"tutoring for grammar school is cheating". AIBU to be fuming at DSIL's attitude?

[twiceupinarms]

namechange coz as much as I don't care if she reads this, I don't want her to know my normal nickname.
I am getting my DD tutored for grammar school. DSIL thinks it's cheating if she can't get in without being tutored and will therefor struggle when she gets there. for fucksake, the exams are not based on school curriculum - it's like being a brilliant footballer but been trialled to get in the team on your ability to tie your laces. fucksake.
Anyone else encountered this attitude?
Oh I can add hypocrisy to the list? Her DD audtitioned to go to Stage Boarding School. Did she do any practice/preparations for the audition? Only 9 lessons a week, every week, for 6 years.

AIBU to be cross?

"Because if there are children who grow up without those elements in their lives and whose educational progress is hampered by that lack, surely by doing all of that with your child you are giving your child an unfair advantage?"

Not an unfair advantage, no. But an advantage. The unfairness comes in when you then put the children with that advantage in a one school, give them access to a broader education, and tell them repeatedly how special they are, while putting the ones without that advantage in another school in a different building, and tell them that they are second class citizens.

The failure lies in the system that encourages so many tiers of students. However, given that the system is there and that the way to play it is known, and given that parents are (rightly or wrongly) inclined to want to give their child the best chance possible can they really be blamed for putting their money where their values are?

Telling children how special they are because of a position their parents' money has basically bought for them -- that I can't abide. It's a terrible thing to say to children.

"They then Hoover up all the scholarships pushing the bar so high that naturally talented kids at say piano who have reached a grade 4 with a real flair, now have to be pushed to a grade 5 to compete with the robots!"

State schools do not offer music lessons ... not not what I would call a music lesson.

Its impossible to reach grade 1 yet alone grade 4 without some kind of music instruction. I have never met a child who has passed music grades without some kind of individual instruction. I have never met a child who has mastered the basics of a musical instrument without some practice.

Becoming good at an instrument is 95% bl**dy hard work and about 5% talent. There are lots of children who have the ablity to learn a musical instrument but not the application.

I can't see how it is possible get a music scholarship without lessons and lots of practice. Scholarships are given to children who are useful and add something to a private school and this is only fair. My son got to grade 2 guitar in 18 months as his first instrument. He may well have more natural talent than a child who started at six but he does not perform like a grade 5 performer.

There is a world of difference between having "potential" and actually being able to perform. This is true of the world of work.

Tutoring is a fact of life in my area. There was not a single child (that I know of) in my daughter's class at grammar school who did not have extra coaching either from parents, a tutor or by attending a local prep known to give extra coaching for the 11 plus.

It's the system, not the tutoring that makes it unequal. OP, YANBU.

snooping - music scholarships is usually an award of a few a hundred pounds or a fees remittance of 5 to 10%. In a few schools that can be as much as 30%. Even at 30% that still make the fees about.£12k per year.

So its kind of silly for you to make the point that some poor musical DC can get a private education if only rich people didn't suck up all the music scholarships. I mean, if you can't afford private at £15k but you can at £12k then you aren't poor.

I accept that parents who started their kids young have an advantage but they have an advantage over other parents who can afford £12k pa. Basically, it's well off parent versus well off parent.

Not read all this as am tired and on way to bed. One of my children is academically bright and was not tutored for the grammar test. Some of their friends were tutored. I am not for or against either option, parents do what they feel is best. My child finds the work at grammar easy and doesn't really need to revise for tests. My child's classmates know my child is good for homework help but some of them are under a lot of pressure and have to work really hard to get similar results. They are under a lot of pressure which my child does not have. They look tired and have to work hard to maintain their levels. I think the best advice is to look at the schools and try and think about what would suit your child best rather than try to fit the child into a school which might not suit them. (disclaimer I have other children who are not so academically bright and this is not a stealth boast - just trying to give a balanced opinion)

Where I am, the parents are pushing for music scholarships as a badge of honour. Those kids are pushed into playing 3 or 4 instruments and have theory on the side!
I'm not making it up! My mind boggles how a kid can go from grade 1 to grade 5 in 1 year - you can't tell me that's natural?
A kid who has 1 lesson a week but practices and is great at whatever instrument cannot compete with that!
One local private school admissions registrar actually told me they are looking at stating kids must be of G5 standard now because everyone turning up to audition is at least that and usually on more than one instrument. Not many auditioning merely meet the G4 standard any more!
So the ones learning music the normal way, a lesson a week, playing in an orchestra and taking their time to enjoy their instruments are being held back from the scholarships by pushy bloody parenting because their kid must have a scholarship!
Please don't tell me this doesn't happen because frankly, it does! And I find it outrageous. Music should be pleasurable - not a golf club trophy!

And some schools offer very generous music scholarships.

YANBU .. SIL is maybe jealous.. who knows. What I do know is that whatever her opinion on it, she was bang out of order to say something to you. It's not of her business and it wasn't her place to say it either.

I still don't get why kids have to go to a completely seperate school for this. When I was at school there was about 4 ability groups for the core subjects (with some off limits for kids who hadn't got up to a certain level by the end of S2) - so the top 25% were taught together in the highest class. The kids in the top groups weren't always the same, for example my friend was fantastic at English but weaker at Maths but with all ability groups in the school, there was enough flexibility to cope with this. How would she have fared at a grammar school? Would she even have got in?

I have a friend who lives in Kent, her DD starts primary school this year. She is already a bit concerned about grammar school places and her neighbour is moving her DC to a different prep school as she feels the one they are currently at isn't sufficiently focused on the 11+. As this was one of the main reasons her DC is at private school in the first place, this isn't going down too well.

"I'm not making it up! My mind boggles how a kid can go from grade 1 to grade 5 in 1 year - you can't tell me that's natural? "

Are you jelous?

If a child is grade 5 in their first instrument then they can very quickly get to a high grade in another instrument. They are only having to learn the technique involved with playing the new instrument. With a first instrument a child is having to learn the theory as well as the instrument.

"So the ones learning music the normal way, a lesson a week, playing in an orchestra and taking their time to enjoy their instruments are being held back from the scholarships by pushy bloody parenting because their kid must have a scholarship!"

Scholarships aren't meant for every child. I admire the level of work that a child puts in to get four instruments to grade 5 standard. The child clearly has a capacity for extreme hard work and that deserves to celebrated and rewarded.

A minority of children do become very obcessed with music. They are self driven and not pushed by their parents. I am amazed that the parents pay for lessons in four instruments though!

" I admire the level of work that a child puts in to get four instruments to grade 5 standard. The child clearly has a capacity for extreme hard work and that deserves to celebrated and rewarded. "

If it is a primary aged child it is almost always the parent that has the capacity for hard work!

Why would I be jealous exactly?
Jealous of kids being pushed into something for mummy and daddies' benefit?
You may have that kind of take on parenting but I can assure you I don't.
Trust me, I don't find many Mozarts in school assemblies!
I just think music shows a good example of how far some parents will go for the sake of their ego! These are primary school kids we're talking about.

And for the record, I've worked with some of the best musicians the UK is known for.
Not many of them were playing 4 instruments aged 8! In fact, I dare say none of them were! Most of them learnt to love music in their teens of their own accord.
Also, the difference between say a woodwind instrument and the piano requires new techniques. It's all hard work for little kids.

snooping - Why do you make rich people the centre of your argument?

Your original rant was about rich people using their money to deprive musical but poor kids of a scholarship. Well, if you can afford private school but only if was £12k instead of full fees then you aren't 'poor' in the first place.

And the last time I looked, pushiness whether its music or academics is not the sole preserve of rich people.

Also, if a DC isn't genuinely gifted then all the money and pushiness in the world isn't going to get that kid from grade 1 to 5 in one year.

My kids do three instruments each. That's 3 x £15 each DC per week for lessons. That's £90/week. Obviously we aren't poor but neither do we have to be 'rich' in order to afford the above.

So is it possible that these other kids are better than your DC because they simply are instead of because they have parents that are richer than you?

... Make that 4 instruments each. I forgot to include the recorder :)

Playing several instruments isn't a big a deal as you like to think snoop. Although I can imagine you making it a big deal just to convince yourself that your DC has been cheated out of a scholarship by kids that are only at a higher grade on more instruments because of rich pushy parents.

Well, you do have to be pretty rich to commit to 4/5 different music lessons a week per child. Unless you are suggesting that any parent could download tach yourself books from the Internet?

I tutor.
I have some quite brilliant (academically) pupils. I've absolutely no doubt that, should they continue to be as switched on and motivated, they'll do tremendously well at a Grammar School - or at another type of school.
However, competition for GS places is fierce - with some pupils having been prepared from the age of 5 or 6.
It is absolutely reasonable to prepare your DC by outlining the format of the exam, question types, etc.
This is standard practice in preparations for school examinations (SATS) and, in general, something that is very much expected and accepted.
However, if a child is willing to follow a parent's lead, you could very well DIY. It's not too difficult to do so - but most pupils work more effectively and willingly with someone else.

People apportion their money according to their particular need/wants.

As MTS implies, music is important to her family, so she spends on it. Presumably foregoing what others may consider a luxury (eg cigarettes, nails, tans etc, rounds of golf, football season tickets).

FWIW, here in Bexley (South London) we don't come under the Kent LA. Four grammar schools, Theoretically they take in 25% of the borough children. Or rather, of the average 5,000 Y6 children in Bexley, 1250 grammar places are available. Only 18% of grammar places are taken by Bexley children (so in reality thats 250 children), the rest pour in from inner London, Greenwich in particular. Greenwich has a perfectly respectable comprehensive system, so the one school ethos and streaming clearly doesnt work for parents.

On testing day, it is not unusual to see 700 sets of parents and children queued up out side each of the grammars, all from out of borough. Our own children are done at primary in their own environment the week before.

There is a big parental movement within Bexley to prohibit outsiders!

As well as our own 4 grammar schools, Bexley parents will also enter the Kent tests for Dartford and Wilmington as they are perceived to be 'easier' tests, and you need a back up, the really bright ones will try for St Olaves in Orpington. We are too far away from Judds and Tonbridge.

Even with the comprehensive system in surrounding boroughs, the level of inter-borough transfers is phenomenal - parents do not want a comprehensive system. The sec moderns in Bexley pick up thousands of children, but very few Bexley children move outside unless it is into one of the better Bromley schools.

Strangely there is only one prep school left in Bexley that I know of, but there are many over in Greenwich, all grooming to go across border

MTS, I clearly hit a nerve with you and now I see why!
We'll never agree on this - my point is not necessarily about being rich, if it were I'd be a raging hypocrite!
It's about parents buying what they want, not what is best for their kids!

The recorder is taught at school so free. As for the other 3 instruments, 30 min lessons at £15 each = £90 per week. No lessons during school holidays so roughly £3800 k pa. My nurse friend spends that much on car payments for her Ford Fiesta (mine is 10 years old).

So at seeker's comment that one has to be 'pretty rich' to afford so many lessons.

So no, one does not need to be educated and MC in order to be able to download past 11+ papers and no, one does not need to be 'pretty rich' in order to commit to 4 instruments.

Snooping - I am not rich unfortunately so no, you haven't hit a nerve.

Your kid has lessons in one instrument. Mine have lessons in three. It cost me an extra £30 per week per child over what you are paying. It hardly makes me rich compared to you.

My kids attend a Saturday morning session at our local LEA music school. A lot of the kids there have 2 or more instruments and often their main instrument is above grade 5.

You don't have to be rich for your kid to be proficient in a number of instruments which seems to be your complaint.

Holly - We spend about £3800 pa on music lessons. This is roughly what my teacher friend spends on car payments for her new Fiesta. I, on the other, hand drive a 10 year old car.

So it's funny when snooping goes on about how her DC was robbed of a scholarship because rich kids were offering multiple instruments when her kid was only offering one.

Why, MTS? Do you know what car snooping drives?