Tutoring in seondary schools

I feel you have taken my comments out of all proportion. To teach a c grade student to change the subject of a formula by using a flow diagram is the type of trick I am talking about. Using grid multiplication rather than traditional long multiplication. This is not a skill they will use again. To teach an A grade student the same thing is not necessary as they understand the maths. C grade students are not continuing with maths at a level. Taking a student from a B to A* which I have gone many times takes more than good subject knowledge. You need good exam technique and to understand exactly what the mark scheme requires. Very few degree students have that in depth knowledge. As I said before, many of my students come to me from other tutors who do not have teaching experience. They do thus as they feel their child is not getting what they need. As I said earlier, I charge less per hour than my mobile hairdresser. For each hour of tuition, it takes me typically 2.5 hours. 1 hour to travel and 30 mind to plan. It is rubbish that good tutors don't need to plan. I look carefully at what areas my student needs to improve and decide how best to tackle it. Do they need an active way of learning? Do they need a song or rhyme to help them remember? Will we make a step by step instruction list? Or a Mindmap?

I then have expenses such as petrol, books and printing. I earn £8 per hour. I could earn more cleaning.

andisa,

"if my child was aiming for a very competitive uni or needed it for their course options. Otherwise, no"

In that case it would not be superficial.

Contrast this with the superficial tuition paid for by another poster:

£36 per hour + costs of travelling to the teacher, in the hope of improving from A to A* in MUSIC. "sacked the teachers who
weren't doing a good job".

"Maths tutors cannot teach tricks"

I have been referring to a maths tutor who said she does that:

"One of th first things I do as a tutor is to establish whether a student wishes to continue with Maths. If they never intend to use it again I will teach the tricks that get an answer without unserstanding."

"Thirdly, your posts are coming across as anti- teacher/tutor to me - which is all to common in our British society."

What is all to common with our "First World' country is:

a. many English and Maths teachers who are useless. This is evidenced by the poor literacy and numeracy in many adults
today;

b. a superficial demand for tuition which leads to exorbitant rates by 'professional' tutors:

"I charge £35 per hour or more - - -

Lots of affluent parents pay for their unmotivated children to to be forced to work/revise -I usually have a number I see
for many hours a week in the run up to the exams for this purpose. They are invariably boys! This probably helps them to
perhaps get a grade higher than they would otherwise, but without self motivation its hard for tuition to make much
difference."

Contrast this with another poster:

"Cumber - DS1's tutor is a final year Uni student who has excellent grades. We were very lucky to find her. She charges £10 per hour."

c. those who need tuition the most are not getting it whereas many who don't really need it are getting it because of their
"affluent parents".

I am in favour of tuition for those who really need it, in Maths and English, and at reasonable rates for reasonable teaching.

cumber

q1: yes, I would pay £25 if my child was aiming for a very competitive uni or needed it for their course options. Otherwise, no

q2: Maths tutors cannot teach tricks - it is about learning, how to go about certain questions, technique. Tricks is a word that demeans tutors/teachers

Thirdly, your posts are coming across as anti- teacher/tutor to me - which is all to common in our British society. It is ludicrous to suggest £25 for a 4 yr course) graduate's hourly rate is exhorbitant.

andisa, please answer the 2 questions I asked you:

So would you pay £25 an hour for tuition so that your child would get an A* rather than an A or B without tuition?

Would you pay £25 an hour for a 'professional' maths tutor to teach your child tricks to get an A without understanding the questions?

The answers show what I mean by superficial tuition at an exorbitant rate, referring to comments by some posters.

I am in favour of tuition for those who really need it, in Maths and English, and at reasonable rates for reasonable teaching. Not for tricks just to pass or for a marginal improvement of an anticipated already excellent result.

"Cumbernauld, I can maybe answer your question on whether £720 would be money wasted if dc fails to go from A to A*, from my perspective."

OldMotherDismass, with respect, you have to answer the question in the context of the poster's comment:

"We pay £18 for 30mun for our music teacher so prices mentioned for a tutor is quite reasonable IMO and a bargain if my DC goes from a A to A*

The child is already capable of achieving an A and there is no question about getting a better understanding.

And if you look at the poster's subsequent comment:

"I kept an eye on DCs' progress in their music instruments and I sacked the teachers who weren't doing a good job."

So its £720 spent ONLY in the hope of a marginal improvement of an already excellent grade. And in Music.

For me, it is money wasted.

I'm confused that people keep mentioning music. Are you meaning help to improve on the GCSE course? Or are we demonising instrumental lessons now?

Dear Cumber,

How is a tutor superficial by definition in their services? It is one to one teaching that is meant to inspire, take beyond the basic and become personalised for the pupil. Some tutors will be good and some satisfactory like all professions.

However, it is a profession and deserves a professional wage. The tutors I have used have all been retired/early retired teachers who love their subject but find whole class teaching too exhausting after so many years. Our music teacher is amazing, teaches privately to bump up her fairly meagre wage as director of Music in a prep school - delivers quality service.

There was funding from government for 1 to 1 needy pupils because they saw how much progress middle- class kids made with private tuition - this was intended to support those that cannot pay. I think this may now have been cut with austerity or academies with own budgets won't pay for it.

Our system is not fair but when you know what improves potential - in our case for a weakness in one area, you do it if you can afford it. I'm not to be classed as rich but I really value what a good, supported education will offer my DCs. I also support hwk - that is tutoring and privileged support , only I call it mothering!

Cumbernauld...Not for tricks but hopefully as a way to help him focus & knuckle down.

Not everyone can afford, true i'm afraid but thats life! We all do the best for our wn children & i dont think we usually prevent our children from accessing things because not all children have it do we??

Not all families can afford computers but here we are on an internet forum, we all do the best we can with the ££ we have. We all have different priorities.

I had a Maths Tutor for DS for Year 13, mainly because he arsed around in year 12. The tutor charged £28 an hour and was brilliant. She told me DS did not need a tutor,as he was very bright, but what she did was really motivate him to work and really enjoy the subject He got his A in Maths which he needed for uni entrance at the time. He went on and got his 2:1 in Maths

Whilst I obviously have no objection to tutoring, it can't make silk purses out of sows ears.

Cumbernauld, I can maybe answer your question on whether £720 would be money wasted if dc fails to go from A to A*, from my perspective.

The simple answer is that, no I don't think it is money wasted. You are not paying for the right to get a certain grade, you are paying someone to provide additional help in understanding a subject. In the same way, with the increased tuition fees at university, you are not buying your right to a degree.

Quality of tuition cannot be measured in terms of grades attained by students (at least, not that simplistically) and improved understanding can be worth it, even if the student still only attains the same grade as their improved understanding can help further along the lines. Quality of education must be viewed as a long-term investment, not simply working towards the next test. This idea of simply working towards the next test just reinforces the compartmentalised thinking seen in many students these days.

"£25 an hour sounds like an OK amount to me, not money i've got going spare but would manage to find it for a few months if needed."

For tricks to pass in Maths or English, or for a good understanding of the subject(s)?

What about the many who can't manage to find it for a few months if needed?

"OldMother - £25 is a bargain. That is how much I pay for a music lesson for DD and that is with us going to the teacher's house."

"We pay £18 for 30mun for our music teacher"

Thats works out at £36 per hour + costs of travelling to the teacher, in the hope of improving from A to A* in MUSIC.

That is not £25 per hour (twisting the facts), even if you actually pay £25 for 42 minutes.

Like twisting the facts by contradicting superficial tuition in Maths and English with superficial knowledge of "rock formations and what Jesus said and did".

"I kept an eye on DCs' progress in their music instruments and I sacked the teachers who weren't doing a good job."

So you didn't pay the sacked tutors?

The very fact that you had to sack tutors proves that they were charging an exorbitant rate (£36 per hour?) for being useless.

You still haven't provided a straight answer to a straight question:

So a wasted £36 per hour x say 20 hours = £720 if DC FAILS to go from an A to A*?

"Cumbernauld, my comment was not actually a critisism of you"

OldMotherDismass, my comment was also not a critisism of any of yours'. I was just seeking your opinion regarding 'tricks' for Maths and English.

We agree on the "tricks", we disagree on the rate for "tricks".

For an apt tutor, tuition for Maths requires hardly any preparartion. You know your subject inside out and already have copies of the material required. The main skill needed is the ability to make the student easily get a firm grasp of the subject. Travelling costs can be charged at actual rate and would be quite low or none if it is walking distance to the student's home.

sorry about the bold, that was meant to be crossed through, i think i need a MN tutor!

my ds2 is very able always in the top 3 or 4 students in his year for all subjects (except anything arty) etc.
But he is just hitting his teens & is a lazy sod, whilst i will try to instill in him that he will only get out what he puts in & that he needs to work to achieve etc etc etc.
I still think i would consider using a tutor during GCSE year if still bone idle & too busy playing football needed.
Once he is over the teenage yrs i'm hoping the self motivation he used to have will return.
£25 an hour sounds like an OK amount to me, not money i've got going spare but would manage to find it for a few months if needed.

I charge £35 per hour or more for home visit tuition, but this works out at much less per hour in reality - unsually under £10 per hour by the time I have paid public transport costs, spent on text books/printing costs, and spent time travelling and preparing. I find I have more than enough demand for my 'superficial' services at this price to maintain tutoring as a full time occupation.
Many of those I tutor (largely A level students) go to private schools, there seems little correlation between the amount you pay for a school and the quality of the teaching.
Lots of affluent parents pay for their unmotivated children to to be forced to work/revise -I usually have a number I see for many hours a week in the run up to the exams for this purpose. They are invariably boys! This probably helps them to perhaps get a grade higher than they would otherwise, but without self motivation its hard for tuition to make much difference.

What is wrong with tutoring?

I couldn't afford to send the dcs to a private school unless we moved into a manhole. So, instead I look at my finances and apportion a certain amount for tutoring (hypothetically). What exactly is the difference between paying £25 a week for a bit of extra maths and paying £25,000 a year for a certain school? Why is the latter considered a fair choice but the former judged as "sneaky" and "cheating"?

And, furthermore, I have helped ds from time to time in various subjects. We have, for example, been spending at least an hour a week doing extra French. I don't pay myself £25 for this (!) but I suppose it is nonetheless "shadow education".

I agree Pushed

OldMother - £25 is a bargain. That is how much I pay for a music lesson for DD and that is with us going to the teacher's house.

I had a maths tutor purely for GSCE many many moons ago. I needed help to scrape a C. I hated maths. I got a C.

In also got A's in all my other arts based subjects. However, I needed a C to get into the Humanities Course I wanted at University.

In this case, I think it was perfectly right that the tutor, in the 1 hour a week he had me, concentrated on tutoring me to pass the exam. I simply wasn't interested in maths.

My maths is perfectly proficient to get me through life.

I also think £25/hour is actually really a rather good rate for tuition tbh. This includes preparation time (not insignificant), materials e.g. print-outs, worksheets etc. If the hour starts from when tuition begins, rather than when travelling time begins, I rather expect that the real work involved in an hour of contact time takes £25/hour to more like £6.25/hour (based on 1 hour tuition, half an hour in each direction travelling to/from the tutees house and 2 hours prep time, in which case, the £25 actually covers potentially 4 hours of actual work).

Cumbernauld, my comment was not actually a critisism of you. Someone else, earlier up thread had said they liked "tricks" as that is what had got them through their studies (paraphrasing), and this did not make them a "worse person" for it. Personally, I'd argue that it may not make someone a "worse person", but it will make them a worse scientist, medic, historian, sociologist or whichever is their chosen field of study.

If you read my previous comments, you would see that I said I was not against tuition if it helps improve someone's understanding of the area - I am against people expecting to use it in order to learn tricks to pass the exam.

I'm on overnight support at the mo. Waiting for IT Ops to call back so I got time to play with you Cumbernauld.

"So would you pay £25 an hour for tuition so that your child would get an A* rather than an A or B without tuition?"

I pay that for a music lesson so I can't get too outraged about being charged £25 by a tutor but yes, I would pay it if it got my DCs an A*. Do I think about how I might be driving up the price for a parent on a low income? Well, do you stop to think that you might be driving up the price of property by buying where you live? Of course not so aren't you being a bit hypocrital about this tutoring issue?

"Would you pay £25 an hour for a 'professional' maths tutor to teach your child tricks to get an A without understanding the questions?"

There are tricks to pass a maths exam??? :) I always thought that you either knew how to do maths or you didn't.