angered by tuition for grammar school 11+

Was today - think I've now heard everything. Chatting to mum I met by chance who I knew years ago in NCT - she revealed that at her DC (expensive, non-selective) prep school, the children have tutors (ie out of school, paid by the parents worried about their DC getting into selective senior schools) to do the DC homework - apparently everyone lies about it but many parents are at it Seems ultra-crazy to pay a fortune in school fees and then pay extra, and sneak about under cover of darkness lest you be found out to pay a tutor extra on top to do the homework competitively.... Makes Amy Chan (sp?) look laid back, in comparison...

^^oh, and we might possibly be considered middle class but we certainly are not well off. Public sector workers and all that.

seems to me that there are obviously a large number of tutors who don't seem to have a problem taking money from parents for two, three or even four years... wonder what their day job is - just saying.

To show my hand, my dtr is at a selective independent school which she managed to get into WITHOUT tutoring. We didn't think she would get in because she hadn't had the advantages of a prep education or tutoring so let her sit the exam whilst cushioning her for the inevitable disappointment to come...

I notice that some posters say they go through the exam papers themselves with their children.

This is great if your child is receptive and will work with you, but many children will not learn with their parents, hence the reason for paying for a tutor.

(Would like to add that I dont send my children to a tutor - I cant afford it), and they dont need to pass exams to get into the local high school anyway.

I think many parents pay for their children to be tutored because they dont have faith in the school system.

Look at how many posts are on Mumsnet alone about private tutoring - for all ages - because their children are not progressing as expected at school.

Some schools do not teach children how to read test questions properly - this is a skill in itself.

Not all children are taught everything they need to know on the curriculum. They might have been off sick, they might have just not understood the subject at the time. They get taught something once a year and are expected to remember it. They dont.

So for a child to be tutored, they are revising their skills and knowledge, they are being taught strategies to remember, no matter what the subject is.

If tutoring is used to revise and consolidate then I think that's fine.

I dont however agree that a primary child should be studying for two hours a night in addition to their school day. Fifteen minutes a night is more than adequate.

It's just such a tricky issue - I know parents of other girls in my daughter's school year who had a little tutoring for the 11+ exam just because it is essentially the first time some of these kids face that kind of written paper and they just went once a week to help feel prepared and in control by knowing what they would face. Though my daughter didn't have this at 11+ we did get hold of some past papers and go through them with her at home and I do see the value in this as it actually calms them down and makes the tests less of an 'unknown quantity'

But several times a week for 2 years? That sounds completely OTT and yes I should imagine absolutely does give some kids who, as you say, have parents who can afford it, an unfair advantage.

The trouble is, how can this be monitored or controlled - there is no way to prevent or control how much external help some parents give their children.

A couple of our local schools have now taken to quite random verbal reasoning and 'sentence based' english tests at 11+ because these are much harder to prepare for and show a clearer picture of the child's natural aptitude - the way forward perhaps, to beat the 'pushy parenting' culture?

If you argue there should be no tutoring, I am sure a lot of grammar school places would be taken up by prep school chidlren where the schools focus on these tests. At least with tuition, we might give others the chance to have a more level playing field...no?

I'm not happy with tutoring either but I suspect that the super selectives (like DD's school) are happy with the status quo. Parents who've spent £££ on tutors tend to be middle-class and also happy to contribute generously to school funds.

DD did not go to a tutor; we did exam practice together and this was really useful preparation and familiarisation. But I feel really strongly that the hype around tutoring is unhelpful. It encourages parents to believe that certain schools are simply unattainable unless they can also shell out for expensive specialist tutoring for several years. It puts children under excessive pressure, as they're certainly bright enough to realise that tutoring is a major investment of time, effort and money.

Actually was only basing my opinion that most don't on the fact that a lot of posters on MN say their DCs schools don't offer separate sciences. So I could well be wrong.

But actually it is wrong that ANY schools are not allowing DCs access to a full academic education if they want it. When I was at school none of the local schools would have even considered not offering 3 separate sciences. And my school was pretty small and rural with only 800 pupils in total.

I understand that some schools only offer separate sciences to those in Set 1 for Science. Not great if you have a kid who is good at biology and crap at Physics. They can always go on to college and do a science with their A'Levels.

Is it most ? I'm not sure about that.

I'm shocked that most schools now don't offer 3 separate sciences at GCSE.

Even at my fairly crappy ex Sec mod comp you could do 3 separate sciences at O level.

That sounds like a brilliant idea. I just wish we had known earlier we would have started saving as soon as we had children, but thats another story !

It does seem like such a shame this country has such a tiered system.

That's sad mouse

I was at school abroad where we had university fees. But courses for key workers such as doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers were subsidised on the condition that they worked in the state sector for a number of years.

I don't see why we can't introduce things like that here. I would be fully behind that (not that I was ever behind tuition fees in the first place!). We shouldn't be discouraging key workers at all.

We also had the big companies coming into school and identifying talent very early on (like the equivalent of yr8/9) and encouraging those children to go on to university and sponsoring those from poorer backgrounds.

Yes, similar situation here Needmoresleep. Our comp is actually an excellent school in terms of value added. However, the intake is like the one you have mentioned. They do extra classes before and after school (the teachers do this even though they don't have to) they offer snacks to lure kids in. However, because there is not enough of a mix kids like my dd and her one or two very academic friends are missing out. Apparently, we can take her to other schools if we want to and they will let her do lessons. We would have to take time out from work to drive her to the lessons and then back to school, some people do this. I cannot. It is quite ridiculous we just want a decent comp with a mixed intake. DD would like to be a doctor but with the school problems and the uni fees she is losing hope. We may have to take her out of school. She would have more chance doing evening classes.

Some time ago I mentored a child in our local, then badly failing, comp. She was a very bright child from a large family whose parents had never learnt English, nor been employed.

She was limited to only 7 subjects at GCSE, and the most stretching GCSE math syllabus was not taught. (At the time the school had 93% on free school dinners.) She and her lovely group of friends, most of whom faced challenging home conditions, would have breezed through an 11+ which took the top 25%, and would have thrived in a more academic environment. But the day they entered the school their chances of, say, reading medicine, were lost.

I was told by her Head of Year was that my volunteer role was to persuade her that she should go to University. If she had been in an environment where her some of peers' parents had been to University this would not have been an issue.

Tiffin and other grammars would have already been out of her reach as she could not have afforded the train fare, even if she had known about the exam and had been able to arrange her own tutoring. Better schools tend to be in leafy suburbs. What we might need is a selective school in the inner city which allows bright kids from poor backgrounds to succeed. Talking about it at University level is too late. The ambition and aspiration need to be cultivated, and opportunity, needs to be there at 11.

I'm not sure ours has ever had 3 sciences. But I went to school in a country where I did combined science and came back to the Uk and did separate science at a level and was fine. Our secondary schools don't have 6th forms so I am not too concerned about what they can and can't do as long as there is a wide selection, which there is at ours!

Notevenamouse, that had already happened at our local nonselective schools. Choice of languages, three sciences etc - "not enough demand". So we sent ds to a grammar in the neighbouring LEA where the curriculum best suits his needs. Our own LEA did not provide that type of education for boys (OK, one girls' comp did).
It's not quite so pressurised where we live though - 8 grammars and one superselective all within reasonable travelling distance. Not quite Tiffin levels of anguish and polarisation.

foxinsocks we did do that with our first child. Now we are being told there are not enough children who want to take languages, join clubs, study three sciences and as a result all these things are going to be taken away.

Practising ffs bloody autocorrect on phone

I know several people who got into Tiffin with no tutoring other than practicing lots of past papers (I do believe you need to do this with nvr/vr if from the state sector as you wouldn't have seen them before). That was this year's intake. However, they all had university educated parents!

We have chosen not to partake in the whole grammar nonsense and are sending dd (hopefully) to our local school. If you don't like it, opt out of that system! It can be done and the more people that do it, te more representative the normal schools become.

Tiffin tbh doesn't skew the local area that much as it takes so many children out of the area imo.

Yes, and would DS have done better at a Grammar school? Prob not.

Would GS have done worse at this comp? Prob not.

But, we have had no angst about 11+, DS does not think he is "better" than anyone elae, and at his schcool all chidren are valued and all talents and gifts are celebrated, rather than a purely academic focus.Must sign off now as am supposed to be packing for hols and we leave in 6 minutes

Well said, frumpy!

I think people often look at the GCSE stats for comprehensive and high schools and panic, forgetting that a school which takes all comers on distance criteria is goin to have a lot of kids wil will struggle to get A-Cs at GCSE, so the stats look bad.

The thing to do is look at Value Addeed - our local high school looks dreadful on straigs A-C measures, but does brilliant things in terms of vslue added, and supporting the less able kids - as well as getting the more able ones their A-Cs.

Oh and DS loves his school too!

Can I just add a personal anecdote? My godson (GS) is at Tiffin (y13) and loves the school, and the ethos and is doing very well.
My son is at the local , well-regarded comp, also in y13. Both boys have very similar GCSE and AS results, both are applying to similarly rated Unis (2 of the 5 are the same), and both have similar offers which they are both expected to achieve.
DS will leave school with 1 AS less than GS, but his is in Geography, whereas GS will have AS in General Studies and Critical Thinking, neither of which are recognised by tthe Uni departments he is applying to - but gee, they look good on Tiffins stats!