"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?

Just in case anyone is interested, 'nurse friend' jacked it in and is now 'teacher friend'.

Nit - what has her car got to do with it?

I'm making the point that you don't have to be rich in order to afford for your child to be proficient in a number of instruments.

Snoopingforsoup

My son only has lessons in one instrument. (Guitar) He got to grade 2 in 18 months, but he didn't have lessons until he was nine years old. He may well be as talented as the children who started music at six, but he did not make that choice. We chose to wait until he developed an interest. Ds also sings in a church choir which is free.

There is a girl in ds's class who is grade 7 in her main instrument (piano) and grade 5 in her second instrument. She is incredibly talented and hard working. She deserves her success and a place at the selective school.

There is difference between having "potential" and actually being able to pay. In the UK lots of people prize potential far more than working hard. Intelligence is partly down to environment and can be improved by hard work.

Some parents allow their children to play on the computer or watch TV for hours.

Well, because you're saying that your car story is somehow relevant to what Snooping can or can't afford - or you seemed to be, anyway. Or maybe it was just a side issue? But then why would it be relevant to discuss the respective cars driven by you and one of your friends? .

Nit - are you seriously this obtuse? If you are then engaging you is a waste of my time. If you aren't then you are merely trolling. In which case engaging you is a waste of my time. Either way ......

Yeah, I'm trolling: that's why I keep changing my name to harangue the same poster ... Oh wait.

I may be being obtuse, yes, I just didn't really see how your point about your car had anything to do with whether or not snooping had a right to feel she was disadvantaged by not being able to afford as much music tuition. It's quite alright if you don't want to engage with me though!

(I won't report your accusation by the way, unless you're regretting it and would like me to)

MTS.

I have to disagree with you on the instrument tuition. My dd plays 4 instruments and we are poor. However, luckily for us her dad can teach her quite a lot, but atm just music lessons are £30 per week and have been £45 at times. Then factor in transport to lessons maybe, exam fees. There are very few who can access proper music lessons if they are not well off.

The only thing that is unfair about the grammar system is that there aren't enough grammar p,aces for every child that would be for from that type of learning environment.

The education system should aim to meet every child's needs, whatever that may be. Undoubtedly, some children with thrive in a grammar school and will do better than they would in a comprehensive, and some children will thrive and do better with a more technical education than they will with a traditional academic education.

As long as every child is receiving an education that suits them and which encourages them to achieve their fullest potential, I can't see what the big issue is.

The 'divisive' argument doesn't do much for me. Children are already divided by what they parents do any don't provide for them anyway. The state should not need to try and compensate for that, the state should just be providing a good education for every child. Where that takes place is irrelevant. Children already know who are the cleverest children in their class by the time they get to y4, if not before. They know who is on the top table for maths, they know who is taken out for extra reading with the TA. If they are taught to accept everyone and value everyone's strengths, then who did and didn't pass the 11+ doesn't matter.

Three of our children have/had music scholarships. It is a lot of very very very hard work. It is not about spending money. I play the piano, I sing, I got (not showing off) almost full marks bar one mark in grade 8 music theory so they can do all that with me if were very short of money (we aren't) free at home. All 5 got their grade 5 music theory without any external lessons. However of course that requires a music parent although I would assume you could be a musical parent and not very well off.

Mine download music free on the internet or borrow scores from libraries. It is easier and easier these days because of the internet to learn. However I accept that in most cases you need an instrumental teacher.

I would say a lot of it is down to very hard graft. I don't think there's much merit in starting very young as by age 10 the ones who started at 3 tend to do better than those who started later but bright hard working children can whizz through the grades. I did term by term for the youngest two grade 1 theory, then grade 2, then grade 3. Okay right someone will say you then have to pay the exam fee which is true but you could do the work at home and then only sit grade 5 which would be cheaper.

I certainly do not accept that mine who won music scholarships at 12 did so because of my paying for lessons. It was more because the family just happens to be pretty musical, because parents were prepared to supervise music practice, because I enjoy playing the piano to their practice and most of all because of all the hard work the child put in.

And I expect you downloaded the piano, and the house large enough to keep it in, free from the Internet too, right?

I accept that in some cases you can provide more music tuition by making certain financial and spending priorities, but it's rather simplistic to suggest that's all there is to it!

morethan - I simply made the point that £3800 pa is what I spend on music lessons and that this is roughly what my friend spends on car payments. I an not rich. I merely choose to drive a 10 year old car and use the money on music lessons.

Obviously a person on a low income isn't going to be able to afford a new car or multiple music lessons. However, my comment was in response to the poster who thinks that one has to be rich in order for a DC to be proficient in several instruments. You are proof that she is talking rubbish so here

'rich' is a subjective notion though. You do show, however, that you're aware that some people might be driving ten year old cars - and even older - not because that frees up £4k for music lessons, but because that's actually what they can afford, so well done for that

I don't understand why this has become about music lessons!

Music lessons prove the point that it's both talent and hard work that make the difference, not parental pay packet.

I was given the opportunity to learn (and own a) flute and piano as a child, I had no talent for it and didn't like it. No music scholarship for me, no matter how much money my parents threw at it and how much they nagged me to practice. My ds is the same. He showed an interest in piano, and is actually very good at it. But after three years of lessons and at grade four, he doesn't want to do it anyone because other things have come along that interest him more. His talent and my willingness to pay for lessons isn't going to make him put in the hours of practice it takes. It would either come from him or it wouldn't.

He is at a SS GS, and he certainly needs to make more effort to keep to the high standard now than he needed to make to be top of the class at primary school. The fact that he has the ability and the motivation to make the effort is what makes him worthy of his GS place. I don't see why a child who is equally as bright, or brighter, but that doesn't want to make the effort is seen by some as more deserving of a place just because their parents might have slightly less income than I do.

My friend's DD got a music scholarship with her flute bought second hand from eBay for £150 and a viola on loan from her LEA music services.

So a great big at the posters looking for excuses as to why their DCs didn't get the scholarship

I think it depends on what you mean by tutoring. If you mean preparation - so exam technique, learning styles, etc., that's fine. It's what everyone who is serious about qualifications does when faced with an upcoming exams - whether that's the 11+, GCSEs, Al-levels, finals or whatever.

If you mean intense 1-1 coaching and are pretty certain that your child would fail massively without it, you're probably setting them up for a lifetime of inability to perform to the expected standard unless putting themselves under an unhealthy amount of pressure.

Dahlen - I can give my DD intense 1-1 coaching in the 100m sprint but it isn't going to make her appreciably faster.

People keep going on about how kids that have been coached for years have an advantage. Anyone who has DCs taking music exams will know what I am talking about. Making a child play the same exam piece every day for 3 years isn't going to get your child a Distinction. Likewise with 11+ prep.

"Obviously a person on a low income isn't going to be able to afford a new car or multiple music lessons."

By Jove, I think she's got it!

MTS. Sorry I misread your post.

I do think that most people do what they consider best for their dcs education. I found that it was more likely down to the parents education, culture and belief not income.
I have seen it from both sides. A really bright girl capable of passing 11+ and parents not knowing what it was, and not having a GCSE between them. It was school that alerted parents to her potential, and the possibilities.
Then another, not as bright whose parents would move heaven and earth to gain a scholarship as they knew the importance of a good education.

My dd is certainly not grammar school potential, she might just pass with several years of tutoring, but why bother. I would rather her education be fun and enjoyable than a grinding chore. If they are bright then grammar school is a good opportunity, if they aren't ffs try something else.

I think it is a tricky one, which I would have to have some serious words with myself about if I lived in an 11+ area. I do find an odd logical disparity between 'my dc would do best at grammar and is suited to grammar by ability and temperament' and the next step, 'so I will do everything in my power to make sure said dc doesn't, left to him or herself, fail to pass the test which will ensure he gets a place at the school best suited to his/her ability and temperament'.

"merely choose to drive a 10 year old car and use the money on music lessons."

In my painful experience having a ten year old car is far more expensive than music lessons. lol...

Being rich is all relative.

I completely agree with Xenia that doing well at music is down to application. Private schools want children are prepared to work hard and are supported at home.

It is next to impossible to get a child to grade 1 standard if they don't want to do the work. I haven't yet met a child who can swan to grade 1 yet alone grade 5 without some parental support and application.

morethan - I totally agree with your culture and belief comment. I dislike reaching for the 'if immigrants can do it' argument but Watford GS is near us. Anyone familiar with it will know how ridiculous it is to argue that the entrance system is biased against DCs who don't have educated MC parents.

Immigrants are often educated and middle class!

Also, immigrants are almost by definition self motivated, involved and into forward planning.

I find the "immigrants can do it, why can't everyone" argument simplistic at best, racist at worst.

I am so relieved that Northumberland is not a 'grammar area' - this is all completely horrendous & stressful.

we were tutored by the school for the entrance exams for all the local grammars. Nothing unusual there.