Talk:Eleven-plus

message: I was a secondary modern student who completed GCE O Levels in 1964. My results were good. Had I been a student at a Grammar School I would have had no difficulty in proceeding to A Levels. However, my school offered no assistance to students who wished to study for A Levels. Neither was it possible for me to transfer to the local Grammar School. Attempts to achieve this met with blank refusal (without reasons being given. Fortunately, my family emigrated to Australia where I entered a High School which prepared me for university entrance examinations. I subsequently completed Bachelors and Masters degrees and became a psychologist. If I had stayed in England I would have found it extremely difficult to achieve the same outcome.
My major complaint about the English Tripartite system of education at the time I attended school in England was the extreme difficulty experienced by secondary modern students who wished to study for A Levels. I can see no satisfactory justification for this situation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.78.118 (talk) 03:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Articulation to A Levels

message: The article says: "In counties in which vestiges of the Tripartite System still survive" ...
But there is no listing of these counties. Could one be added?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.8.35 (talk) 15:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Counties

message: If anyone could provide some firm percentages for intakes in different areas that would be fantastic, i can't seem to find any sources and I'm going on memory at the moment.  Also the article on Grammar schools in the United Kingdom seems to have a lot about the eleven plus if anyone feels more confident than me in reaming information from it.  --Pluke 23:26, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Figures

message: The eleven plus is talked about here in the past tense... it still exists and is taken by thousands every year...a little misleading?
:The article does refer to it in the past tense but this is due to the fact that the exam is taken by a small minority of people as opposed to previously, when it was universally taken.  If you really think it would be better reworded don't be afraid of jumping in and trying yourself--Pluke 12:22, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the the major usage of the term is to the eleven-plus as once used (determining the future academic career of every schoolchild in Britain); the exam taken these days at the same age is not really comparable in effect. And the article makes this point, I think, by using the past tense when talking about the old system. --Telsa ((t)(c)) 16:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tense-switching (the exam was / the exam is) still jars, however. I don't believe the problem of referring to a once universal, now only locally used, examination in the one article has yet been resolved. Before anyone answers "Well, go ahead and fix it then", I do have my thinking-cap on. This is just advance warning / a plea for any helpful suggestions. -- Picapica 12:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tense

message: I can't find a nice cite for this, so can anyone else? I gather that the eleven-plus was referred to as "the Scholarship" in at least some parts of Britain in the fifties. "He's passed his Scholarship" and so on. According to the person who was reminiscing about this, it was definitely seen as an exam you either passed (went to grammar school) or failed (went elsewhere), and everyone in the  town would know about it. This term "scholarship" was in use in at least south-east Wales in the early to mid fifties. Wikipedia doesn't like "Ah yes, I remember it well" as a source for information, so has anyone found mention of this somewhere cite-able, by any chance? Was it used anywhere else? --Telsa ((t)(c)) 16:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for those. We need a reference (as per WP:V) before we can put this in though. Still hoping to find something we can cite. Telsa (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also took the scholarship to go to Strutts Grammar School in Belper in 1949. I don't recall any mention of eleven plus or secondary moderns. (The first in my area I think was Allestree Woodlands) Those who failed the scolarship either worked for their fathers (farming for instance) or took apprenticeships. This was before the school leaving age was raised to 15 Chevin 16:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The "Scholarship"

message: Hmm - I actually wanted to contact Telsa directly but difficult to find out how to do so in short time available to me now. As an 11 plus failure who rebelled against being so categorised I am not that happy with what is here, even though the contributors are obviously critical. I would have liked to see the 11 plus placed within the context of intelligence testing as a whole, and some mention of the extremely thorough critiques of the whole concept of IQ, e.g http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man. I felt a bit critical of some of the assumptions of the argument; that there is some kind of "fair", "unbiased" way of doing this kind of test, which allocates people fairly - in contrast to the view that any way of abstracting the world into a quantifiable measure involves a framing of the world (decision as to what constitutes an object to be measured) which only makes sense in a social and political context. I realise that that is (to some extent) my POV but nevertheless one which I guess is not only held by me, but well, this is the discussion page - I just wanted to kick it around a bit. Also the links against the eleven plus seem very general - to do with selection for state education generally and not really examining the basis of the eleven plus in intelligence theory - I would love to find such sites. Oh well 86.129.134.44 19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To contact me, you can leave a message on my talk page at User talk:Telsa. You should also be able to email me by hitting "Email this user" when looking at my talk page, but I have had trouble setting an email address, so it won't let you. To discuss this article, though, you want to bring things up on this page. I actually haven't contributed to the article much. I may have fixed a typo or something, but that's about it. So contacting me about this article may not be the best idea! On the other hand, those look like good points to me. As with so much else on Wikipedia, the main problem is referencing. I don't seem to be able to find good information on the web about any of this. Might have to resort to—horror!—books! Hope this helps.  Telsa (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested material

message: From the Controversy section:
"For example, judging candidates on their ability to recite the succesion to the throne, their fencing and soggy biscuit playing abilities and also how many Communists they had excuted whilst serving in the White Army during the Russian Civil War made it easier for middle class children to pass the exam and also conveniently weeded out those from less wealthy or less educated backgrounds."
I am assuming this is nonsense.  If someone has better, correctly-spelled alternatives, please be bolder than I am.Shouriki 02:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Scratch that, I've replaced it with a section from this history version.  But still have a look, this isn't an area I'm that bright in.Shouriki 02:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy - Communists? 

message: The Sampson reference is to 'anatomy of britain today' not 'modern britain' but i'm unsure how to fix it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sarahjeantaylor (talk • contribs) 21:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 

message: The age group of the takers is not 11-12, but 10-11. I was 10 when I took it. perhaps this sentence should be taken out? or perhaps it should be said that the age of 11-12 is that which is gained by the time the school is actually attended (I was 11 by the time next September came around. I took the test in November.)
Jake the Editor Man  (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a lot of confusion because as far as I can see, the state sector has never had uniformity of transfer ages across the country and changes over the years just increase the lay confusion. See Three-tier education for the wide variety around. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

text: As you say, it's the age of entry rather than of testing.  I've tried to clarify the wording.  Kanguole 14:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age group 

message: The Controversy section is not presented from a neutral point of view. It is written as if the 11+ was or is necessarily a bad thing. It also uses a classic non-sequitur when it states (as fact) that because of the 35%/10% difference in pass rates between the South West and Nottinghamshire, the results must have been determined other than by ability. You can only make such a statement if you assume that the population of the South West at the time of the quoted results was equally academically gifted as the population of Nottinghamshire, and since even today those parts of the country have quite different demographics, it seems unreasonable to make such an unwarranted assumption.
It is also full of weasel-words; indeed, it even uses the classic "critics say" that is one of the first things listed on Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words page. In a couple of cases, weasel-words have been used to include disparaging remarks about the middle classes (for instance, the part about how middle-class opposition to the eleven plus exam came about because of "greater fairness" in the exam itself).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.160.244 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy NPOV/Weasel Words 

message: I dispute the comment about the Eleven Plus being more important than the SATs, especially considering SATs are not designed to measure a pupil's actual ability, but instead their teachers' performance.
That seems to me a judgement; that testing pupil's ability is more important than testing standards in the English teaching profession. Should judgements be in a supposedly impartial encyclopedia?
Ginger Warrior (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: It was my understanding that in areas where the Secondary Modern and the Grammar schools were mixed sex that the 11+ results had to be adjusted to allow approximately equal numbers of boys and girls to enter the Grammar school because, in the 10 to 12 age range, girls tend to outperform boys and that, without an adjustment, the Grammar schools would have been predominantly female institutions. Unfortunately I can find no references to this but if something can be found I think it would be important to add something about this in the main page. Colin Mill (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different entrance criteria for the sexes? 

message: I was 11 in 1981, and remember taking 11+ exams in Dorset..  So I think this article may be incorrect.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.75.83.25 (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was ended as a nation-wide system, but vestiges remain today in a few LEAs. 86.185.216.32 (talk) 12:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was it really ended in 1976? 

message: A contradiction tag was placed on the article on 00:35, 22 December 2008 EvilFred (talk | contribs) (11,208 bytes) 
("The 'Eleven Plus' ... is now only used in a number of counties and boroughs in England, and, more widely, in Northern Ireland" vs "the system was phased out in Northern Ireland in 2008").  Tag was removed for the following:
That the information was at one time outdated did not make it contradictory as the Eleven plus exam is still in use in some areas for other reasons than originally intended.  Instead of placing a contradict tag, perhaps correct the outdated information.  Thanks so much on the hard work with this article.  Kjnelan (talk) 18:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Contradiction. 

message: From this page - and in general - I am not sure what the "status" (if that is the right word) of the 11plus is. Some particular questions I have are:
* Is there "a" syllabus or many different ones ? (References - Links)
* Is there a body (bodies) that standardise it authorises it? (References - Links) It is categorised as a Standardised test in the UK but I can't see evidence of it being standardised
* Is it just a label given to any general exam used for admission to some schools at age 11?  
All I have found in searching the web is some books and sites that offer to sell materials to help with it but no evidence about. There is something about []. But they seem to be acting as someone who is commisioned by schools or some LEAs to produce tests for the Schools. So the tests are owned by the Schools. (Msrasnw (talk) 09:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer to your third question is 'no'. 86.185.216.32 (talk) 11:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion and some "missing" information 

message: I have posted a bibliography of   Intelligence Citations for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in those issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research and to suggest new sources to me by comments on that page. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 20:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing 

message: Is it true that middle-class families in the U.K. commonly have servants? This is not true in the U.S., where only movie stars and families with great wealth can afford long-term servants. It has been common for the last few decades for wealthy Americans to call themselves "middle class." This is confusing, at best.
Donfbreed (talk) 05:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy: Middle Class?

message: Somwhere in an A-Level Psychology lesson when talking about socially-sensitive research, I distinctly remember my teacher saying that a psychologist called Bert, who's research was during the 1920s I think, heavily influenced the design of the Eleven-Plus. But we were then told that it was discovered that his findings were completely false and that he'd invented them in order to receive credit to his name. 144.124.3.121 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 09:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's Cyril Burt. Kanguole 10:52, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Some accuse Burt of committing fraud, but it is far from clear. 86.185.216.32 (talk) 11:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence of false research 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: The article refers to areas of the country that still use the 11-plus as "counties", but this is not strictly true.  For instance, it is my understanding that it is still used in the cities of Plymouth and Birmingham, but not in the surrounding areas of Devon and the West Midlands.  I believe the division is along local council administrative boundaries, i.e. whichever is appropriate of city council, county council or unitary authority for any given location. 46.208.99.201 (talk) 13:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There are definitely places in the West Midlands outside of Birmingham that use it. Wolverhampton for one. I don't have personal knowledge of the South West, but a cursory search reveals that there are indeed grammar schools in Devon outside Plymouth. 92.236.160.211 (talk) 18:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current situation - counties? 

message: In quite a few, if not all, places, Eleven Plus is italicised in the article.  Should it be?  If so, shouldn't the title also be? If not, the itals should all be removed. Huw Powell (talk) 12:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, remove, there is no reason for them. Plain 'eleven plus', as in the title, is the most common usage. Rothorpe (talk) 00:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics? 

message: What is an "LEAs"?  It is not defined in the article, or at the image page, as far as I can tell.  Huw Powell (talk) 12:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I found it and linked it. Huw Powell (talk) 13:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image caption 

message: The article begins by discussing the Eleven plus exam and mentions transfer test without saying what the connection between the two is.  Was 'transfer test' simply another name for the eleven plus exam? 86.185.216.32 (talk) 11:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eleven plus exam/transfer test  

message: I have looked at  Lincolnshire CC site to check on the sentence- (although the test is optional, the education system is completely Tripartite . That appears far from the truth- our own site List of schools in Lincolnshire is unreferenced, but does show no vestiges of tripartite provision. Whether Lincolnshire is the largest area to suffer from the blight of secondary moderns is a mute point- as Kent and Medway are more populous. If decent references can't be found I suggest Crtl-X.
Looking at the placitude about Kent, this is not referenced and experience on the ground suggests this is an exception rather than the norm. If decent references can't be found I suggest Crtl-X.
--ClemRutter (talk) 17:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current practice- criticisms. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Eleven-plus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722055519/http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=8884&topic=Home%20affairs to http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=8884&topic=Home%20affairs
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:53, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm in my last year of a BSc hons in Maths specialising in statistics and planning to do a research PhD into 11+ exams so came across this page and felt that the section on scoring here could do with some improvements.  I've not edited Wikipedia content before so would like to understand the etiquette.  
The problem with the existing section is it appears to relate to only Kent or possibly even just one particular school.  My proposed edit would point out there are 163 grammar schools, 85% of which are academies so able to set their own admissions criteria and that the 'pass mark' varies enormously.  I would add an overview of how standardised scores work to select a percentile of the applicants, point out the limitations of only providing standardised marks and refer to some of the attempts which have been made to increase transparency.  
If anyone has any thoughts please could they respond? 
thanks 
Thehampshirehog (talk) 17:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes go ahead- raising it here was the correct thing to do- just remember that the article is aimed at the general reader, and 'complicated sums scare them'. If the general information conflicts with the practices in Kent- then put that information in first- and then say "However, in Kent, --------existing material¨ lI will put some general tips on your talk page. ClemRutter (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed edit to the section on scoring 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eleven-plus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110705051412/http://www.management.stir.ac.uk/research/economics/working-papers to http://www.management.stir.ac.uk/research/economics/working-papers
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Until quite recently I had always thought that everybody took the 11+ (I mean from its inception until the advent in most areas of comprehensives, and presumably excluding those who were always going to be privately educated), but then I spoke to an acquaintance, a distinguished scholar, who went to a secondary modern. He said he was one of those who were deemed too thick to be worth being entered for it. Does anyone know whether it was meant to be taken by every child, and why a school wouldn't enter all its children (was there a fee, for example, or was it difficult to prepare children for it?)?Snugglepuss (talk) 20:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no fee, and most children took it. Certainly when I took it in 1966 I don't remember anybody in my very undistinguished primary school being excluded because they were 'too thick'. I think parents could opt out, but almost none did because grammar school entry was generally prized. There may have been some variation in practice across LEAs though. --Ef80 (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That is my recollection from earlier in 1950. One variation was that is most places there was just a choice between a secondary modern school and a grammar school but in Sheffield there was a choice between many grammar schools across the city and they had a definite pecking order. My parents had to choose an order. I was lucky. My primary school was good and I got into the school everybody listed first. --Bduke (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who took it?