CEM-Style 11+ Exams: What the Format Means Today

CEM stood for the Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring, a research and assessment centre based at Durham University. For a number of years, CEM was one of the two dominant providers of 11+ testing in England, alongside GL Assessment, and a considerable number of grammar school areas used CEM-designed papers.

It's important to be accurate about where things stand now: Durham University's CEM centre wound down its involvement in producing 11+ entrance exams some years ago and is not the active provider of 11+ testing services it once was. Areas and schools that previously used Durham CEM papers have generally moved to other test providers — some to GL Assessment, and some to other organisations that produce tests built in a similar style and philosophy to the original CEM approach.

Because of this, when people today say a school or area uses a CEM-style exam, they usually mean the test follows the distinctive format CEM pioneered, rather than that Durham University itself is currently running it. It's worth checking directly with your local authority or target school which provider they currently use, since this can change from year to year as areas review their arrangements.

The clearest difference between CEM-style tests and GL Assessment papers is structure. Where GL separates subjects into clearly labelled papers, CEM-style exams have traditionally mixed English, Maths, Verbal Reasoning and Non-Verbal Reasoning questions together within the same test booklet, sometimes without clear labels distinguishing one section from another. This means a child can move from a maths question straight into a vocabulary question with no warning, which rewards flexibility and quick subject-switching as much as raw ability in any one area.

Verbal reasoning in CEM-style tests tends to lean heavily on vocabulary breadth — synonyms, antonyms, word meanings in context, and comprehension of more advanced texts — often drawing on a wider and less predictable vocabulary bank than GL's more format-based Verbal Reasoning questions. This is one of the main reasons CEM-style verbal reasoning has a reputation for being harder to specifically revise for: there's no fixed list of question types to drill in the same way GL's codes-and-sequences questions can be drilled.

Maths in CEM-style papers is usually framed as numerical reasoning, meaning questions are often wrapped in short written contexts or word-problem framing even for what is fundamentally a straightforward calculation, so reading comprehension plays a bigger role in the maths score than some parents expect.

For families, the practical difference comes down to predictability. GL Assessment's question types are more standardised and reusable across past papers, so a child who has drilled plenty of genuine GL practice materials walks in recognising the format. CEM-style tests are, by design, harder to over-prepare for in this narrow, format-drilling sense — the emphasis is more on general vocabulary depth, reading stamina, and comfort switching between subjects at speed, rather than on recognising a fixed bank of question types.

This doesn't mean CEM-style tests can't be prepared for — quite the opposite. It means the preparation looks different: broader reading, sustained vocabulary building over months rather than weeks, and lots of mixed, unpredictable practice rather than narrow repetition of one question type at a time.

Some local authorities and grammar school consortiums that historically used Durham CEM have moved to other providers offering a similar mixed-subject, vocabulary-led style of test, while others have switched to GL Assessment or set up their own bespoke arrangements. Because this landscape shifts periodically as local authorities retender their testing contracts, the most reliable source of truth is always your specific local authority or grammar school consortium's own admissions information for the relevant intake year, rather than a general assumption based on what was true a few years ago or in a neighbouring area.

Because the format rewards breadth over narrow drilling, the most effective preparation tends to combine three things: wide reading across fiction and non-fiction to build vocabulary naturally, deliberate vocabulary work (synonyms, antonyms, word roots) so unfamiliar words become easier to guess from context, and plenty of mixed, timed practice so switching between subjects mid-paper stops feeling disorientating.

Stamina matters more here than in some other formats, since children need to sustain concentration through a single long, varied booklet rather than resetting between separate subject papers. Building up practice session length gradually over the months before the exam, rather than cramming short bursts close to the date, tends to serve children much better.

Skylark 11+'s adaptive practice is well suited to this kind of mixed preparation — it draws on a broad bank of vocabulary and mixed-subject questions and adjusts to what your child finds hardest, rather than repeating the same narrow question type. The free diagnostic identifies gaps early, and the personalised plan (a full year plan, or an 8-week emergency option) paces the wider reading and vocabulary work this format rewards, alongside timed mock exams and downloadable worksheet PDFs, for £199 a year.