Why is tutoring such a big deal with some people?

(302 Posts)
APMF Sun 02-Dec-12 23:05:14

We downloaded some past papers. We 'tutored' our DCs in standard test taking techniques ie watch the clock, skip a question if you are stuck and return to it later, recheck your maths answers if you have the time and so on. Now, if parents want to pay someone to tutor their DCs in such obvious exam techniques then my rates are quite reasonable smile

After listening to so many presumably working class parents harp on about middle class parents buying a GS place for their dim? DCs, I wonder if the said parents realise how stupid they sound.

I mean, there is no secret technique that is known only to the Secret Brotherhood of Tutors. Some parents haven't the inclination to do the above and so they hire someone to do it for them. This hardly gives their kids an advantage over yours.

I get it that some of your DCs didn't pass the 11+ but why blame others for the fact that you didn't do your part as a parent or that your DC wasn't clever enough to pass?

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:07:47

Yes there could be more extreme setting in comprehensives - all very good. Doesn't alter the fact that so many children are getting a poor primary education so they'd be in the lower sets without a chance of being in the higher sets. What's the difference?

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:08:56

A point of clarification- do people think that "comprehensive" means "mixed ability teaching"?

CaseyShraeger Mon 03-Dec-12 13:09:30

Brycie, you told me I shoukd argue for better primary education, and when I agree with you I don't make sense?

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:10:02

"cream off the top 2-25%"

cream off is such a perjorative term

I love an elite, myself. Thank God for elites, for heart surgeons, bridge builders, nuclear scientists, chemical engineers, the brightest academics in the humanities. Pick them out and make the best of them. We all benefit.

april1st Mon 03-Dec-12 13:12:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bulletpoint Mon 03-Dec-12 13:12:17

Seeker - "Of course I bloody did! I assumed that went without saying"

Next time you need to bloody say so, it is not a given as you rightly pointed out:
I suppose many grammar school supporters would have rubbed their hands with glee at the prospect of one less competitor.

You are a grammar parent so what was I supposed to think

Why? in non grammar areas the children who would have gone to grammar form the tops sets of comprehensives and do just as well as they would have done qt grammar school.

See this is another stupid myth perpetated over and over again on MN, how excatly do you know what might have been ? are you a soothsayer ? how excatly could one measure or study or do a survey of wether child A would have obtained the exact same standard of education at the grammar as they would have had they gone to the local comp, any local comp ?

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:12:22

You said, in effect, that lots of children have a poor education and in the next post that everyone should have that education.

I agree: the same high standards should be offered to all and expected of all. But a lot of anti-grammar/selection types are also anti the kind of rigorous more exciting education that can achieve these standards. Are you like this?

APMF Mon 03-Dec-12 13:16:43

@seeker - Putting aside your hypocrisy (trying to get your DC into a system you despise) why do you insist on wheeling out this caricature of a 'typical' GS parent?

If your DC had passed the 11+ YOU would be one of these GS parents that you persist in ridiculing.

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:18:43

She does have a child at GS. Presumably seeker imagines there's only one nice decent parent in the whole school and everyone else is smug, self-serving, snotty-nosed and complacent.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:18:48

"See this is another stupid myth perpetated over and over again on MN, how excatly do you know what might have been ? are you a soothsayer ? how excatly could one measure or study or do a survey of wether child A would have obtained the exact same standard of education at the grammar as they would have had they gone to the local comp, any local comp ?"

Because if you compare the results of a comprehensive school to the results added together of a grammar and a high school in a similar catchment, they are very similar. And in some cases the comprehensive does better. I'll find a link to some Sutton trust stuff this evening.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:20:59

What the caricature of the middle class, professional educated parent? That's me! it's not a caricature. it's observable measurable fact.

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:22:30

"the middle class, professional educated parent"

is not necessarily gleeful at the exclusion and poor education of others, drawing in their skirts if a poorer family passes them in the playground

which is what you assume with many of your posts

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:23:24

not "necessarily" gleeful?

is never, in my experience, gleeful - more sad and worried

CaseyShraeger Mon 03-Dec-12 13:28:50

No, I said that everyone should have as good an education as those children who don't (for whatever reason) have good parental support because the children without parental support should be getting a really good education.

Your question appeared to assume that obviously those poor souls were condemned to a crap education, and the only question was whether all other children should be condemned to it along with them or not.

I do agree with rigorous education, but suspect we might differ on some of the details of what we mean by "rigorous" (for example, I am very pro early learning of times tables and number bonds and think more time should be spent in school on that, but I am anti homework in primary schools).

Do you really feel that a child just above the cutoff for selection at the age of 10 is "elite" and should be made the most of, and that a child just below the cutoff at the same age is "other" and doesn't need to be developed in the same way? At a good comprehensive school the two might be in different sets but woukd have the flexibility to move up and down over the months and years across a range of different subjects; under a grammar system they would be irrevocably split for the rest of their school careers into different institutions with different priorities.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:29:27

""the middle class, professional educated parent"

is not necessarily gleeful at the exclusion and poor education of others, drawing in their skirts if a poorer family passes them in the playground

which is what you assume with many of your posts"

No. I agree. And I don't think I have assumed anything of the kind. But supporting the grammar school system as vociferously as many on here do does imply that they are motivated by at the very least, self interest. Particularly when that support insists that nobody is damaged or disadvantaged by the system.

bulletpoint Mon 03-Dec-12 13:29:58

Sutton trust will be able to tell me that my niece who was bullied horribly at her local comp for being bright and eventually "dumbed" down so she could fit in and came out with poor GCSE's, would have had the exact same result if she had gone to a fantastic grammar school or a lazy but bright child who got into the fantastic grammar and had to pull his socks up and came out in the end with brilliant results would have done just as well if he had gone to niece's sink comp.

And as for results being very similar that means a few numbers out therefore proving my point to degree ? well those few numbers are somebody's child, nobody's parents wants that number to be their child.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:34:45

What about the child "condemned" to a secondary modern school and coming out with poor GCSEs who would have flown at a comprehensive?

You have no way of knowing that your niece would not have been bullied at a grammar school- they are by no means immune. I don't think we can debate about individuals, I'm afraid.

bulletpoint Mon 03-Dec-12 13:35:41

and to add, if the results between the comprehensive, grammar and high school in a similar catchment are similar and in some cases the comp is better and this is is a sustained result, i'd probably agree with you to shut the grammar school down, its a waste of space.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:37:20

Yay! Bulletpoint's joined the campaign!!!!!!!!!!!!

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:39:16

"I am very pro early learning of times tables and number bonds and think more time should be spent in school on that, but I am anti homework in primary schools".

Me too! I bang on about it every opportunity.

"Do you really feel that a child just above the cutoff for selection at the age of 10 is "elite" and should be made the most of, and that a child just below the cutoff at the same age is "other" and doesn't need to be developed in the same way?"

Grammars are the same as rigorous, proper selection in comps, that's if you want selection in comps to achieve the same results. Same separation, same higher expectations. The truth is it doesn't work that way.

What we have right now with this super-importance of grammars, private education and selection is a direct result of the downgrading of state education and nothing at all to do with the actual existences of grammars, private education and selection. To get rid of the problem, get rid of the downgrading.

Seeker:" I don't think I have assumed anything of the kind"

yes you have - "you'll all be delighted her child is not in your class" etc etc yawn

Brycie Mon 03-Dec-12 13:40:40

Bulletpoint hasn't joined any campaign hmm unless you don't understand her posts. Sometimes you don't seem to read what other people write, Seeker. No offence.

LaQueen Mon 03-Dec-12 13:41:30

We are having our DD1 tutored, purely because neither DH or I are patient enough to do it ourselves, and I honestly think we would end up un-nerving/stressing DD1 more than helping her.

APMF Mon 03-Dec-12 13:42:41

@Casey - I was addressing my comments at the parents who were complaining that The System discriminates against them. I wasn't directing my comments at the druggies who probably don't even know what day it is let alone spell 11+

bulletpoint Mon 03-Dec-12 13:45:44

What about the child "condemned" to a secondary modern school and coming out with poor GCSEs who would have flown at a comprehensive?

Yes and that too, does Sutton say this child will do just as well as he/she would have at the Comprehensive ?

You have no way of knowing that your niece would not have been bullied at a grammar school- they are by no means immune. I don't think we can debate about individuals, I'm afraid

Yes Seeker there are so many unknown factors arent there ? how do you know wether the poor child you speak of wouldnt have got run over by a bus on their way to the lovely comp ? and walk safely to and from to the modern every day instead ? hence why the Sutton report you talk of in this case is rubbish as far as i am concerned on this particular matter, (they have many other fantastic results).

All we can do as parents is try to obtain the best education that we can for our children (it is not my responsibility to provide an education for other people's children, that is the responsibility of each parent and role of government) just as in my example of food, I may know what is better to eat but can't force it on other people, but that doesnt mean I dont want the best for others, but my "best" may not be everyone's best. The rest is an unknown, but at least we each would have tried our best.

seeker Mon 03-Dec-12 13:46:39

"and to add, if the results between the comprehensive, grammar and high school in a similar catchment are similar and in some cases the comp is better and this is is a sustained result, i'd probably agree with you to shut the grammar school down, its a waste of space."

Well, this is what she said, Brycie, and as that actually is the case, then it's reasonable to assume she's on board!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now