Would it be true to say that there is a good deal of
spurious accuracy in any single figure that purports to show the true ability
of a child? A child who achieves 125 in verbal reasoning and 130 in mathematics
but only 112 in nonverbal reasoning can easily fail the eleven plus. The same
child may be amazing good at playing the flute and a master of chess – but still
achieve a low mark in the actual examination.
We do not, however, have to assume that variability is the fault
of the nonverbal test. The child may simply have shown some degree of
variability in performance.
Suppose, however, that the same child had constantly done
very well with any preparation exercises? What if the child had always done
very well on earlier school tests with reasonable consistency? Any subsequent effort
on the part of the school or the parents would be reduced to decisions beyond
their control.
The value and provenance of ability tests are sometimes
questioned. Anecdotal experience, however, seems to suggest that coaching and
expert tutoring can help children to do well on ability tests.
Reading and then understanding the instructions at the beginning
of the test can affect performance. Children also have to be confident that
there are no trick questions. They should also be aware that they should often
consider a variety of options before answering a question.
A different problem for some children is time. There is
limited time for tests and children have to take this into account. If a child
lingers too long over one question he or she may leave too little time to be
able to complete the paper.
