11+ and bilingual children (and now, also, younger children)

[mad?]

Finally, to respond to the opposition to age standardisation

What opposition, can't see any on this thread?

Still not sure what the question is your are asking for help with?

[SlighlyStressedMum]

Opposition to age standardisation - I assume that is aimed at me?

I'm not opposed to it and I am aware of the studied regarding Summer born children. Having an August born child obviously it has been of interest to me since he started school. I was merely stating that I don't feel my child has been discriminated against (my summer born child, my right to this opinion whatever your stance). Secondly that if you believed Boston to be unique in not standardising you were incorrect.

And I still don't understand what you're asking.

[guest201]

I really don't see why a bilingual upbringing should cause a problem at primary school or should be considered a special circumstance, surely by definition bilingual means the two languages are dominated. From personal experience I know of plenty of bilingual children who have been successful in 11+ and have not had problems in primary school, the same as I am sure there are other bilingual children who have not been successful in 11+, but can you say that being bilingual is the reason for this. Some will pass some will fail the same as non-bilingual children. (sorry for the use of pass and fail, you all know what I mean)

[Amber]

As someone who is multilingual, and whose OH doesn't have English as a first language, I thought maybe I could contribute something to this thread.

However, I am afraid I don't understand what you are actually asking either, andyrob. I clearly don't speak your language.

Maybe you could spell out exactly what it is you would like forum members to advise you on? We are usually quite a helpful bunch.

[Tolstoy]

Sorry first time I am seeing this thread or would have responded previously as you have hit a sore point for me. I assume you are concerned about the disadvantage VR tests cause not for truly bi-lingual DC but DC for whom English is a second language and not necessarily a strong one.

http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/advice/11-plus-CEM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Struggling to copy and paste but the bottom paragraph states that CEM does penalise such DC. I don't know what Boston uses for testing but I would guess that their test may do so as well. People will argue that the Grammar schools have a high percentage of ESL DC however the vast majority of these will have been well prepared for the test.

I would argue that many also penalize dyslexic DC. CEM claim that their test doesn't do this but fail to produce any stats to prove their claim. In addition there seem to be a high proportion of surprise results that involve DC with dyslexic tendencies on this site.

[Proud_Dad]

I think the question the OP is asking is whether any special allowances or consideration should be made for children taking the 11+ for whom English is not their first language (recent immigrants for example).

Presumably this might be something like allowing them extra time to take the test as is sometimes done for children with dyslexia? Or maybe some kind of weighting or normalising factor as is sometimes used to try and balance age related factors? (September vs August born).

The problem is though that there is a whole range of factors which will influence a child's performance in the 11 plus test. Some of these might include (in no particular order):

1. Whether English is a first language
2. Any diagnosed learning conditions (e.g. dyslexia, autism)
3. Age within year (September vs August born)
4. Sex (girls supposedly performing better than boys at that age)
5. Parents' wealth (can they afford a tutor?)
6. Parents' educational background/ability (can parents self tutor?)
7. Family culture or background (is education valued, are there lots of books in the house, class or cultural aspirations etc?)
8. Child's ability to cope with exam pressure and stress
9. The quality of the primary school teaching the child has received so far
10. Ability to read or think quickly
11. Innate intelligence (whatever that means?)

Many people think that to make the 11+ "fair" the test should make allowances for some of the above factors. e.g. allowing extra time for dyslexic children, normalising age scores to try and reduce the advantage of being born in September. But then what about all the other equally important factors that are not allowed for?

[Amber]

Many people think that to make the 11+ "fair" the test should make allowances for some of the above factors. e.g. allowing extra time for dyslexic children, normalising age scores to try and reduce the advantage of being born in September. But then what about all the other equally important factors that are not allowed for?

It will never ever be fair to test children at ten and determine their educational future that way. And the biggest disadvantage will always be not being rich enough. I would hazard a wild guess that middle class bilingual children do a whole lot better than poorer ones. You could probably even look at the languages they were bilingual in and then correlate them with the chance of success at 11 plus. And I think it probably wouldn't take a gifted statistician to draw some economic conclusions from that data.

[andyrob]

This is OP again.

I seem to have misunderstood the users of this forum which can be seen from my lack of use of terms such as DC and others which, for the most part, I don't usually understand. It's a language problem.

But to return to the recent replies, again thanks for your comments but for those who keep asking 'what is the question' I'll copy the last para from my first post:

"Have the various 11+ test procedures used across the country for the past 70 years ever taken account of any special, individual or group needs of certain children"

Proud Dad - I'm pleased that the last few posts have started to address the issue for which I believe the answer to be very rarely, and inconsistently across the counties. Consequently, in the hope that our own children 'pass' and derive the subsequent benefits of that, we mostly live with a selective system and accept the unfairness (discrimination?) for some children that I believe exists.

I didn't think I'd said that I believed Boston to be unique in not standardising but obviously if Essex don't then that is incorrect. But still wrong in my view - and if your child were a young one who'd just 'failed' without standardisation I think you would have wished it were used.

That's the problem in this debate. Everyone is happy with a system in which their own children succeed in the test - standardised or not - and desperate if they do not pass. I'm just trying to discover if the 11+ test is used anywhere in a way that genuinely tries to measure ability and future potential rather than current knowledge which could more easily and perhaps more reliably be measured by SATs.

And finally, to respond to the point about bilingual children not being at any disadvantage. At this age, most children raised bilingually will be 'behind' a monolingual child of the same ability. Of course, there will be many clever children whose bilingual upbringing will not have prevented them from succeeding, indeed the extra challenges they faced and overcame may well have contributed to that success.

But not for the child who uses English only at school and then maybe for only part of the time, and whose mother, father, nor many of his extended family, speaks little or no English. For him, from the answers in this thread, this form of bilingualism is not recognised, nor given any Access Arrangement by 11+ procedures, and therefore I conclude the test unfairly treats such children - as well as the many others listed by Proud Dad.

That's life I suppose.

[mad?]

"Have the various 11+ test procedures used across the country for the past 70 years ever taken account of any special, individual or group needs of certain children"

Sometimes, to varying degrees.

Consequently, in the hope that our own children 'pass' and derive the subsequent benefits of that, we mostly live with a selective system and accept the unfairness (discrimination?) for some children that I believe exists.

No, 'we' (most of the country) do not live with a selective system. Albeit that comprehensives select by religion and or post code which amounts to money as well

That's the problem in this debate. Everyone is happy with a system in which their own children succeed in the test - standardised or not - and desperate if they do not pass.

It is not a debate, not is everyone happy, as you will see if you read the posts on this forum.

I'm just trying to discover if the 11+ test is used anywhere in a way that genuinely tries to measure ability and future potential.

Then perhaps that is what you should have asked. Briefly, they have tried to and IMO failed.

[mattsurf]

If you are helping a parent prepare for an appeal, pointing out the inconsistencies and unfairness of the system is likely to do far more damage to the appeal than good.

The appeal should focus on evidence of academic ability, you might point out that the 11+ result was not a reflection of the child's ability because English was their second language and it was impossible for the child to work at the required pace (at age 10 children will never have completed an exam under this level of time pressure). However, you also need to have evidence of the child's academic ability;

The appeal panel should look at the following aspects: was the appeal conducted in line with the School Admission Code - it doesn't matter if you think that the code is wrong, that is not the job of the panel to assess. If you have evidence that the test was not conducted in line with the admission code, then you need to raise that at the appeal, but you also need to bring evidence of academic ability

The next aspect that the panel will consider is whether there is other evidence that the child has suitable academic ability for the school; the parents need to collect as much quantitative evidence as possible

Finally the panel will need to consider whether the prejudice to the child of not allowing them to attend GS outweights the prejudice to the school of accepting more children than their PAN.

I agree with you that there are faults with the current 11+ and appeals system, however, an appeal is not the place to bring them up.

Finally, even if there are faults with the process, many people on this forum, myself included, would not be in favour of trying to discredit the whole system; 90%+ of the people here are strongly supportive of Grammar School education in principle, however, there are far too many people who want to put an end to Grammar Schools. I am concerned that we do not provide evidence that can be used to support the case against Grammar Schools. Individuals like yourself (and I am sure that you are well intentioned) are unlikely to make the system fairer by attacking the weaknesses.