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

oh...and let's say, they live in a socially deprived area.

"However, what do you propose will happen to that same child you use an example, when they face GCSE's at secondary school or a good comp, if the home situation hasn't changed? And for argument's sake, let's assume they live in a comprehensive area."

Presumably the school will be teaching them what they need to pass their GCSEs?

Talkinpeace

Using FSM to prove a point can be a bit of a red herring. Take for example, those who are unemployed - in most cases, only those on Income-Based Job Seeker's Allowance are eligible to apply - note that I mention "apply", as opposed "can get it". If you lose your job and you've been paying your tex, NI etc, then you only get Contributions'-Based and no entitlement to get FSM. You're still on the breadline but don't bolster up those lovely FSM figures people so love to bandy around.

So what does FSM show - ummmm - a variety of things but it doesn't necessarily mean dirt-poor, single mum with poor educational background and children who are being iced-out of GS. The benefit system can mean that just because you don't see high FSM, it doesn't mean that there aren't pupils whose parents are struggling financially to feed everyone. We are - DH lost his job and so did I but we've got a cat in Hell's chance of FSM, even though we have nothing. There's a lot of hidden people.

"And as for hours of tutoring : sorry but single mums with four kids ranging in age from 15 to 3 who work nights at the Tesco warehouse near here have NO hours to sit down with one of them and get them to look at stuff that the mother does not understand."

I was that child, although I had two parents who had very little education - my father could barely read through no fault of his own, having been hospitalised for 5 years and then left school at 14. He worked away all week and my mother often worked the twilight shift. I went to GS. So I understand that scenario only too well. However, what do you propose will happen to that same child you use an example, when they face GCSE's at secondary school or a good comp, if the home situation hasn't changed? And for argument's sake, let's assume they live in a comprehensive area.

Private schools offering scholarships/bursaries /whatever are allowed to take a candidate's background into consideration- state selective schools can't.

...which is that you seem to me making the case the poor kids can't get into state selectives because the exam is biased against them. Buy you then make the point that poor kids can past the exam at private selectives but can only take up the place if scholarships are made available.

Talkin - I'm a bit confused by your post.

Kids from poor backgrounds don't get into non Central London selectives because the exam is biased against them.

However, kids from poor backgrounds do get into Central London selectives because of financial scholarships.

Hopefully you can see the reason for my confusion.

Yellowtip
sadly the statistics back seeker up on this : FSM and C2DE parents at selective schools are rarer than hens teeth - apart from possibly in Central London and a few schools that offer lots of financial scholarships.

And as for hours of tutoring : sorry but single mums with four kids ranging in age from 15 to 3 who work nights at the Tesco warehouse near here have NO hours to sit down with one of them and get them to look at stuff that the mother does not understand.

The evidence is there at the school my DC attend. Admittedly it's not in Kent, which obviously helps.

Aren't they, yellowtip? Glad to hear it. I'd be delighted to have some evidence of that!

Talkin how many hours do you suppose that bread is talking about a week?

seeker stop ramping it up. Not all of those offered places are from dictionaried, knowledgeable, educated, confident, leisured, languid, timely, spatial and inclined families of yore (or middle class Kent).

breadandbutterfly
What happens when the parent is less intelligent than the child and was failed by education - how are THEY supposed to help their child to reach their potential - especially if they are working nights at the Tesco warehouse?

"Agree - almost any parent who's not half-witted can tutor their own dc better than a tutor"

Provided they have the knowledge,the education, the confidence, the leisure, the language, the time, the space, the inclination......

Bread - I think that you're right, any parent who isn't thick can tutor their own child at 11+ level in the right circumstances. Many people have to operate in circumstances which aren't ideal though. Just a thought.

And there really is no 'magic' insider information. Known only to tutors.

Anything you want to know a quick google will reveal to you as well as to a tutor.

Agree - almost any parent who's not half-witted can tutor their own dc better than a tutor. You know your child, you can fit in lessons when convenient/not tired, not when it suits a tutor, you know when your dc is bullshitting or being lazy and can hassle them to pull their finger out whereas a tutor doesn't know and wouldn't dare.

Plus it's free!

What's not to like?

IME, dcs tutored by tutors were unsuccessful at 11+ whereas those tutored by parents were successful.

It's a myth that only professionally tutored kids get in - put about by tutors who make a nice living out of pushing this idea.

No I don't think parents are feeble-minded idiots at all, far from it. However, I do think that a lot of parents do think that tutors have some magic 'insider' information.....

Habba
I took DS to see a tutor about a specific issue. It was sorted in two sessions. I've not been back.
She's not happy as she treats each kid as a multi year "project gravy train where she keeps finding more issues that "need work"
and they don't.
But when the "professional" tells you they do ....

Posters keep going on about tutors praying on parent's insecurities as if parents are feeble minded idiots.

No, I am not a tutor but its irritating to read this blame culture thing over and over again. How about the parents taking responsibility for their actions?

I think the whole tutoring industry plays on parental insecurities.

I really enjoyed telling the tutor 'touts' "no thanks, but we are doing it ourselves!" - they looked less than amused....

11+ tutoring seems to be a very lucrative business, so there are lots of people with a vested interest in making it sound like something to be left to highly-paid professionals. When I went to an open evening at DD's school, there were tutors openly handing out fliers and touting for business outside the school.

I would strongly encourage anyone to have a go themselves if they and their child are keen. The tests are aimed at 10-11 year olds and the books all have the answers and explanations, so it's really not rocket science. You need time, patience, some confidence and a child who is bright and motivated. It's a total myth that you MUST have a professional tutor to have any chance of winning a place.

And an added bonus is that I'm pretty sure doing the prep for the 11+ exams helps with their end of Year 6 SATs too.....

DS's class scored second highest in the Borough for Level 5 attainment and I'm pretty sure it had quite a lot to do with a lot of them having sat for at least one (or more) selective exam earlier on in the year, rather than their formalised teaching (they didn't have a very good teacher that year!)

I've done it both ways, a bit. I think tutors can be great if your child won't work happily with you, you've got grumpy younger dc around, or you can't do the darned NVR yourself (hangs head in shame....), and English can be tricky as no right or wrong. But OP, do be reassured that it is perfectly possible, it is not rocket science and maths, VR and NVR all have answer books . It is mainly just regular, focussed practice that is needed - and you would be having to facilitate that, tutor or not. The raised eyebrows are often IME from people who like to think there is some magic because the thought of having to sit through all those past papers with their dc makes them want to weep (understandably).

Start in plenty of time, and try to make it fun, little and often so it becomes routine (Bond do ten minute tests which we found great). You know your child well, and also as you are only tutoring one, will be able to get completely up to speed on the exact requirements of those particular exams.

Even if the exam includes maths and your ds is behind because of his school, just working through the books will bring him up to scratch if he is bright. I recommend a bit of maths before breakfast every school day if that suits your working pattern.

I agree with Saintlyjimjams about the raised eyebrows and puzzled looks from parents who've thrown money at a tutor, when you say you're helping your child(ren) yourself. It's sheer incredulity on their part that this is possible.

But it is so possible and as some have suggested on here, and I can testify to from our experiences with DS and children from his school, it is often the ones who are not officially tutored who do get in rather than the ones who are.

I think if you have a naturally bright, keen to go to a grammar school type child, parental guidance on the 11+ exams is enough. As I've said before I think a lot of middle-class parents think that if you throw enough money at at tutor even an average child can get in. That isn't the case generally.

DS did three 11+ exams in the same borough and every 11+ exam was different. Interestingly he did better (well he got places at two out of the three) in the exams which did include an NVR/VR component as well as English and Maths.

The OP isn't going to out herself by naming schools (if she has then I must have missed it). In the absence of that info all people can do is talk about it as if the 11+ is one thing.