Tutored to get into selective school

Ds has twin boys in his class who have been totally tutored and have passed the tiffin test with high 240 scores. They are not in the top sets in his class and are averaging level 4s in maths & English and level 3 in science. They were intensively tutored throughout the summer, on weekends and took 1 week off before the test to practise every day.

I have no Idea how they will get on in Tiffin but I guess if they are prepared to put in that level of effort when they get there they probably will end up with A*s. Each to their own, ds is naturally brighter but would never put in that effort without constant pressure. I guess only time will tell what will happen?

I can't speak for superselectives, I suspect the comments of other posters are valid. However, I have seen pupils that have been tutored to pass the eleven-plus, and pupils admitted to grammar school that have not passed the eleven-plus (it does happen), that are out of their depth in my subject. What happens ? They struggle, and it's no fun.

SuffolkGirl - at a highly selective competitive girls independent quite near us a third of girls left before going into sixth form because of the A / A* requirements.

Over tutoring perhaps means having a child tutored heavily since Yr 3, with onerous amounts of homework from the tutor on top of the school tasks, then adding nightly test papers from Yr 4 onwards (oh, it's only 20 minutes a day') , comparing the child's score week after week....doing endless exams and tests in selective schools across the region, and by the time they start Yr 7 they are sick to death of it all, look on passing the test and getting in as the end of the process and feel disaffected from any more homework.

Over tutored perhaps means structuring your child's time into a rigid timetable of tutoring, homework and practice papers so that they lose any sense of self motivation and then feel intense disappointment when they are mediocre in their class but because the tutoring and structure has been imposed they lack the initiative and self belief to get themselves going and push themselves.

I have seen both these scenarios within the smallish pool of parents I know, so I don't think it is that rare

The children who do best in any school, in any setting (and of any ability) are those who are self motivated and actually enjoy the learning they do.

Being naturally brainy and finding schoolwork relatively easy can be great but someone who's had a really good tutor and learned how to be an expert learner, how to make the most of their strengths how to be self disciplined and plan their work has other advantages.

It's always a good thing to learn how to learn things which don't come naturally and how to cope with the emotional side of finding something really tough going.

...genius is 99% perspiration...?

At DS's superselective there is minimum GCSE grades to progress to the sixth form. One boy did not make this last year and transfered to another local sixth form but it is not common.
The sad situation with the tutoring culture is that most of the children would have passed without tutoring but it has become so common place that many parents do not dare not to.

I agree with Ladymuck. Admissions can be imperfect but if a child gets in, they are capable of the work. And at superselectives the tests are versions of iq tests, so will not be wildly out of kilter with reality The idea that there are a lot who can't cope is unlikely although some may not cope with pressure, the school environment or position in the hierarchy etc. and this might be what people refer to raher than an absolute inability to keep up. Only a happy child learns to the best of their ability.

One of the advantages of the all round education I think is it can have an impact on confidence and perseverance which has a positive effect on classroom focus and hence attainment.

To be honest it is much rarer than you would think, despite all the fears on mumsnet. There isn't a huge IQ discrepancy across the intakes at superselectives and the children are still taking the same GCSE exams that the rest of the population take.

I think the real issue with superselectives is that even when only the top 2% get in, someone (in fact quite a few someones) still will be in the bottom set. They will come out with a string of As and A*s and still feel as if they are bit less clever than average. Not because they were over tutored to get in, but because they are in a specific environment. For some children, the effect on their self-esteem is so great that they may be better off being closer to the top of a less selective school. That said, a critical mass of bright children tend to bring up the standards of those around them anyway, so it does depend on the individual child.

Also at age 11, what does over tutoring mean? That they've been taught maths and English up to the end of level 5 really well? Will a well prepared diligent student do worse in the long run than the innately brighter student who hasn't learned how to apply themselves?

If you have the money you might end up like this metro.co.uk/2013/11/21/cambridge-student-offering-48000-for-tutor-to-help-him-through-uni-4197075/