Any 11+ SWLon success from kids who aren’t tutored?

We’re in SW London too Paribus. I’ve had 3 go through the system. I’d say tutoring was slightly more common by the time my last one came to do 11 plus, but still no more than 20% and, even then, you’re talking maybe one hour a week. They were given 2/3 maths papers a week to do under timed conditions for homework (on top of doing others at school); it was the same with English comprehensions and short stories. These were all past papers for schools they were applying to. It was non-stop. They all did BOFA. They all had VR / NVR sessions. They did a bit of interview practise.

What more can a tutor do? We didn’t need any more practise papers. The two tutors I tried - well, one showed up with no resources whatsoever. She was an Engineerimg student. She didn’t even know where G&L or SPGS were! The other seemed to think she could tutor based on the fact her son went to SPS in the 1990s. I mean, anyone can show up and go through maths with a ten-year old. I had to explain that things had changed in the last 25 years.

I guess if you get a tutor who is up to date or specialist for some requirement, then they’re worth their weight in gold. But otherwise, you might as well print off some past papers from school websites and do it yourself.

Both my kids are state educated and both passed their 11+ without tutoring. We familiarised them with past papers ( free) and a 3 month subscription to an online practice program ( BOFA) that cost £16.
If they have a natural aptitude, they don't need tutoring ( just familiarisation), If they don't then grammar isn't the right place for them. Hope that helps.

I'm SW London. DS went through the process last year and DD is doing it this year. Neither was tutored. I agree with glittercats that the key is to target suitable schools.

Very interesting discussion. I think the consensus is that most kids who excel are tutored. Actually DS asked for a tutor too and said all his friends in the top set are tutored. I said no. I still think he is exaggerating. I don’t think he actually asked every kid in the class. The situation doesn’t seem ideal since it indicates that the schools (even preps) are not really delivering. Weekend classes just doesn’t sound right!

I don't know where you are glittercats- we are in SW London and it is like this here.

My DC all went to a non-selective prep (4-11) and none of them were tutored at all. There wouldn’t have been time to be honest - they just did the homework the prep gave; did the practise papers in the school and that was it. The school were very good at guiding you towards suitable schools to apply to, making sure you always had at least one “safe option”. There were few surprises in terms of 11 plus offers, but if your child will not get into a school, they will tell you and, in some cases, refuse to write a reference if they believe you are setting up a child to fail.

The couple of times I tried a tutor it was totally counterproductive because they were teaching in a different style to their own agenda and just confusing the DC. It was too much, very frustrating, and a total waste of time and money.

Also a lot of tutors have no idea about the types of papers for specific schools. They are students or random persons trying to make some extra cash. Agencies will send anyone your way, They actually make more work and faff because you end up having to explain what the schools are looking for to them. Unless a tutor can demonstrate up-to-date relevant knowledge and come in ready to hit the ground running, you are wasting your money, in my view. The tutoring industry is a racket, quite often, that takes advantage of anxious parents.

Listen, i’ll be honest- my kids are in private school and every single child there is tutored. Every single one starting either in year 4 (about 10-20% of kids) and continuing in year 5 (100% by the end of year 5). The same applies to other private schools in the area- i happen to have a lot of friends in other independents. Some of them are tutored more heavily than the others (7 hours a day vs 1 or 2 hours) but there are just no exceptions to the rule. Don’t ask me why- it is just the way it is sadly. Some even start tutoring in year 2.

The schools are very good at choosing the children who will thrive in the environments they offer. It is sad if that is not your child, but to dismiss those children who are chosen as having succeeded because of tutoring at the expense of 'the talent' seems a little unkind.

Unfortunately, I think our system has become too technique (or strategic) in the way exams are created and delivered. So technique is important for all exams (11+/GCSE/A-level). Looking at my kids school, most of the 'talent' that was tutored, got in to everything. One other 'talent' wasn't tutored and got in too. Of the other kids, there were tutored and not tutored. None of those that weren't tutored got in. Some of those that were did. Broadly, I think that those that got places (or who are likely to get places) is representative of the levels of the kids, with a few that you might not have expected who did. But for me, talent is limited in value. With a very few exceptions (fewer than 1 in each primary class in the country), it is a combination of talent and hard work that is going to get you in. And I actually think that is broadly reasonable, because being able to work hard is an very important factor in future success.

Having said that, there are so many random variables that impact on success or not for school admissions at 10 but that do not determine future success (how they feel on the day, how 'mature' they have been in their attitude for studying, how bright they are, how hard working they are, how much support they have or haven't been given, whether they have even been given the opportunity to prep and/or try). That is why so many kids who could get in don't get in, and why excellent options in non-selective schools SHOULD be available to all parents and children.

state frees talent and interests

Independent schools have 4x the funding. That goes to fantastic resources and opportunities like bands, orchestras, theatre groups, lots of sport, fab art facilities etc. Have you visited any schools? It should be dead obvious where the opportunities for developing interests are.

I understand what you mean ZebrA. The thing with the 11 plus is they are dealing with such huge numbers of children, they have to have some method to select and no system will ever be perfect. A very bright child may not be great at writing an effective short story in 20 mins, for instance? But if that’s what’s being tested, then that’s what they have to do. There’s a technique to this that a 10/11 year old wouldn’t know unless somebody tells them. Once they’re in the school, they can follow whatever their talents are, obviously, but this is why children sit around 5 schools in average. It’s to hedge their bets.

But yes, if you’ve got a great state option locally, then that’s an advantage for sure!

ZebrA - the “technique” is only to get into the schools - once they’re in they’re as free as anyone else It’s like if an older child wants to get into Oxbridge; there’s no point in believing you can just breeze in and declare “here I am - talent! Can’t you tell?” You would understand it’s highly-competitive and there will inevitably be a few extra hoops to jump through.
In some “top” London independents there may be over a thousand pupils going for 100 places. Many children of great “talent” in all sorts of areas will be turned down, tutored or not. It’s brutal.
Maybe the lesser “talent” children as you see them have simply aimed for more realistic schools and this is why they got interviews / places?

Also, I think there is a danger sometimes of pupils being identified as “talent” and getting complacent in certain schools. I saw this recently at GCSE level - a friend’s son who had been told he was “exceptional” right through his (outstanding) secondary was going around for months announcing he was predicted all “9” grades. He did no revision because he thought his talent should speak for itself, so he came out with a few 7s but mainly 6s and he couldn’t understand it because in his mind (and everyone else’s) he was known as being “top.”

@ZebrABC To answer your question, no, not considering state schools. Nothing against them except that when we moved back to the UK, we didn’t know if we could get a place in our preferred state primary. And as for grammar, we just left it too late because I had no idea what were the deadlines for registrations. The other reason is that I am not familiar with the state system.

@ZebrABC London preps seem a lot more competitive. We are not living in London now but applied to only three London schools, SPS, Westminster and KCS. No backup schools at this stage. Through to interview stage for the first two schools. Will find out about KCS next Tuesday. i don’t like tutoring as the classes take up time and that is time away from family and play-dates during weekends. But this is a very personal view. I don’t think DS’ prep is doing much beyond making them through the Bofa tests during school hours. Or so I have been told. I have a full time job so I really have no time or interest to micro-manage his studies. But I must say that my son is in the top set and has a scholarship from his school.

Independent schools vary as widely as state ZebrA, so it depends on which ones you’re talking about really. Also not everyone has “local state” in their area, so the whole decision is area-specific. But generally, it’s like anything else - would you rock up to an important job interview unprepared? No, probably not. So it’s about finding the right school for the individual child and then familiarising them for the process - eg, if that school don’t test VR / NVR then don’t do that, obviously, but what are they looking for? Good comprehension skills maybe, in which case do they need to answer in clear, concise sentences, or is the paper multi-choice? What will the maths paper be like - will there be any reasoning-type questions thrown in (in which case prepare your child not to panic at the unfamiliar). What about the interviews - what might they ask? Etc etc.