the comprehensive system worked. My school life would have been so much happier if it had (and it wasn't good - in fact it was miserable.) But the evidence I have, personally, and from what I see of others, is that it is everyone dragged down to the minimum level - and I don't blame the teachers for this.

Whilst I wish it did work, I can't see how it can, in the current climate.
I'd love to be proved wrong.

[TSM]

@Sarah - what about Dyspraxia? As the parent of 2 Dyspraxics and one Dyslexic I find it incredibly exasperating that almost all discussion of SEN is restricted to Dyslexia. To hear Ed Balls speak you'd think Dyslexia was the only SEN there was.

Incidentally, my oldest child - who is Dyspraxic- has just started at a grammar school. The only one in our county. So, Grammar schools and SEN aren't actually mutually exclusive.

[Kim]

TSM - that's an interesting point. I interviewed someone recently who works as a special needs assessor. She talked a lot about dyspraxia, and the fact that a lot of cases still go undiagnosed. She said that dyspraxic children are often very bright but tend to get labelled as clumsy, careless, unco-ordinated and so on.

I do hope your eldest child is getting the support he/she needs. Technology can help a lot - e.g. letting the child use a keyboard rather than to have to write things by hand. Voice recognition can help too. (You probably know all this.)

She said that at least with dyspraxia, it's only been identified as a condition in the past few years, so people haven't got round to claiming it doesn't exist as they have with dyslexia!

[Mrs Baum]

These entrance exams sound like a nightmare. I don't think it's that bad outside of London.
I am currently despairing of the education system as, having done very well up to year 6, my son did year 7 at our local (comprehensive, with a good reputation) High School and went from being at the top end to being decidedly average, doing as little work as he could get away with etc etc. The school did absolutely nothing about it.

So, we moved him to an independent school. This means a longer school day, a 40 minute drive each way, and the end of his social life during the week. It also means that he's actually finding out what it's like to get homework every day, how to research and write your own work instead of filling in scrappy worksheets which are promptly lost etc etc.
He's not happy at the new school, but I can't trust the local one to keep his nose to the grindstone - and he is a child who needs pushing as he isn't very motivated.

I wish there were a 3rd option. I've even considered home schooling, though it would drive me mad.

If there were a grammar school round here, yes, I'd bloody well tutor him for the exam (I did, for the independent school exam - though I did it myself). Mine is a child who thinks that as long as he's doing about as well as everyone else, he's fine, so he needs to be somewhere where the general standard is high!

And don't get me started on the GCSE options - crap crap crap! If you want to do triple science the other options are so restricted, and there are no guarantees that you'll be "allocated" the subjects you want! Unbelievable. My son would rather not do a language or RE, both of which are compulsory (WHY?), but won't be able to do all the DT and other options he'd like to do - at either school.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just so disillusioned with the education system in this country, and as far as I can see it's just getting worse.

[Parvati P.]

The problem with secondary education in this country is that just a few schools (particularly in London)are any good. Among them the grammar schools. Parents have little choice but to push their kids towards the grammar school route, or at least to try. They would be failing their children if they did not. Its all very well for people to say there are good comps but what if they aren't in your area? Also for those who say what about the 80% who don't get in? That's the whole point, the panic and the passion is all about not being the 80%. It is a much more competitive world out there than even 20 years ago. The competition for decent jobs among the really well qualified is horrendous. The bottom 80% don't even get a look in. There in a nutshell is the reason for the horrendous pressure at 11+.

[Cathy]

Parvati: 'The bottom 80% don't even get a look in.'

You mean they're all unemployed? All doing rubbish jobs? What exactly do you mean by this nonsensical comment and where's your evidence?

[Cathy]

Mrs Baum: 'He's not happy at the new school, but I can't trust the local one to keep his nose to the grindstone - and he is a child who needs pushing as he isn't very motivated.'

Poor child.

[Cathy]

One of the elephants in this particular room is the fact that, where a grammar school exists, the local comprehensives are 'robbed' of the brightest potential pupils. While I realise that this is not sufficient motive for parents to send their children to the state school, it does render their subsequent criticisms of comp results somewhat disingenous.

[TSM]

@Kim - sadly Ed Balls doesn't seem to think dyspraxia exists. :(

[Sean Marshall]

The fact is i went to a state comp got bullied etc. My parents both worked in shoe factories and i am a labour supporter but do i say to my eldest tell you what luv you go to the local comp and get the snot beaten out off you becuse daddy feels that you should help to be part of schools that are failing and where you wont be encoraged to devlop and where the likely hood of reaching your full potential won't be reached. She decided on the Grammar school and also we lloked at two church schools, she passed and she chose to go but for all you who turn round and have not lived through schools where you are scared to go in, the teachers don't care and you learn just to survive at times then i say don't blame the parent who will fight for his kid to have the chances he didn't. If you say they are selfish then damn right they are but i can live with that ok.

[Jos]

@seanmarshall -

No-one could argue much with anything you say, but the point you make seems to be mainly about what parents will and will not do to ensure that their child gets what is best. Not arguing with that, it's completely reasonable and I'm as selfish as the next person. If my children end up getting bullied I will fight the school tooth and nail and if I get nowhere, I will move them.
The point about state secondary education though is that parental involvement is if anything more crucial than before. It's sad, but by the time most children reach middle school age (age 9 - Suffolk has a 3 tier system), parents seem to stop reading to their children and they seem to feel unable to support children with their school work. OK, no-one expects parents who may not have much education to be able to handle A-level maths, but being engaged doesn't mean doing their homework or even understanding it (number lines took me ages!), it means working together with the child to find the resources that will help. It means taking an interest. It means not expecting schools to do all the work for them. The research shows that parents who do all that tend to have good educational outcomes for their children even when their school is very poor - which throws all this panic over tutoring and selection into perspective. Good education still starts at home.

[Bloated Fish]

Parents who care about there loved ones are terrifying when it comes to the high expectations they set on the little cherubs. In most cases, my sense is that parents are keen to fix their own defects and shortfalls. This means that the poor kids are treated like factory chickens who must go to school and achieve the results.

Whilst this approach works for the great majority, it is nontheless a battery chicken that is produced at the end of the process. It is far better to see a child who has the correct values and passion to succeed who seeks out a good education.

Ultimately, star performers will do well anywhere. However, a positive and well resourced school with minimal disruption from socially deprived children will always be a strong reason for many to seek out the better performing schools.

[Ian Ingram]

Nearly seventy years ago I went for my grammar school test. I travelled alone at a time when air-raids were frequent. I passed and spent 4 years which I wasted, much to my later shame, at Tottenham Grammar. Most of the boys were what in those days would have been described as lower class and most of them did not waste their time. There was little or no bullying

[proud dad]

My daughter was one of about 900 who secured one of 98 places. I believe my coaching was a major factor. I worked at her till her initial low 60's reached the high 80's. Whatever anyone says I think it was a great achievement on her part (and mine!)

[david taylor]

Yet a further indictment of our so-called 'education system'that parents have to go to such lengths to secure a decent education for their children.In spite of social,class and geographic engineering,it highlights the abject failure of the comprehensive system.(See crashing standards and statistical manipulation).The tragedy is,that like the Bubonic Plague of 1348,there seems to be nothing we can do about.Instead of pussy-footing about and mouthing platitudes about the EU,dole-dodgers and the like,issues he has no intention of dealing with,here is one challenge that would really make his name,incorporating all the values he purports to stand for.
Fat chance!Sauve quit peut!

[david taylor]

Oops!Sorry.In my haste,I omitted to name Cameron in my comment as he who can make his name dealing with this problem when he assumes power.Oh,the humiliation of it!An indictment of sobriety!Had I had a drink,this would never have happened!

[Kim]

Proud Dad - do you think your coaching improved her understanding and her intellectual abilities? Or do you think that she may now find it difficult to do well in a school where she is surrounded by so many high-achievers?

Genuine question, not a snide one. I'm curious.

[GERARD GILLHAM]

Entering a child for an exam where they have not been prepared fully is about the most stressful thing you can do to them.
The key to success is to look beyond the exam and see the work you do with your child as adding strength for their future.
A really good tutor will know if they are in with a strong chance of passing the 11+ or not. Without a doubt we need more Grammar Schools. Make it an election issue?

[conker]

It always usd to be that this exam was sat at the proposing school, as part of the normal school day.
Why has it changed?

[Keith Green]

My nephew was due to sit the 11+ last saturday. He went to look around a school the day before with around 15 coach loads of other kids. Got bullied, pushed over and broke his arm by a visiting 10yr old girl. Consequently he missed the exam (but is being allowed to take it at a later date). Quite sad really that he will be taking an exam to pass onto a school were he has already been "pre-bullied". What sort of life is he going to have

[jnrdoctor]

"A really good tutor will know if they are in with a strong chance of passing the 11+ or not. Without a doubt we need more Grammar Schools. Make it an election issue?"

Some parents will be able to afford "a really good tutor" and some will not. What would you suggest for people who can't afford the really good tutor, Gerard? Until someone finds a way to assess children by their ability rather than their parents' ability to pay someone to forcefeed facts and exam technique into them, then the selection process is always going to reward averagely intelligent children of savvy parents over intelligent children of less-competent parents.
If 11+ exams were held within primary schools and based only on the national curriculum and used questions similar in style to those on the SAT exams which all children will be familar with then the system might be a bit fairer.
Gerard, if you want increasing grammar schools to be an election issue, I hope you combine it with making the entrance exam fairer to those without tutors.

[liz]

Is it worth putting your child through it? No. My daughter got offered a place at a selective school like this, and we were so unimpressed at the way they treated potential applicants, plus the way they lived on their reputation rather than their facilities (and they should have such a reputation with such selection!) that we turned it down.

And as for your comment about different races, religions etc, really, how patronising can you get?

[April]

It's called "Supply and Demand". Look at what the oversubscribed schools are doing, and all schools need to do more of that. Look at the under-subscribed schools and do less of that.

Oversubscribed schools will have pushy (involved) parents and the minimum of illiterate, unsocialised, dyslexic, disruptive children.

Poor teachers, poor curricula and poor parents aren't the only thing that make a poor school. Poor pupils are 90% of the problem. If you raise a "poor pupil" you have to expect that any school that has a choice is going to avoid taking them.

Therefore, be a good parent raising a good pupil, and you will get in. Good pupils bring out the best in teachers. Teachers that feel rewarded by their profession instead of under siege will move beyond any bad curriculum to provide the right knowledge. Therefore the cycle of education begins with you - the parent. There is no reason why you can't be your child's tutor, and learn along with them.

[Helen]

"One of the elephants in this particular room is the fact that, where a grammar school exists, the local comprehensives are 'robbed' of the brightest potential pupils. While I realise that this is not sufficient motive for parents to send their children to the state school, it does render their subsequent criticisms of comp results somewhat disingenous."#

Cathy: this isn't true. I went to a grammar school in the 1980s and the top 25% went to it (without tutoring). So at that time your assertion was true. But now, they take from a much wider catchment area because they are obsessed with league tables, and only the top 5-10% get in, which leaves a large group of brighter kids who go to the local comp (unless they go to private schools at that point).

And by the way, most grammars are state schools. Private grammar schools are a diffent animal entirely.

[rick]

To Jos....
re your response to seanmarshall...Yes I agree that good education starts at home, but I believe that despite that platitude, bad education starts in a bad school. seanmarshall's point, as I see it, is that you do what you can for your kids. If sending them to a grammar is the best for them and they can get in, so be it. It makes not one dot of difference how it's wrapped up within theories and best practice, a bad school is a bad school and everyone knows it, and if you can avoid it you will. Good on seanmarshall for being honest enough to say that, all politics aside, his school was bad, and didn't want that for his child. Maybe more honesty in the system about what is good and bad would help. Good for you seanmarshall...your child will likely grow up with a great deal of common sense and to be a caring and perceptive adult, if you are the example.

[Another mum]

For the huge majority who live in an area where there are no grammar schools, may I put in a word for comps (not a sentence I EVER thought I would type). My son's school is huge and non-selective but it does set the children for each subject (at the start of each academic year s there can be movement between sets) .. and he is working hard and mixing with bright children who want to learn.

I think this is the key to everything.

I was the "good mother" who read to him, listened to him read, tested his spellings and tables etc at primary, but at secondary, the influence of the peer group is massive. And a lack of disruptive brats is very important - it frees the teachers up to teach.

Meanwhile, I got an 11+ scholarship to a schol which is always in the Top 10 in the country - and it was utterly miserable for the girls in the bottom quartile, who were there as a parental status symbol.

[GERARD GILLHAM]

If you can't afford a good tutor (people always have different priorities about how they want to spend their money and why not?) then as long as you have access to a computer ( local libraries - do they still exist?) it is possible to find lots of free stuff to help your child.
But most importantly good tutors rely on parents who are willing to devote a significant amount of time helping and encouraging their child.

[Cathy]

Helen: Thank you - I hadn't looked at it that way (showing my age). However, you must admit that the grammar schools are still cherry-picking the top pupils, albeit to a lesser extent?

I do realise that grammar schools are state schools (unless things have changed even more since my day).

[Cathy]

Another Mum: Phew! At last! Our comp is similarly good and it's entirely down to the catchment area, not particularly the teaching. Why don't people realise it's easy to teach the brightest children? Put the really gifted teachers with the tough children, I say (and I don't mean the ones with the best qualifications, either, necessarily).

[Dr Jones]

What is the point of all the fuss? A child can get it, but then what? If the child lacks the brains, then going to the best school is not going to help the poor child. I have marked examination papers at all levels of education which has left one thinking that 'perhaps their is no life after birth for some!

[Edward 1]

When I set off to school for my 11 plus exam, walking alone, back in 1955, my mum wished me good luck before she went off to work at her part time job.
After the exam I paid my three pennies in a public telephone booth to call my dad at work and tell him how easy it has seemed.
I passed.
How different.

[Deep Joshi]

My wife and me separated 9 years ago. We have a daughter whom I see alternate weekends. My daughter has been stopped from seeing me by my wife because she needs to concentrate for her Grammer School Exams. Can it get any worse?

[McLovin]

Crikey! I sat and passed my eleven plus some 21 years ago and went to one of my local grammar schools of which there were three - one mixed, one boys, one girls.
I didn't go through any of this malarkey, I got a letter through the post with a couple of school brochures and in due course I chose the school I wished to attend.
It's clear the abolishment of so many grammar schools has forced these parents into this overly competitive frame of being and the poor kids end up with a heap of pressure on them.
I wonder who'll sort this situation out?

[George]

JANE HOWARTH says:I've told her that while the grammar school is a fantastic opportunity, she will be educated to a high standard wherever she goes if she puts her mind to it....
I wish it were true.Some comprehensive schools are very bad. There is no authority of the principal over the unruly children, and few idiots can ruin a lesson. No wonder,private fee paying schools have their numbers increased year by year.I should know, I teach inoneofthem.

[Alice]

I'd just like to say how thankful I am that my youngest of three sons has just started AS levels at college. No more fretting about the earlier school years. YAY!!!!! What a relief to be almost out of it.
I'm struggling not to think how awful it will be by the time my grandchildren come along.

[Lizzy-Lou]

I sat the 12+ at my middle school in the late 80s - I just thought it was another end of term test, really. Went to school, did the exam, came home. No biggie.

Why on earth don't they still administer it through the feeder schools? Even if there are more of them, can it really be that open to cheating/much more difficult to administer?

[lyn]

all 3 of my children sat the 11+ in kent. They took them at the primary school they were already at and there was no hysteria or over-emotional mothers at the gates.

I have never seen anything like these scenes out here in the sticks--perhaps location ie not London, has more to do with this story than education.

[Rachel]

"Oversubscribed schools will have pushy (involved) parents and the minimum of illiterate, unsocialised, dyslexic, disruptive children"

@April, not very happy to have dyslexia included in your list of sins. Being an involved parent won't cure dyslexia. It is an inherent difficulty that needs a different approach to learning. Or do you think it's just another excuse for 'laziness'?

[Mrs Baum]

@Cathy - actually, I resent your comment about 'poor child', referring to mine. As you know nothing about my family, I don't think it's your place to judge me or my situation.

I don't want him to be unhappy either, but neither do I want him to fail to achieve what he's capable of. He got all level 5s in his year 6 SATs, and was still at level 5 in everything by the end of year 7. His marks went steadily downhill all year, and nobody even replied when I wrote a letter, nor was I able to actually see the teachers at parents' evening due to bad organisation.

I'm totally not a pushy parent as it happens, but I had to do something about the situation,and the local school were totally unresponsive. We've told him that he has to do a year at the new school, and if he still hates it we'll consider letting him come back to the local one (there is no 3rd option), although if that happens I will have to become a pushy parent. The teachers will probably hate me, but there you go.

Try to stop being quite so quick to judge other people, eh. I've noticed that happening quite a lot.

[proud dad]

To Kim,

Intelligence in a person is fixed. Coaching merely improves exam technique. For example, my daughter initially would spend excessive time on a difficult question leading to easier ones being left out.

[Kim]

Lyn - I think Kent is a little different because the 11+ system is still in place. In London, the system is supposedly comprehensive but there are a handful of selective schools. If you have, say, five children per school from about 40 different primary schools (figures made up, but you get the idea), entering for an exam to get into a single school, it makes more sense both for the selective school and for the various primary schools if the exam is held in one location. It gives the selective school the opportunity to minimise cheating and it saves the primary schools the faff of having to organise exam arrangements. Some of them may even refuse to do so.

[Kim]

Proud Dad - I think you'll find an army of educational pscyhologists prepared to argue with you over the assertion that "Intelligence is fixed"! The evidence suggests otherwise.

[Cathy]

Mrs Baum: Sorry to have given offence. I just find it rather sad to hear that your son isn't happy at school. I think I'm entitled to my opinion ... just as you're entitled to your opinion of schools and teachers. I know I'm a great teacher and I'm sure you're a marvellous mother. I'm afraid the first whiff of 'pushy parents' makes me illogically defensive!

[Natalie]

Hi, I have just finished 7 years of education at a grammar school and feel I have really benefited from the opportunities my school gave to me. I believe I achieved more than I would have done at a comprehensive where I would not have been pushed so much. At my 11+ exams, there was none of the madness described in this article. All of us were nervous but in an understated way, and everyone was really friendly and trying to make friends. My parents wanted me to go but were never pushy and none of my friends' parents were particularly pushy either. This incident sounds entirely against the norm

[Mrs Baum]

Well, there's proof that grammar schools work, as Natalie who's been to one can actually spell and punctuate, unlike most of the teenagers who post on here.

Aaanyway, @ Cathy; that's ok, I've no problem with people having opinions; I've got plenty!

I actually liked most of the teachers at the local school and didn't think they were the problem. Not entirely sure what was tbh. The leadership and general standards, possibly,plus the fact that the school is way too large. As many of my family and friends are teachers, I do respect what a hard job it is - and I wouldn't do it in a million years!

Just hope Son settles, anyway. My friend who teaches at the old school tells me to be glad he's out of it as his old class are horrendous!

Oh, and I am very occasionally a marvellous mother. Also a crap one sometimes too. But mostly kind of ok I think!

[Sean Marshall]

@ Jos i agree that parenting determines alot of the educational standards we see tooday. Intelligence is not fixed! Yhis is an arguement that is now rubbish to all but a few psychologist, it can be learned and improved if the stimulus to learn is encouraged.

I see to many parents who turn round sit their children in front of the xbox or TV and then wonder why their child does not engage with their learning. They scream at the sducation system and say why is the school failing my child yet can they get off their fat backsides and do something to help their offspring. No to much like hard work. True some parents work hard in dead end jobs and struggle to find the time but come on we know that their are some who goal to the dole office sign on and do sweet FA and their kids guess what the majority though not all copy them and thus it continues.
I have my reservations over Grammar schools to be honest but my point is that until the parent and the school work together with the child these schools will invariably fail (the lower comps that are failing). I hope the new schools being built in Burnley will improve the standards in fact i admire some of them for the vision they have but it is at home the battle now needs winning imo.

[Sean Marshall]

Another quick point is this my daughter though vey bright chose the Grammar School she wanted to go there and if she had chosen a number of good faith schools that she could have gone to then great she would have gone, her choice. To anyone who pressurises a child then shame on you it wont work, the child can only perform to a given level and at the end of the day if they are coached, bullied or bribe to go in for an exam then they will be found wanting either in the exam or through the level of wotk expected of them. My eldest she had some books she worked through 3 weeks before and a freind helped with the maths but other than that she had fun. The child who is loved and enocraged succeeds the one who is fearful will fail.

[Cathy]

Mrs Baum: You sound a bit like me! Thanks for that. I do struggle with this blasted medium a bit. In real life, apart fom having tone of voice and body language rather than just the written word, there's always the 'bite the tongue' option. I need to practise sitting on my hands ...

[Nancy]

We did all this three years ago and knew at the time that it was madness but didn't have the confidence to just check out of the competition and watch from the sidelines. The payoff is that our child is now thriving at a selective school and is truly happy, looking forward to lessons, enjoying the school community and no longer feeling like a supersmart weirdo. The London scene is scary. Like the rest of parenting, we did our best through dead reckoning and may just have done okay. Time will tell.