Is an appeal always the answer?

[T12ACY]

Very thorough reference but I beg to differ with the NVR paper in particular knowing a parent who forced her child to sit practice papers every single day, even christmas day, to achieve a place at The Judd. She was of course delighted he passed with full marks. This is a paper our own school told us was a skill which was more technique than actual natural ability.

The child who went to The Judd went through the whole time falling well below the expectations of him and parents being constantly called in to school. He left after year 12, at the request of that school, and had to re sit the year at an alternative school. GCSE results were not a patch on my own DS's who 'just scraped through the 11+ by 5 or 6 points above the minimum'.

Perhaps this is a one off? Am sure it must be

[sherry_d]

I have to agree with you Tracy. VR can CERTAINLY be improved through practice and use of some techniques. There are vocab question where you really cant do anything but most other question especially those with codes, numbers etc - a child can get full marks here and compensate for poor vocab

That research is very skewed and I would like to know how they did it and under what conditions. I am sure they were trying to push their own interest as they were the official examiners for most 11+ counties so I bet they were trying to convience that their testing really works

I am of the school of thought why should it bother anyone if one goes for appeal. Its the law and its the job of politicians to sort that out if its subject to abuse. After all you can ask for a remark for GCSE so why should 11+ be immune from any sort of redress. Its like people who move temporarily in catchment. It may be viewed as morally wrong but I wouldnt care, thats what these politicians should deal with. Fairness never exist and I wonder how NVR and VR are surely a test of ability? I would prefer English but that not my job and have to deal with whats there. I am sure most parents are reasonable and know what their kids are capable of and no one would go through appeal if they doubted their DC abilities. Appeals arent for the faint hearted.

[T12ACY]

'I am of the school of thought why should it bother anyone if one goes for appeal. Its the law and its the job of politicians to sort that out if its subject to abuse. After all you can ask for a remark for GCSE so why should 11+ be immune from any sort of redress. Its like people who move temporarily in catchment. It may be viewed as morally wrong but I wouldnt care, thats what these politicians should deal with. Fairness never exist and I wonder how NVR and VR are surely a test of ability? I would prefer English but that not my job and have to deal with whats there. I am sure most parents are reasonable and know what their kids are capable of and no one would go through appeal if they doubted their DC abilities. Appeals arent for the faint hearted.'

Hallelujah!!!! I am not mad (perhaps it's just me and you that think this sherry_d?)

[pippi]

I have to agree with you Tracy. VR can CERTAINLY be improved through practice and use of some techniques.

Isn't that pretty much the punchline of the NFER page: "The effect of sustained coaching over a period of 9 months is shown to be substantial."?

And they say this about verbal reasoning tests: "For this reason they were commonly viewed as indicating capacity to learn and were widely used in the United Kingdom as part of the process for selecting children at the age of 11 for a separate academic education in grammar schools (the 11+ test). This view of verbal reasoning tests as measures of capacity to learn has declined and they are better regarded as measures of reasoning which reflect the person's experiences up to the time of testing, not as providing a fixed potential."

http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/research/ass ... en-plus/#1

[Amber]

What worries me most about all types of 11+ test is that there are many people, and I count myself among them, who mature later and are not anywhere near showing their true potential at 11. Teachers are very familiar with this concept. Lots of children who are at or near the top of the class at primary school drift downwards on the relative performance curve as they near teenage; conversely many who are average at primary school suddenly start firing up when they get to 13 or 14. In fact, last year's BBC programme on genius found higher ultimate IQ levels in those who developed higher order thinking and reasoning skills later on, once they had gone to secondary school. Taking the top however many percent at primary school does actually risk missing the real geniuses!

[mitasol]

I think that is a very valid point Amber but with such a fractured 11+ system how can a further test or later test at 13 be practically implemented.

[Rob Clark]

In my experience of 11 GS years the only 2 students who were removed from the GS and placed in to the local comp were boys who were tutored to get the place and then failed to keep up once this support was withdrawn

T12ACY, hope your latest appeal went well

I’m sure there are some DCs who struggle with GS for various reasons, and I guess it’s possible that the example you give above accounts for some of them, though 2 students in 11 years represents, I would think, considerably less than 1%. Amber’s suggestion that different DCs peak at different ages also rings true and could equally well account for some DCs struggling at GS.

And there may be all sorts of other factors, too, such as medical or social.

My point is, it’s very difficult to ascribe a DC’s struggles at GS directly to how much tutoring they had for the 11+.

[T12ACY]

I agree Rob 2 in 11 years is not many at all. I see it as testiment to the GS who do everything possible to address areas and nip signs of problems in the bud. Perhaps a coincidence and as you say other factors could have played a part which none of us would be privvy to. The fact remains that the process for selection is flawed but without what would probably be costly and unpopular changes we have to continue with what we have.

btw no idea if the latest appeal was better from their perspective yet, but from mine they asked very general questions. The only major one being that they were uncomfortable with my extenuating circumstances. They are used to hearing of a relative passing away which affected a DC but not a friends parent and were concerned DS couldn't really have been that upset. Gave me the opportunity to explain (they clearly hadn't grasped from my paper submission) that wasn't why he was distressed but the trigger to it. Am certain they understood once I relayed what DS had said to me when I picked him up..... So still playing the waiting game for 'that envelope'!

[sherry_d]

My point is, it’s very difficult to ascribe a DC’s struggles at GS directly to how much tutoring they had for the 11+.

Well said and couldnt agree more. My personal opinion is there are very very few kids who are super clever and can get away with a paper or 2. Probably about 2% in grammar school, the rest are just all ordinary with most parents believeing their kids are clever much more than they really are. I would say the same of the opposite end that maybe the really bottom 2% perhaps those with speacial needs are the ones who may not pass the exam. For the rest with coaching they CAN actually pass 11+. I dont think its the top % who make it into grammar. I would say its those with the top 25% determined parents who make it through 11+

[Amber]

I think that is a very valid point Amber but with such a fractured 11+ system how can a further test or later test at 13 be practically implemented.

It would of course require a fundamental re-think of the entire selective education system. That would be excellent news in my view (and might even lead to its abolition) but unpopular with those whose children do well now, and about as likely as the proverbial porcine fly-past.