Does anyone regret tutoring to get their DC's into private school?(50 Posts)
I keep hearing about children crashing out at private school if they've been 'over tutored' to get there. Some people seem to think any tutoring is too much; others that a couple of sessions a week is sensible.
So...those who tutored their DC's please tell me how secondary is going!
It's going great. I tutored mine, some might say quite heavily, and they are on track for GCSEs A or, on a good day, A* so no regrets here.
I suspect that the crash and burn kids are those who were heavily tutored and even then just managed to scrape in or were on the waiting list. However this isn't an indictment on tutoring itself. I mean, it's like taking someone with two left feet, subjecting them to hours and hours of tennis coaching and then blaming others when the kids burns out from all the stress and pressure.
I think that it is the homework and constant tests that stresses out some kids as opposed to being unable to keep up in the classroom. I mean, typically in year 8 you get streamed so keeping up in the classroom isn't an issue.
However, mine get between 1 to 2 hours homework 7 days a week with at least one test each week. On top of this my kids attend after school clubs like netball, swimming, athletics and rugby. Then there is the music obligations. They still have enough.free time for hanging out with mates and playing on the PC.
However, reading threads about homework, I see that many parents rolling their eyes at a couple of hours homework a week. If a kid is pushed to his/her limit, just to pass the test then the routine I described above is going to sooo stress them out.
It depends on the child. Two of my children are very academic DD is on for A* without tutoring and the other one is doing work 3 years ahead without tutoring. My other child needs extra help as he needs to do things a couple of times before it sinks in.
I would never tutor a child extensively I want my children to have fun and enjoy their childhood. There is soooo much more to life than academics.
I do know a lot of parents who regret tutoring because they fell for all the pre selection angst and signed up to the tutoring factories around here where they have waiting lists, test pupils before accepting them and then cram them around a kitchen table, and it turned out to be a pretty miserable experience for the child, and they are not convinced it even made a difference. There is a world of difference between that and getting a child some extra individual help with things they are weak on or haven't covered or doing it yourself, whilst keeping it a positive experience.
My DDs were at a very selective indie, a bit of a hothouse frankly but I was not aware of anyone crashing and burning. They seemed pretty good at seeing through tutoring and selecting the pupils who should be there, and where pupils have weaknesses they get lots of support.
Each year thousands of kids get into selectives. Going by personal experience and what gets posted here, a significant proportion were tutored to some degree. I suspect that only a small number actually crash out. Those that do, I further suspect that they realise that a couple of hours of homework a day plus a test most weeks isn't what they want as opposed to them not being able to cope with the academics because they were 'over tutored'
Admit that the sound of preselection and group lessons sounds fairly horrid and can imagine that the benefits must be much less than an individual tutor. People here (SW London) seem to do specific tutor for poor subject; then group lessons for exam practice.
If we sit DD for 11+ then I think we'd only accept a place if she got in comfortably rather than just scraping in....
My friend has a regular tutor group that meets around her kitchen table. I've dropped in a few times when lessons was in progress and I didn't notice anyone looking miserable. And at the end she got a lot of thank you cards from parents who saw a marked difference in their DCs mock marks.
Who is to say that your anecdote is more representative of reality than mine.
And what is wrong with testing them before accepting a DC? If a tutor took your money knowing full well that your child didn't have the potential to pass then you wouldn't be very happy. Jeeze, with some people you just can't win.
I don't think tutors pre-test children to do parents a favour - they do it so that they are tutoring the top kids so they can tell other parents that all the kids they tutor get in. Besides - how many tests do they do before rejecting a kid? Surely best to tutor the child and once you really know them have an honest conversation with the parents if you think they won't cut the mustard.
The tutor we used for dd (not to get in to anywhere - just to help boost confidence in specific maths areas) certainly doesn't test children to decide whether she's taking them or not. She does test - all kids - but only to assess where they are re levels and knowledge.
I would imagine most parents, like the ones I know who are using the same tutor we used but for entrance exam purposes, would prefer to have the tutor get to know their child a bit then give feedback on chances of getting in. Or, as dd's tutor very kindly and accurately did, give feedback on what sort of school she thinks would serve that child best.
But then, I would never use a tutor with a specific aim to get a child in to a specific school anyway.
Before I started tutoring my kids I sat them down and gave them a past paper to do. One scored 60% and other 65%. If either had scored less than 50% then I wouldn't have proceeded with tutoring.
So I can hardly blame a professional tutor for taking the same attitude.
Re the dropping out after getting in to highly selective schools - I tend to think MTS is probably right: kids may not realize what the expectations are going to be once in, and then just find its not for them. Especially, though not only, if the parent wanted it more than they did in the first place.
As opposed to 'not being bright enough' and tutoring having squeezed them in when they shouldn't be there. Which sounds pretty unlikely to me, tbh.
Yes, but MTS you did that because you wanted to get your kids into a specific school - or were finding out if that was an option, I presume.
To my mind, the best professional tutors won't take on kids promising to get them in to anywhere - they will just do their best to support/teach kids and advise as to likely positive choices for them.
At least, that's what I wanted from one - and what I got.
Surely this depends on the area?
If you have a range of selective schools in your area, then sure, you work with the child and then help them go for the ones that are right. I'd have thought tutors in London and other big cities are in this position.
But if you live somewhere with one, very highly selective school, surely it would be wrong to take money and raise hopes if there is no chance?
11+ exams are not knowledge-based so I to think the crashing out thing is unlikely. Once you've been helped to develop your maths skills so you can work fast and accurately, then you can go on from there.
Depends on the child, and the amount of tutoring.
I believe if a child just needs that extra help, but has the natural ability, then tutoring is fine to get into a school.
Parents who are determined to get their children into the best school without regard to their emotional wellbeing, as well as capability are beyond cruel. Do they not realise that if said child makes it through the entry tests, there will be children there with a huge talent and this child will be languishing at the bottom of the heap, coming last in tests, and the end result can be a psychiatric hospital (worst case scenario) or at best a miserable 7 years ahead.
If you tutor your own child to that level then you are more than capable of getting them multiple As at GCSE in a normal school without the price tag. A majority of private schools are actually little better than states in the same area yet they have more leeway to skew their results......
Yes, tiredaftertwo, it probably does make a difference where - sorry, was speaking in London terms. Although I'd think there was some choice in most places, hopefully - whether people accept it as choice or not!
Oh yes, Elibean, absolutely. I agree with you about London - you can apply for a range and for most people it seems to shake down fine. It is just there may be good professional tutors working in areas where there is only one selective option, so they will have to adopt a different approach.
mungo - there is a vast difference between tutoring a 10 year old for 11+ and tutoring a 16 yr old to GCSE A* standard in 10 subjects.
I think when tutors cherry pick the children they are probably getting a group that is already very close to where they need to be to get in. It's lazy to just pick 'the best'.
Sure there are super selective schools where only the top 2% get in and yes, a tutor should be clear with a parent about their opinion of the childs chances but surely in the end it's the parents decision to go ahead and try if they want to.
Presumably we all want our kids to go to a selective because we want our kids to be educated in an environment where all the kids are of a similar (high) ability. Yet, we want the 11+ tutor to take kids with varying abilities to form a tutor group???
Bright DCs leave state schools with As and A*s, having never been tutored and doing sensible amounts of HW.
I really don't get it.
Not everyone is as bright as your DCs OR go to a school that is as good as yours
MTS I didn't want my DDs go to a selective, I wanted them to go to the best school for them, and it just happened the selective was the one they felt was right for them. If I had suspected they wouldn't cope academically I wouldn't have put them through the exam, let alone tutoring.
And to answer your remark earlier, jeez it is the factory tutors who want it all ways, prey on parents anxieties by fostering the idea that their one size fits all approach is the magic bullett that will get your child into these schools regardless of how clever they already are, what their strengths and weaknesses are, what parts of the curriculum they have covered and haven't etc etc etc etc. then only select the cleverest, and even then some of them don't get in because I do not know of a selective school that doesn't frown on kids being crammed in that way, and are focused on ability, and are better and more thorough at identifying it than any tutors pre test, which is why few DCs do actually crash and burn at the good selective schools. I was fortunately abroad the first time around so just focused on my DD's needs, and so was never prey to the playground chinese whispers but I do know a lot of parents who in retrospect feel they were wound up to the point that they lost touch with what was right for their DCs. They look back at delivering a tired child who hated going, to a kitchen table where they were given repetitive and boring work with little personal attention for week after week through Years 5and 6, though now I gather these tutors are taking them in Year 4............ I think parents will come to regret any tutoring that isn't child centred and a positive experience
To be fair, parents whose DC go to a private prep school may well not tutor their children (although many do this as well) - but the whole purpose of those schools is to prepare children for selective secondary exams. Any parent hoping to get their child into these secondaries from a state primary is at an obvious disadvantage - for a start quite a bit of the maths won't have been covered at school. Tutoring these children is not about cramming them for an exam they don't have the intelligence to pass - it's about trying to create some kind of even playing field (in my view!)
Join the discussion
Please login first.