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

Hi, I am trying to find out which exam board was responsible for the 11+exam in Sheffield in 1960. Do you have any details? Did you get a certificate or a letter which includes the exam board?

Hi, I am trying to find out which exam board was responsible for the 11+exam in Sheffield in 1960. Do you have any details? Did you get a certificate or a letter which includes the exam board?

Agatha, I took the 11+ in 1960 but I don't remember who set the exams. For senior schools, the O and A levels were set by various university boards (the most commonly used in our area was called something like the Combined Universities Joint Board but was generally referred to as "Northern", but I suspect that Sheffield Education Committee themselves set the 11+ exam papers - from memory there were three, English, Arithmetic and Aptitude.

 

Agatha, I took the 11+ in 1960 but I don't remember who set the exams. For senior schools, the O and A levels were set by various university boards (the most commonly used in our area was called something like the Combined Universities Joint Board but was generally referred to as "Northern", but I suspect that Sheffield Education Committee themselves set the 11+ exam papers - from memory there were three, English, Arithmetic and Aptitude.

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

I took the 11+ in 1958. As a previous poster says, the exam consisted of Maths, English, & Aptitude papers. Of course we were taught Maths & English in the normal way, but we were not aware of the existence of such a thing as an aptitude test until we looked at the paper on the day of the exam. I still remember the feeling of panic when I was confronted with the list of strange questions. As far as the O & A-level exams were concerned, they were set by the Joint Matriculation Board (universities of manchester, liverpool, leeds, sheffield, & birmingham) at least they were at the grammar school I attended. We were told that the JMB set the hardest questions of all exam boards, but I suspect that our teachers were using a bit of psychology on us. I think the 11+ papers were set by Sheffield Education Authority.

Just realised I have posted on the wrong thread. I confused this thread with the "Did you go to a Grammar School?" thread.

I took the 11+ in 1958. As a previous poster says, the exam consisted of Maths, English, & Aptitude papers. Of course we were taught Maths & English in the normal way, but we were not aware of the existence of such a thing as an aptitude test until we looked at the paper on the day of the exam. I still remember the feeling of panic when I was confronted with the list of strange questions.

Your teachers were perhaps not clued up. There were books available of past papers and trial papers, which we worked through in the weeks or months before the 11+ so by the time we sat the real exam we were familiar with the format and the types of question. Of course my Dad, being a schoolmaster, brought a book of trial papers home, so I had to do one each Saturday morning and he would then mark it. At the time I would rather have been doing something else, but in retrospect I'm grateful for all the practice I got.

Your teachers were perhaps not clued up. There were books available of past papers and trial papers, which we worked through in the weeks or months before the 11+ so by the time we sat the real exam we were familiar with the format and the types of question. Of course my Dad, being a schoolmaster, brought a book of trial papers home, so I had to do one each Saturday morning and he would then mark it. At the time I would rather have been doing something else, but in retrospect I'm grateful for all the practice I got.

The issue of preparation is in the news again recently. In principle, the 11+ exam was, I thought, meant to identify students with particular academic abilities or potential. As athy states above, some students were coached by teachers or parents or presumably by tutors paid for by parents. This definitely happens today. Clearly, that coaching and practise improves the performance in such tests and gives those students an advantage over the others and so, some would argue, is unfair to those others. It is therefore argued that this perpetuates "privilege" whereas others argue that it provides an opportunity for students from less well off families to access those opportunities as well.

What you're saying in essence, TWhits, is that pupils who have been well taught tend to do better in their exams than pupils who have not. I entirely agree with you.

What you're saying in essence, TWhits, is that pupils who have been well taught tend to do better in their exams than pupils who have not. I entirely agree with you.

That was part of what I was pondering, athy. The more contentious bit is where well-off parents are able to pay for coaching and so give their offspring a better chance of getting into the "best" schools whereas those less well-off can only rely on raw ability. This tends to perpetuate the class divide / status-quo which is at odds with the other view that 11+ examinations identify raw ability and grammar schools provide a way for the less well-off to move "up" the social ladder.

Another related aspect is that those who do less well in 11+ examinations are "condemned" to the less academic schools and maybe 11 years old is rather young for that black / white selection with little opportunity to swap between the two later.

I was trying not to express a personal opinion but rather to encourage views to be shared on this emotive and important topic.

 

I was trying not to express a personal opinion but rather to encourage views to be shared on this emotive and important topic.

It seems to me that you have succeeded in doing both those things, which is exactly what should happen on a discussion forum.

All these words and yet no one has answered your question directly. I may be mistaken, but I am pretty sure it was "Yorkshire and Lindsey Joint Matriculation Board". (Or "West Yorkshire and Lindsey Joint Matriculation Board"). I will have to dig out my CSE's to check!

All these words and yet no one has answered your question directly. I may be mistaken, but I am pretty sure it was "Yorkshire and Lindsey Joint Matriculation Board". (Or "West Yorkshire and Lindsey Joint Matriculation Board"). I will have to dig out my CSE's to check!

The OP wants to know who set the 11 plus exam not the GCE/CSE exams, seems like everyone is clued up on the latter. My GCE's say Joint Matriculation Board, I have no copy of my eleven plus result and my mum passed away 9 years ago. I don't think there was a certificate any way.

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.