Can a grammar school headteacher make such a demand on 11+?

Good discussion - lots of reasons why a Head might wish not to accept tutored students.

However, not many answers to whether the Head has this right within an admissions procedure and how it could be fairly implemented.

Try starting a new thread and asking prh47bridge or Admission to answer the question.

Kez - I agree that a tiny minority might be a true genius - but believe that for most it's all about input - hours of practice if you like.

I also can't agree we have any ability limit. Sure we're not all cut out to be academics but all can continue to incrementally grow and learn IMO.

Fossie - what you say makes sense. Why do you think there's this apparently growing anti tutoring sentiment?

My DD1 has just got a place at a super-selective Grammar school. She needed VR and Maths for the exam. The exam was based on year 6 level questions but she took the exam is September of year 6 ie before covering the year 6 work. I don't know how she would have passed if I hadn't done the extra maths with her and to some extent the VR.

I was annoyed the Head at open evening said it wasn't necessary to tutor a child and made a poor year 7 child come forward to announce they had got in with any tutoring. I am in the fortunate position of being a former maths teacher so we didn't need to pay for a tutor but I don't think she would have got in otherwise. I have another DD in year 5 so I am having to do this again. Will she get it? I don't know, seems a bit like a lottery really but I will say she will be very well set up for maths at whatever secondary school she ends up in and her confidence at her primary school is high.

I would put both my DDs in the top 20% in academic ability but not the top 5% that normally get into this Grammar school. The rest is our hard work I would say. There is only so much you can do. A weak child cannot be tutored enough to get through one of these papers imho (as a former teacher).

If the school is an academy, the admission criteria are whatever they want it to be.

kes100 I agree that genius cannot be taught, but can intellect be increased by education? I think it can. Certainly enough ability can be acquired to pass the 11 plus by most average children.

Presumably one way to defeat ST Pauls' questioning is to teach them yourself.

I disagree partly, Cortina. Genius is genius. I don't believe that level can be taught.

I reckon everyone has an upper level of ability which they could get to given the right amount of time, teaching and practice. Because most of don't max out on one subject or have access to amazing teaching (which suits our style of learning) I suspect very few of us reach our potential - except where it is our job, maybe. The upper level of ability will differ for everyone in every subject. If you could actually create genius, someone would have bottled it by now.

So, yes, you are right to a degree. However, life gets in the way, and a well rounded education is exactly that and it stops many from becoming the very best they can be in piano, but at least they can hold a job down and earn a living.

It's also perhaps possible his 'brain' might have been gradually transformed and he might have grown in intellect with all that extra, purposeful practice.

If I put that many hours (and we are talking about a very large amount of time) in with a great piano teacher, for example, I'd likely be able to master all the tricky bits of Chopin that currently elude me. No doubt I'd also be able to give a respectable recital perhaps even drawing gasps of admiration from an audience. 'How brilliant she is' some might say, 'what talent' etc.

Well to be fair to the child he might have passed even had he not had the tutoring, it's not possible to gauge. He'll certainly be worn out, poor little thing.

I personally would take advice from tutoring agencies with a spade load of salt. Some might be giving sage advice but some might well be profiting purely by preying on ill-informed parents' fears. And that's very wrong.

I can't see how a child who was tutored for 20 hours a week to pass the 11+ is going to thrive at grammar school.

Quite agree Cecily. As hard as A Level! Curious as to the astonishing A Level results that this school must surely then produce I looked them up and see that last summer out of 21 candidates for English Lang and Lit, not one got an A and two achieved an A; out of 20 candidates for English Lit, two achieved an A and six an A.

Then I re-read the article and noticed that it was the 'founder of the S6 Tutoring Academy' who advised the mum on the onerous study programme apparently required for the exam.....

Tough as A level? The kids could just bypass grammar school and go straight to A levels.

20 extra hours of tuition a week for a 10 year old is child cruelty IMO.

Why then doesn't Westcliff get better GCSE and A level results? I'm confused.

Interesting link - so English paper - 11 plus - for Westcliff is as tough as A level English, really?

Topical: I was just so relieved that all the hard work paid off for him

Yes, the majority are tutored. The others are coached by parents. Then there are (very) few who do neither and still pass.
Polly you're right

Ah grammar schools, that great leg-up for the bright working class child, hey Coolascucumber...

One third of children admitted to the nearest boys grammar school to us came from independent schools. This obviously doesn't reflect the local community at all. The parents have effectively bought a place at grammar for their child to the disadvantage of children from less wealthy backgrounds.

Cortina "It's not a popular opinion but I believe 'ability' can be nurtured and developed."
I am also of this opinion. Indeed i would say with any individual child it is impossible to say how much of their ability is genetic and how much is acquired. Even IQ could be improved by education.

All that can be tested is whether or not a child has the ability to pass or not.

@ Yellowtip - good point, why is 'private coaching' superior & more advantageous than tutoring your own child? It's possible a parent could be far more qualified than a 'private coach'?

without there being an onus!

An educated parent can clearly tutor his own child as much as he wants without their being an onus to declare it on the form. If that same parent then tutors another child to any extent then the parent of that child will be bound to declare it.

Schools who ask these question are simply trying to flesh out the background of each child but there must come a point where questions would be regarded as overly intrusive.

As things stand, state schools can't ask any of these questions at all.

The style of 11 plus papers mean you have to do some coaching or pretty much any child is going to struggle to pass. Ds2 is supposedly the sort of child who should be fine at grammar but he is struggling with the practice questions because they're so different to what he's used to (and include topics that aren't covered until year 6 - the exam is 2 weeks into year 6). We're not paying for tutoring but I'm certainly doing lots of practice questions with him.

I'm not completely convinced it's right for him tbh but he says he want to apply so I've said I'll help him practice. But honestly the vast majority who are comfortable at grammar and go on to get good exam results woukd not pass the eleven plus without some practice at the type of questions before the exam.