Is the 11-plus selection system fair?

Readers were quick to point out that, although state schools were not allowed extra preparation for the test, private schools could do as much as they pleased.

In a letter to the Free Press, John Fletcher of Chiltern Manor Park, Great Missenden, wrote: "The idea that coaching makes no difference is patently absurd and discredited.

"As private schools can choose which pupils to enrol for the test, they can put forward candidates with a strong chance of selection. And this also means that privately schooled pupils who are selected for grammar schools will take advantage of a state-funded education, while those who are not successful can continue with privately-funded tuition.

Mr Fletcher wrote: "The idea is that you pay from five to 11 then switch to the state system where it is free. The parental brief for most private preparatory schools is simple: Get my child into grammar school."

Councillor Marion Clayton, Cabinet Member for Achievement & Learning, understood that parents might feel this system was unfair.

She said: "Independent schools play by their own rules, the way the law stands at the moment. I can understand why some parents might feel that way. I can't disagree with it. As the law stands we are obliged to offer the education, and the opportunity to sit the 11-plus."

But Cllr Clayton thought people should not focus too much on the test results. She said: "The 11-plus is not the be all and end all of education in Bucks. The message I want to get out is that children here are getting a good education, whether they go to grammar school or not. There are some excellent upper schools here."

Cllr Glyn Galbraith thought the results indicated an improvement in selection rates, but noted the wide gulfs between certain schools.

"There was a fairly wide disparity, and there were higher pass rates in more rural settings. It does bring into my mind we need a system that affords equal opportunities. I think we should be trying to uncover the reasons for the disparity."

Cllr Clayton believed the reasons were not straightforward. She said: "There are a whole range of reasons that children in some areas may not have so high a rate of selection. Deprivation is a factor. It could be that they have special needs, it could be that they struggled with language, it could be all sorts of reasons."

Paul Goodman, MP for Wycombe, supports the selection system, but felt that the publication of the 11-plus results raised important questions for the county. He said: "That the system is good does not mean it is perfect. And the figures provoke some interesting questions. First thing - is there more that the grammar schools themselves could do to encourage some primary schools to prepare more assiduously for the 11-plus?

"And secondly is there more that the primary schools can do? Because it would be a shame if access to our excellent grammar schools was in any way impeded."

Posted by: swearmeister, High Wycombe: "I take exception with the Each child is provided with a familiarisation and practice pack'. This is true in state schools, but in private schools there is a lot more coaching. This is why there is not a level playing field. Instead of scrapping the 11+ policy, the Conservatives should move to allow a level playing field between state and private schools - then every- one would get an equal chance."

Posted by: Steve, Totteridge Hill said: "OK the system isn't perfect but it stops the under achievers slowing up those that want to get along. As for private... there are parents so fed up with the state system that they will remortgage and raise the money by any means to get off the state merry-go-round, their sac- rifice."

Posted by: Jack Mannion, Kenton said: "A grammar' school in my vocabulary is a school that admits pupils on the basis of a rigorous testing regime that tests all aspects of the curriculum (e.g. maths, English, science), NOT working out patterns, deciphering the meaning of words, etc - which by its very nature leaves important aspects of the curriculum untested and is frankly too "Mickey Mouse" to be a reliable barometer of where pupils' real abilities lie."

FH, Amersham said: "I think that's the point! The current form of 11+ is meant to be more akin to an IQ test than to a test of knowledge, i.e. the idea is that it approximates more to ability than how many facts you've crammed. Of course that's a reductive argument that isn't quite true, but I think it fairer than testing subject based knowledge at that age."