Are more of you planning to move your DC from private to state for 6th form now?

asked me to buy him a book, which I did and left him to it.

And decided on school, knew the entire scope of program? mock tests? At the age of 10?

Yet it surprises me that a mother of such genius child has challenges to comprehend the basic fact that most kids have very intense preparations to the 11+ entry exams and 1 out of 10 or 15 gets in.

And once again, I wasn't involved. He asked me to buy him a book, which I did and left him to it. Not county grammar, super selective grammar.

That does not constitute tutoring.

Tutoring by a parent is still a tutoring. It doesn't need to be paid elsewhere to be considered tutoring. Your child had full blast preparations.
Is your child in county grammar?

Well you can be as sceptical as you like. We are both high achievers and went to top universities so our DC have benefited from genes (do you count these as tutoring too?) but apart from that they went to a normal decent state primary, had no help there with 11+ as it is not allowed in state (although it is in private prep)and did a few bond books on their own at home - my DS asked for them because he saw someone had one at school and loved the NVR puzzles. That does not constitute tutoring.

@Sneezeanddessist What does it mean "untutored" ? It is impossible to get to grammar just relying on state school program. You have very narrow definition of the word " tutored". Please read the post above in which redskydarkknight accurately described the matter

Absolutely.

Irrespective of what I spend my time doing, mine got CATS scores of 141 untutored if that means anything to you. So it would seem you are way off the mark.

I like how a fundamental disagreement on selective schooling is always deemed to be ‘the politics of envy’.

Maybe some of us have nothing to be envious about.

Nope - I'll happily admit I paid handsomely for my dcs to get a first class education while I waste time on here 🙃

With grammar we observe self created perpetuated marketing. Parents of the prospective kids think- if it is difficult to get into then it must be a good school. Parents sometimes are not bright enough to see anything beyond that and exam results. And there is so much more to any school.

Even worse are the private schools. It is really hard to avoid to be influenced by amazing marketing and show like Open Day. Private schools employ one ir even sometimes a whole department of marketing staff to work on the school image. All that online independent paid for rankings 🤦🏼‍♀️. Private school tactic is to offer free places for those who they spot as super academically talented. These kids will show in Leavers Destinations under accepted at Oxford. And the rest believes that the magic to get there is in that school 😁One school here offers to local schools a special Saturday sessions for free sending invitations to primary schools to send them top performers to the " free Saturday program for Y5"
There are also kids of the rich donors. Oh those are treated lightly by the teachers. The parents give a lot of 💰 apart from tution fees.

Private, grammar, faith comprehensive - all schools are better or worse. They really vary but most often the truth is well concealed. :)

I think those claiming "not tutored" are often selective in their definition of tutoring. So their child didn't have a tutor but may have
-gone to a private prep that specialised in preparation
-gone to learning centres like Explore Learning
-worked through workbooks at home
-had a parent/grandparent who worked with them
-did an absolute ton of "enriching" experiences
-had lots of books and broad discussion at home

I'm afraid I'm sceptical that it's possible to pass super selective grammar school exams where the child literally has no educational input than going to their bog standard local state school. Possibly the odd one or two self taught genius (Matilda type child). It might be more possible at "ordinary grammar" where the intake is broader (top 25% in Bucks, for example).

Of course they are.

I presume you are talking about yourself spending too much time arguing on a chat forum.

Well no, as mine are all out and on the other side (with good jobs and happy lives).

I was referring to the mumsnet brag about their kids not being tutored but managing to be in the top percentage of academics in the country. I don't think a parent that spends time arguing on a chat forum is necessarily going to be the best parent to produce these mythical kids.

Either we are talking about general trends or are getting into infantile envy vs snobs war. I opt for the first one

If you don't see that the grammar of your child is underfunded then you live in your bubble.

In order to pass 11+ either the parent is a tutor or the private tutor or atom learning ( tutor) 10 year old is not in a position to understand the scope of material that he she has to learn
There is less turoring in so called county grammars that accept up to 26 perc of local cohort. But def a lot in superselective school.

Btw We are not talking about your singular case, it is not about singular me me me to boast an individual talent. We are talking about trends. Your case doesn't change the nature of things.

Is this perhaps the real politics of envy? I understand it must be nauseating for you.

Yes, parents are engaged by paying for tutoring. What is the point of school if teachers are not providing equally outstanding teaching? The kids are going there just to tick the box as everything depends on tutoring, self study and parents support? They could spare they time and do homeschooling if it is the case. Mediocre teaching yet the grammar schools know how to push and push for rssults
In my opinion grammar kids are particulary vunerable to mental breakdown. They deserve more funding for pastoral care and better teaching

Donations are common case with many schools not only grammar and that is why we observed in recent years many schools turning to academy with volutary contributions. But schools tend to spend these money on roofs etc

Of course they did!

Not all them are. Mine got into super selective grammars without any tutoring and did brilliantly there. There is more tutoring generally in the private sector (belt and braces) in any case. Maybe there is a bit less for grammars because many preps tutor in school hours.

By keeping their kids away from less academically able kids. I see.

When a school is selective parents and students are more engaged. So paper pushing Ofsted ratings don’t matter and neither does teaching quality. These parents will always find a way to help their kids succeed. Also most grammars rely on and obtain donations.

I think the worst in grammar schools is that the school may be not better than comprehensive school. The grammar schools exist because they are convenient for the government due to the fact that they pay less per pupil than in the other state schools. As a result the grammar schools are notoriously underfunded.
In addition
Many grammar schools have been downgraded from Outstanding to Good ( in some cases even lower) Most often because of level of teaching provided.
Hard working kids and the teachers who don't provide equally superb education.

The grammar school means endless stress for a hothoused child as the geniuses are also going there. The school puts pressure...pressure and all are ambitious all could be top performers in comprehensive gaining confidence....yet in grammar they are nobody. Many kids in grammar schools are tutored all education to keep up.
Not a joy and that results in stress in a school with limited pastoral care because of funding.

And never mind the poor kids who failed the 11+ and have that hanging over them for the rest of their lives! Who cares about them right?! Grammar system is even more immoral than the private system.

we are paying £700 a year for our DD to access state 6th form in our county. She could attend the college in our local town but they don’t offer any MFL A levels. So she is taking the train 1hr away.

as if the grammar kids were not hothouse to get to grammar :)))