Has anybody successfully tutored for the 11+ completely by themselves(need reassurance)

Seeker is correct that it was me that made the comment. Your suggestion that she is being inconsistent is therefore wrong.

There is extensive research that shows properly constructed VR and NVR tests are immune to tutoring effects. Obviously a child is handicapped if they have never seen this type of test before but once they have taken 2 or 3 tests further practise produces little or no improvement. Even repeating the same paper produces little or no improvement beyond what you would expect from the child's age.

Of course, I cannot guarantee that the tests used by schools for 11+ are properly constructed. I suspect some schools use tests that are not immune to tutoring effects.

I didn't- prh47bridge did.

And if you can't be bothered to read what I post, I honestly don't see why you are addressing comments specifically to me!

I don't see the difference.

As for you not arguing that tutoring has a negligible effect, you chose to make the comment that research showed that tutoring had no effect. I assumed that you was endorsing the research. My thinking was why else would you introduce something to the conversation if you didn't think it was relevant.

I don't argue that tutoring is unfair. I argue that a system where tutoring is effective is unfair. A VERY different thing.

And it's not me arguing that tutoring has a negligible effect. I think it has a significant effect. As I have said on this thread.

seeker - how can you argue elsewhere that tutoring is unfair because it skews 11+ results in favour of MC parents AND then argue here that it's of negligible value

We relocated to England when my DS was in Y6, had come from international school abroad based on hybrid American-Australian education and had no idea about British one. He is a bright boy but it was a shock to him to get into British education - he still was writing with pencil, never did more than 15 minutes a day homework and never experienced exams (in the international school they had tests now and then but never told children in advance not to stress them and never revealed the test results to parents).
When he did first autumn exams in Year 6 in his school here his highest mark was 62%.
I tutored him myself the whole Year 6, in summer exams in Year 6 he already got around 85% on his strong subjects and around 70-75 in his weak ones. He did pre-testing for 13+ entrance in Year 7 and managed to get a place in one of good day schools. I am working full time so only tutored him over weekend. I used Bond books and past papers of schools. All possible - don't get stressed.
I considered getting tutor as well, but then one of the parents in his school told me: why don't you start yourself and see how it goes before spending money on tutors? I am so glad I listened to her. I should have gotten him tutor in French though, that I admit, don't know the language myself and now he is behind the programme...

Poppy - why is it the fault of the school? . It sounds like you are getting caught up in this competive parenting thing.

If your 11 year old is already doing GCSE level work he can drop a set and still be way above the national average.

Take my DS. He is in set 3 for maths at his secondary. I can push him in an attempt to move him up but it's a bit pointless given that 95% of the 2012 crop got GCSE A or A*. DS can drop two more sets and still be working towards a strong A.

If you want to push your DC so that he stays in the top set but it's a bit silly paying for something that you don't think is good thing and equally silly for choosing to playil Competive Parenting and then complain about having to play the game.

Yes, I know that. And I know that the plural of anecdote is not data! But as I said, it seems completely counter intuitive.

seeker - Research is about the general rather than the specific. When they say there is no effect from tutoring they mean that if you take a large group of children, test them, tutor half of them and then test them all again, there is no statistically significant difference between the scores of the tutored children and the untutored children. That does not rule out the possibility that it is effective for some individuals.

"In order for him to keep up next year I will have to tutor him all through the summer or he will drop down a set. How is this fair to a 11 year old?"

But he's obviously in the wrong set. How is that fair to an 11 year old?

Sounds like a seriously crap school to me. Or at least a school that has no idea how setting works!

Presumably that's an independent school poppy so it's not as though it's compulsory to attend. Stick him in the local state primary if you're concerned.

It would be interesting to see if there's a year-on-year upward trend in the 11+ results with all this tutoring going on.....anyone work in grammar school Admissions who could tell us???

My 11 year old is now doing GCSE work at school because of tutoring ( they teach at the pace of the class), he has kept up so far but now cracks are beginning to show. In order for him to keep up next year I will have to tutor him all through the summer or he will drop down a set. How is this fair to a 11 year old?

Well the grammars can't insist on no tutoring since there's no mechanism by which they could do that - they can't put a SPGs clause into the application form while they're constrained by the Admissions Code. So I suppose what they're doing, putting in place the Durham tests or restructuring their own tests, is the way to go.

Why is everyone tutoring if schools actively discourage it?

I know children that attend great prep schools yet they have been tutored for 2 years to sit entrance papers. I feel that schools are teaching less and leaving more and more work to parents/tutors.

Entrance tests will get harder and harder if parents keep tutoring their children.

Children are only little for such a short time let them be free from such pressures until theyre older.

And I know that the research indicates that tutoring doesn't increase VR and NVR scores- but it does seem really, really counter intuitive. I am naturally very bad at NVR, for example- but once somebody has carefully explained to me how to do each type I can them do them. It's like cryptic crosswords. I couldn't do them to save my life, so my father sat down with me and the Times Crossword every morning for about a fortnight, and by then I could do it ( I was in my 30's at the time- he wasn't being a pushy dad!)

Oh, I see, sorry- the grammar schools discourage tutoring? That's working well isn't it?

I mean the grammar schools discourage it seeker.

saintlyjimjams has described almost exactly how my DS3 was with essays/ rabbit freeze and almost exactly what I did to get him to stop at two or three (short) paragraphs. I'd advocate getting a whole load of boy books into the house too - Alex Rider etc.

In the area where I live, schools are specifically forbidden by the LEA from offering any 11+ coaching at all.

poppydoppy schools actively discourage it.

There is little point in teaching VR and NVR. The evidence is that properly constructed tests are largely immune to tutoring effects. It obviously helps the child to have done one or two tests to become familiar with the kind of thing required but after that tutoring should have no effect.

A child's raw score in VR/NVR tests goes up rapidly at this age even if there is no tutoring. It is easy to think a child is making rapid progress through tutoring when in fact they are only progressing at the rate expected for a child of that age. Of course, if parents have just spent a fortune on a tutor to get their child's score up by 20% the last thing they want to hear is that their child would have achieved that even without a tutor.

The argument is that schools should not spend time teaching something which will benefit only a tiny minority of the children.

Ideally there should be no need to tutor children if schools taught properly in the first place. All schools should teach VR if entrance exams require it.

This whole tutoring thing is becoming a joke and the schools should not encourage it.

S2's school did publish a mark scheme for an example essay. A lot of marks were for sentence construction (the more complicated the better) so we did some work on changing the cat sat on the mat into the feline, with sleeky fur as black as the dark of night, reclined on the sheepskin rug, proudly surveying the room while purring like a distant helicopter. I'm taking the piss but ds2 did start to methodically think about extending sentences (he's a lazy git when it comes to writing so his preference would always be for the shortest possible sentence).