11 Plus Exams Forum

I ask the above question because when I went through the system a few decades ago, my best friend didn't pass and went to an upper school.

At the end of his first upper school year, his parents and the Head were able to persuade "the system" that he was good enough to transfer to grammar school. I don't think he took a further exam.

The point is that he now says it was a disastrous move. He had basically missed a whole grammar school year and never caught up. He left at 16 with 2 average O levels and he remembers the whole experience with some bitterness.

Are there any similar stories these days for pupils who take the 12+ and make the move? Is it universally considered to be a good thing if your child can do it ?

Dear Dad40

I keep in contact with my tutored children who have passed the 12 plus, all are thriving.

If a child is at the top of an upper, then I would hope that they will have been stretched accordingly, putting them on a par with a grammar school child.

Its a rarity for a child to leave a grammar with 2 GCSEs [ showing your age up with the term O levels!]

I truly believe that the opportunity is a 'good thing.'

Patricia

Interesting question?

Although many years ago, I didn't get through the 11+ and went to an Upper school, Headmaster told my parents they should appeal but they decided it was better at the top of an Upper than at the bottom of a Grammar School. I loved the Upper School, got 7 O levels, and 2 A levels. My sister passed her 11+ and went to a grammar school 2 years later and hated it, only got 2 O levels.

Both mine are now at Upper Schools and are doing very well, they took the 11+ with no coaching but didn't pass.

But a bet there are many counter arguements, for those children that weren't sufficiently pushed at Upper Schools, I was lucky I was.

Thanks Patricia.

I confess the experience of my friend has really coloured my views on that particular process so am pleased to hear of anyone who has had good (and recent) experiences. I hope my friend's experience was a one-off.

The one thing I didn't mention is that he is now a very successful business man. He was quite a "driven" person before his 12+ experience (or 13+ as it would have been then) but we have since discussed over a beer whether the experience made him want to "prove something" in later life. It clearly remains a bad memory for him and probably didn't help at the time that a few friends including me just passed first time.

And yes I'm getting on it a bit! The username should really be DadAged40 (well, 41 - you see I've even started lying about my age !)

PS: Great forum!

[quote="Anonymous"]Interesting question?

Although many years ago, I didn't get through the 11+ and went to an Upper school, Headmaster told my parents they should appeal but they decided it was better at the top of an Upper than at the bottom of a Grammar School. I loved the Upper School, got 7 O levels, and 2 A levels. My sister passed her 11+ and went to a grammar school 2 years later and hated it, only got 2 O levels.

Both mine are now at Upper Schools and are doing very well, they took the 11+ with no coaching but didn't pass.

But a bet there are many counter arguements, for those children that weren't sufficiently pushed at Upper Schools, I was lucky.

The evidence from the children I have taught is that 12+ is a good thing - anyone with 3 level 5s should either be being stretched in an Upper or in a Grammar - but not all Uppers are able to stretch the most able.

I am biased in the fact that my child sat the 12+ and is thriving ...

A thought:

If the shift from upper to grammar is relatively painless these days, could it be because of education changes over the last 30 years?

I'm refering to the fact that we grammar kids used to be prep'd for GCE 'O' Levels from the Oxford, Cambridge or Associated Examining Boards. Whereas the uppers (secondary moderns) used to gear up for CSE's.

Could the merger of GCEs and CSEs plus SATs, plus national curriculum etc etc etc have made transfers between grammar and upper easier?