Just curious, as standardisation of scores is such a big part of the 11+ (which, incidentally, I believe is absolutely fair). Also struck me that age plays a massive part in strength/muscle build - the difference between a 10/11-year-old boy, e.g. is massive at this stage - is age taken into consideration for sports scholarships?

If age is not taken into consideration, does this mean a large percentage of kids at indies are Autumn-born?

Does anyone know?

I don't know if a large proportion are Autumn born - I doubt it is that significant. With all the other exams going on at that age, eg 11+, which are standardised etc, it is not a simple analysis as you do not get EVERYBODY applying to private schools - only those whose parents can afford to apply - a very small minority in the grand scheme of things. These could all be parents of summer born children one year - unlikely but possible.

I am not aware of indies standardising - without being too brutal, as I know some are very competitive, but as financial businesses, they have to have bums on seats, so their priority is to be full, rather than making adjustments to ensure it is scrupulously fair.

With regards to sports scholarships, there might be a comparison of age when considering two candidates - well, look how good he is, he's only 8 versus him who is 10, but when it came down to someone who is still 10 and someone who is just 11, I doubt age plays a big part. With sports scholarships, as music, drama and art, there is a certain amount of subjective opinion from the sports masters (backed up by evidence of county/club/national ability where appropriate.) The reality is, I know some boys who grew massively in Y5/6 but were not able to control their muscles and limbs until Y8/9, where they turned into superb sportsmen, and others who were quite weedy but fast and wiry in Y5/6 who were outgrown and outstripped by Y7/8...and vice versa...sporting ability is about so much more than your size and muscle build - you have to have awareness, discipline, leadership etc etc alongside ability, to be successful.

Indies don't have to be fair or even transparent in their admissions. Think of all the royals and celebs who get their kids in. Can you imagine them getting expensive tutors or - horror - being rejected?

Thanks for your replies, very helpful and interesting.

Still, for some of the most highly acclaimed, selective and leading indies (and my DS did not apply to one of those), you'd think there should be some sort of standardisation as it might ultimately achieve higher results for them. I'm sure some of the adaptive stuff done by CEM etc for privates would be?

The age thing is actually something sports associations are becoming more aware of (better late than never) - looking at 'biological age' when talent spotting. This is just one article I found but anyone interested in the significant effect of when children are born in the year should read Malcolm Gladwell 'Outliers' :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35054310

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/dec/19/biobanding-scientists-skinny-kids-sporting-superstars

Agree, perhaps smaller players have to compensate by having to 'think' more but still, there can be a huge difference between boys in Y6!

Agree, indies tend to look at applications 'holistically' but I should have thought forward-thinking heads should take age into account when looking at scores.