Which exam board was responsible for the 11+exam in Sheffield in 1960?

An interesting viewpoint, Annie, but I can't see how that would have worked. Do you mean most junior schools or most grammar schools? I don't think that would have been feasible either way.

I have never heard of junior schools teaching Latin - though, of course, preparatory schools did (and doubtless some still do).

An interesting viewpoint, Annie, but I can't see how that would have worked. Do you mean most junior schools or most grammar schools? I don't think that would have been feasible either way.

I have never heard of junior schools teaching Latin - though, of course, preparatory schools did (and doubtless some still do).

I agree, athy, the comment from Annie seems different from my understanding of the 11+ in Sheffield in the late 1960s. Surely, if it was a competition for places combined with an allocation of students to secondary schools, it had to be the same test sat by all the children. It was certainly just the one exam for all the schools on my list. If I recall, we did have the option of not taking the test and going to the default secondary modern school. If we took the test, we could list our destination schools in order of preference.

I think the process was that the top student was then allocated to their first preference and so on down the ordered list of students. When a school became full, then students were allocated to the next school in their list. It was up to parents to choose the schools they wanted to be considered for and to choose the order they wanted.

By the way, at King Edward VII, we did study Latin - at least in the first year - and performance in that subject was a key factor as to which set you were in the following year!

Yes, I know that the first form at King Ted's did Latin - I was there. I think we had Mr. Prescott, who was a young teacher, perhaps newly qualified at that time (1960). But I meant junior schools, i.e. the ones which we all (or most of us) attended until we were eleven.

Your synopsis of the selection process for 11+ candidates is, I think, spot on. I would have written my previous post in more detail but it was very early in the morning and I had not yet finished my first cup of coffee, hence brain was not yet working at its supercharged best.

Yes, I know that the first form at King Ted's did Latin - I was there. I think we had Mr. Prescott, who was a young teacher, perhaps newly qualified at that time (1960). But I meant junior schools, i.e. the ones which we all (or most of us) attended until we were eleven.

Your synopsis of the selection process for 11+ candidates is, I think, spot on. I would have written my previous post in more detail but it was very early in the morning and I had not yet finished my first cup of coffee, hence brain was not yet working at its supercharged best.

Sorry for any confusion, athy, but I had realised you were talking about primary schools whereas I slipped in an "aside" about KES. You must have just left KES just before I arrived in 1968.

Relieved that you seem to have the same memories of 11+ in Sheffield as I do. I know that grammar schools (and independent schools) have their own entrance exams these days but don't think that was the 1960s Sheffield system.

Most schools set their own 11+ exam or bought in papers from specialist companies.

 

There was no pass mark as it was a competition for the places available in that school.

Parents would apply for their child to do the examinations in areas where there was a higher percentage of Grammar School places.

 

It was much easier to get a Grammar School place in Manchester or Liverpool than in Sheffield because as more established cities they had more charitable, religious and occupation based Grammar Schools. They also had a higher RC population who had a disproportionate number of Grammar Schools.*

 

Examinations were designed by many schools to 'select' the child based on their 'class'. For example if the questions covered Latin, algebra and literature then this would exclude many children from working class areas as these subjects were not taught.

 

About half the children from working class areas would do the examination at the age of 10. A much higher proportion of middle class parents sent their children to the fee paying feeder schools of the Grammar School where "aptitude" tests and repeat testing of the same exam were common practices.

 

So much for social mobility(* The RC church had a different agenda) and fairness.

I was at De La Salle from 1956 to 1961. In my 11+ year only two of us passed from St Joseph's Handsworth. Not sure how many girls passed for Notre Dame. My year was made up of pupils from all over South Yorkshire and North Derbyshire There were kids from Rotherham, West Riding(me), Barnsley, Chesterfield and Barnsley. The reason for all of this was the fact that De La Salle(boys) and Notre Dame(girls) were the only Catholic Grammar schools in the areas mentioned combined.

However after saying all that I still have no idea how our 11+ exams were set up. I do know however none of us had a clue about Latin until our first year at Grammar school, despite us being Catholics. I also know that we were a mixed bunch, a lot from working class homes, sons of Doctors, Lawyers , Teachers etc etc.

Most of the exams at King Edwards were "Oxford and Cambridge" board when I was there. Sorry, don't know who set 11+ papers.

At High Storrs, A levels were Oxford & Cambridge. I think the 11plus exam attempted to divide students, academic/ non academic too early in a child's development. I know several examples of students who failed that exam, but blossomed later when the Labour government brought in a late developers' program. Many of these went on to university.

Thank you. I have GCE O Levels from the JMB so maybe they did set the 11+.

I went to Notre Dame High School from 1952-59. It is only recently that I found out that there was a primary school at Notre Dame Cavendish Street which was dis-continued at the time I started there. It seems that the majority of those girls were fee paying and all went through to the 'big' school, either paying or by obtaining a scholarship. Thereby reducing considerably the intake of pupils from ordinary, for the most part, working class households, who may have passed the Eleven Plus. There were certainly not many from the school I was at.

I believe the answer to this question was given in post#4 by fatrajah. In 1946 when i took the "Scholarship" exam (11+ is a name adopted later) the Sheffield Education Committee were responsible for this and had been for decades. My parents both received small hard-cover cards recording their achievements early in the 1900's in similar tests.

Certainly the Joint Matriculation Board (the 6 given in post#4) set the last "School Certificate" exams in 1950 and the O&A levels in 1951 and thereafter at my school. They were sometimes referred to as the NUJMB (Northern Universities).

I was very interested in the comment about some children taking the 11+ exam at age 10. I thought I was unusual but perhaps not. I do remember I was the only one in my year to pass it.

My first job on leaving school in 1963 was at the Education Office of Sheffield City Council which was then on Leopold Street. Within a year or two I found myself working on the administration and organisation of the 11 plus. There was myself and a senior colleague.

The examinations, over two days a few weeks apart, were the responsibility of the Education Department. I recall using standard test papers to which we added our own covers and instructions. Four marks were eventually recorded. I am sorry but after all this time I cannot recall the source of the test papers but they would be from one of the examinations boards at that time.

It was a most interesting job involving all responsibilities including preparation, distribution, collection and the recording of marks given by a pool of teachers followed by the allocation of pupils to a rough hierarchy of grammar schools, or their local secondary modern schools, according to marks obtained and parental choice. Results were sent by post on the appointed day and, following that, there was a period where parents who wished could make representations in person to the department with any mitigating circumstances and these were dealt with by interview with my colleague and I or more senior staff in needed.

The line was that there was no 'pass' or 'fail' but that pupils were being allocated to the most suitable school and type of education according to their abilities. Ironically, the 1945 Education Act which introduced the 11+ system was a Labour Government initiative, one of many under the various social reforms of that age. Rough justice in many ways, but this was still a time of deference, trust and respect for authority. I do know that the Education Department did all expected of it at that time to implement and administer the test in an efficient and well-organised manner within the definition of fairness of the time.

Ironically, having myself been born 'on the wrong side of town' and having unfortunately suffered childhood loss, I also 'failed' the 11+ test and found myself at my local secondary modern school, although subsequently passing the 13+ which enabled me to go to Technical School. Not being in the slightest way 'technical, this was not, as educational thought then held, of much value.

It took many years before I was able to obtain graduate, postgraduate and professional qualifications and eventually entered an academic career and so, to some degree, overcome educational disadvantage.

Some of my primary school friends (a small minority) were able to pass their 11+ and go to grammar school. This was an achievement and opened doors for them which were closed for me.

Again, ironically, my test paper showed me that I had only completed half the questions, getting most right, and was, therefore borderline fail. There was no tuition on how to successfully pass examinations or tests at some primary schools or allowances made for late development following unfortunate life chances.

In my academic career I endeavoured to remedy this to try and help all students and , especially, mature ones and try and ensure more equal opportunities for all.

The current educational environment is much different these days but I'm honestly not sure it is that much fairer being, as it is, open to even more political interference and idealism in an age of changed values and expectations.

My first job on leaving school in 1963 was at the Education Office of Sheffield City Council which was then on Leopold Street. Within a year or two I found myself working on the administration and organisation of the 11 plus. There was myself and a senior colleague.

The examinations, over two days a few weeks apart, were the responsibility of the Education Department. I recall using standard test papers to which we added our own covers and instructions. Four marks were eventually recorded. I am sorry but after all this time I cannot recall the source of the test papers but they would be from one of the examinations boards at that time.

It was a most interesting job involving all responsibilities including preparation, distribution, collection and the recording of marks given by a pool of teachers followed by the allocation of pupils to a rough hierarchy of grammar schools, or their local secondary modern schools, according to marks obtained and parental choice. Results were sent by post on the appointed day and, following that, there was a period where parents who wished could make representations in person to the department with any mitigating circumstances and these were dealt with by interview with my colleague and I or more senior staff in needed.

The line was that there was no 'pass' or 'fail' but that pupils were being allocated to the most suitable school and type of education according to their abilities. Ironically, the 1945 Education Act which introduced the 11+ system was a Labour Government initiative, one of many under the various social reforms of that age. Rough justice in many ways, but this was still a time of deference, trust and respect for authority. I do know that the Education Department did all expected of it at that time to implement and administer the test in an efficient and well-organised manner within the definition of fairness of the time.

Ironically, having myself been born 'on the wrong side of town' and having unfortunately suffered childhood loss, I also 'failed' the 11+ test and found myself at my local secondary modern school, although subsequently passing the 13+ which enabled me to go to Technical School. Not being in the slightest way 'technical, this was not, as educational thought then held, of much value.

It took many years before I was able to obtain graduate, postgraduate and professional qualifications and eventually entered an academic career and so, to some degree, overcome educational disadvantage.

 

Some of my primary school friends (a small minority) were able to pass their 11+ and go to grammar school. This was an achievement and opened doors for them which were closed for me.

 

Again, ironically, my test paper showed me that I had only completed half the questions, getting most right, and was, therefore borderline fail. There was no tuition on how to successfully pass examinations or tests at some primary schools or allowances made for late development following unfortunate life chances.

In my academic career I endeavoured to remedy this to try and help all students and , especially, mature ones and try and ensure more equal opportunities for all.

The current educational environment is much different these days but I'm honestly not sure it is that much fairer being, as it is, open to even more political interference and idealism in an age of changed values and expectations.

Well done!

On another thread I posted how coming from a one parent welfare family, I "failed" the 11+ and went on to a trade.

Determined to educate myself, later in life I had the opportunity to teach for a full year at a grammar school, and was Science Link Governor at one of the best grammar schools in England.