What I am unsure about is how we as parents choose to enter a 'selective' system, but when convenient choose to ignore or question that system's findings - we want another test, and if that isn't positive another. I am not saying this is wrong, just that I'm uncomfortable with the 'selectiveness' of some - intelligence of many sorts can be measured - grammar schools don't claim to measure them all, just the 'bits' they want/need.
Interesting....not sure I agree with you here. My son failed the damn test a year ago, and I have found it very very difficult to understand why. Every single piece of evidence from both old school and new school shows high achievement. The problem is..that we perceive the grammar school to be better than the rest, and so want our children to attend. Then we have a great deal of difficulty reconciling ourselves to the fact that they are not of the required standard.
In my view, these reasoning tests do nothing more than pick out the most tutored children, because VR is a skill that is taught, and if you teach and teach and teach, your son or daughter will be at a far higher level in VR than those children whose parents did just a few weeks preparation with them.
My son's test was in VR and NVR - NVR being more difficult to tutor for....he passed that one,
but the VR was beyond him. And actually the score in that paper (99, with a pass mark of 111) was laughable really compared to CAT tests and SAT scores he has since achieved, the former putting him in the top 5% of the population. I have not had an EP report carried out, because I know what it will tell me, and his working memory is not an excuse for why he did not pass the exam.
Actually now I do not want another test, I am reasonably happy with where he is and he is happy because he is shining there...(at the grammar he would have been middlish I think) and that has gone some way to rebuilding his self belief which was completely shattered by the nonsense 11+ exam result.