How necessary is tutoring at top schools?

What do you mean by top schools, OP?

My dc at a "top" private school had no tutoring to get in. One had a bit for maths GCSE as her maths was never great and - even at a top school - you do get rubbish teachers, like hers. She had no confidence and needed handholding from a young, empathetic maths graduate who lived locally. If she'd needed it across all subjects or for A level I would worry. One dc's friend does have a tutor for every subject, her parents are absurdly rich and that's the way they roll but it simply isn't necessary ... No one else afaik does

I don't think anyone thinks it's just a private school thing. I think the general consensus is, it's a state school thing, and it's shocking that it happens in a private school where you're already paying fees. I don't think anyone would be surprised that a grammar school kid has a tutor.

I keep meeting people from a south east private school who still pay for tutoring. One person I met paid for tutoring until the end of a levels.

In my opinion, the culture and atmosphere of the school does largely influenced by the parents overtime.

There's definitely a cultural angle. We were in the ethnic minority at our prep school (we're white) and most of the kids had tutors from an early age. School were very anti tutoring and pointed out it was entirely unnecessary (it was an excellent school in terms of teaching) but it didn't have much impact. There was also a lot of over-competitive behaviour from parents.

Secondary school is more balanced. School doesn't encourage tutoring but some kids have extra tutoring on top if they're struggling in a subject. Not casting aspersions on the school provision as they provide a lot of extra support at lunchtimes and after school for those who need it.

It's not just a private school thing either. My friend's sons go to a high performing grammar school and have had extensive tutoring to make sure they got A stars in their A levels and 9s at GCSE.

I don’t buy this for a second, and I have a DS who is a top student at one of the top senior schools. Never had a private tutor in his life.

If I had to guess, I would say loads of tutors are posing to prop up demand for their services on MN.

Likewise, but sorry not sharing!

@crazypig are you referring to me? Would be interested to know where you teach!

Ok, I'm not a teacher so you probably have more saying on your school.

As you agreed on a prospective parent probably we couldn't tell which school care less about league table than the other.

In my opinion, the culture and atmosphere of the school does largely influenced by the parents overtime, when a large group of parents obsessed with league table send their kids to a specific target school high up in the league table, I can't imagine the school can stand for its principle and believe without adopting to it.

@PreplexJ I still disagree to an extent. My school (and I suspect possibly the school of another teacher poster on this thread) would fall into that top bracket, but the school is not obsessed by results. Some of the parents are, but there's not much we can do about that. We just carry on doing what we do in the way we think it's right to do it!

One of my DC attended one of the so called superselectives in SW London. She used practice papers to get in but no tutoring as such. Nearly everyone else was tutored for years to get in.

I found out later that many of her peers were tutored throughout their time at the school.

I was told consistently that my DD was in the top third at least of the year group but these students were consistently the top in the class.

In DC’s opinion a couple of had been overtutored as they always struggled but all the others were very clever. I think their parents were just paranoid or competitive.

I belatedly hired a tutor for one of the sciences in upper Sixth because one of the teachers was appalling. Most others had hired one within a week of starting lower Sixth.

DC later got a first in her science related degree (no tutoring!)

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I think school result is largely explain by the intake cohort ability.

I'm talking about the schools that at the very top bracket i.e the few percentage difference in GCSE - some parents I know even only look at 8-9 GCSE percentage, and A levels at A* percentage only, that is the kind of obsessiveness of perfectionism competitive parenting in the top range of those league table schools. And to some extend, such concisiously two way selection of the parents/schools drive the direction of the culture and atmosphere of these schools.

Actually, I think the impact on league tables is also less than you'd think. If you have a very selective school, with an intake of very clever kids, and you teach them well and generally look after them, then the vast majority are going to end up getting great results. How you treat the small percentage that struggle (ie whether you push them to get tutors and/or manage them out, or whether you just support them to do the best they can without wrecking their mental health) will actually not make a dramatic difference to your results, because the numbers in question are small. But it can make a very big difference to the atmosphere and culture of a school, if you're the type of school that chases that extra 1% A-C at all costs, or whether your school leadership has the confidence to think that other things are more important. Where I agree with you is that it can be very hard for prospective parents to tell the difference from the outside.

" I think there are plenty of schools that care much less about it than about other things (student wellbeing for a start), and far less than parents might think."

"we do provide loads of extension opportunities to challenge even the most able students."

Thanks @crazypig I think what you stated below is really what IMO a good school should be. I wonder the schools with such attributes will be ending up in the very top of the league table, or will at least be very volatile in their league table position. How can the parents to identify/find these schools though?

Yes, it probably yeild little difference from school telling students need tutor or not - it can't change the parents mind if they think they need it for whatever reasons.

I'm not saying that there are lots of schools that are totally oblivious to their league table position, but I think there are plenty of schools that care much less about it than about other things (student wellbeing for a start), and far less than parents might think. Sorry, I'm not about to start naming schools, for either good or bad, because that wont end well. My experience from many years on MN (NC frequently but I'm a very old MN hand) is that parents are far, far more cynical about schools' motivations and actions in many cases than is actually warranted.

To answer @PreplexJ no, we won't individually tutor kids to 'get ahead', but we do provide loads of extension opportunities to challenge even the most able students. And as for proactively stopping parents from tutoring - apart from telling then they don't need to and giving them all the reasons why we don't think they should, how do you propose we do that?

"I'm sure there are some leading schools which are obsessed with league tables and push tutoring. But that doesn't mean there aren't plenty that aren't and don't."

Interested to know which leading school doesn't care about league table, obviously not obsessed (only some parents do).

Also my observation is that the higher the league table school is, the more likely the school with high cluster of competitive parenting. Though it is not the school who ask for extra tutoring, the school won't proactive stop it.

My experience is the same as @crazypig No need for a tutor, any extra help needed is given by the subject teacher.

But I’m talking about help if struggling with something, not tutoring designed to get ahead of the class or help DC come top in tests. I don’t see the point of the latter, and I don’t think the school would provide it (though I’ve never asked).

Again, that's not my experience. Not all schools are obsessed with league tables. But people tend to extrapolate their experience of (or stories about) one school to other similar schools. I'm sure there are some leading schools which are obsessed with league tables and push tutoring. But that doesn't mean there aren't plenty that aren't and don't.

Exactly - the ridiculous levels of tutoring to get children in to leading independent schools means that some children end up in schools that aren’t right for them.

When it starts to become obvious that the child is struggling to keep up with the pace of learning then the school won’t sacrifice their spot in the league tables. The options are either you leave or you tutor.

This. They won't. DDs friend is at a London independent and the school gently asked if they have thought about tutors.

Yes you’re right- it can become an arms race. I didn’t tutor DC for 13+ entry although they did do atom for paper familiarity. I do understand the pressure where there are maybe not many day schools locally and boarding is not an option but personally I just decided to let mine find their level and in both cases I feel they’ve ended up at a school that’s a good fit for them. DS in particular might have got into a more selective school with tutoring but at the same time I know he would have been an unwilling and sulky tutee so that probably tells me that Winchester etc is probably not for him, and that’s fine.

I would also suggest that tutoring in preparation for an entrance exam (typically 11+) where pupils need to be confident in both technique and timing is different from tutoring to keep on top of the GCSE curriculum, for example.

Even very academically capable children may need tutoring in order to prove their abilities in an entrance test, but once in a selective school, they shouldn't need regular extra tuition in order to succeed.

I teach in an academically selective private school where around half the intake at 11 comes from the junior school (no exam required) and half from a range of local primary and prep schools. The school discourages extra tutoring. There are still a handful of very pushy parents who would tutor their children regardless of circumstances; however, the children who are most likely to need/receive regular extra tuition are those who joined the school at 4 or 7 and, to be honest, aren't academic enough to cope with the pace in the senior school.

In an ideal world, no pupil would require regular/continuous extra tuition as they would be in an appropriate school environment where they would be stretched or supported as needed. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen: in the state sector, owing to a lack of resources/staff, and in the private sector, owing to parents choosing schools for their children which don't really meet their needs.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/primary/4829253-views-on-tutoring-prep-school-kids

Or the parents believe their kid had inate ability, but worry about other kids (with "less" inate ability) who do extra tutoring to take away their DCs opportunity to make Winchester/ Wycombe/ St Paul’s.

@DPotter , agree but some schools do not teach as they said they would. They say they prep but talking to parents from the last 4 years all the super selective secondary offers had extra camps…Maths, Creative writing, etc etc. We know girls in Year 2 getting 1-2-1 netball, cricket coaching to get to better teams plus school sport clubs and weekend clubs.
Boys with football academy training and holidays trainings overseas.
Same with music etc.
Not all prep schools teaches to the same level. Our friends’ in all boys or coed primary preps had clear and fair instructions through out the years to manage expectations. Girls only schools seem very vague and all is lovely until they are told there is an issue at last term of year 5, leading to massive tutoring over the summer holiday.

Or that the parents have unrealistic expectations. Not every child has the inate ability to make Winchester/ Wycombe/ St Paul’s.