"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?

[wordfactory]

My Mum was both involved and pushy, I think .

She was a legend!!!!

[ReallyTired]

There is a difference between being pro active and pushy. A pro active parent works with the school and often enhances the education of every child in the area. (ie. being a governor or being a parent helper etc.)

A nightmare helicoper parent is overly pushy and prevents theri child from developing resilence, problem solving skills and self moviation.

[Dahlen]

I've read all of this thread. I am undecided on where I stand.

However, I completely agree that a lot of this angst about schooling is unnecessary. A child of average intelligence with good parental support will do well whatever school he or she attends. IT's the parental emphasis on educati0n that makes such a difference - and that starts right from reception year when parents are expected to read to their children every night. It's also well known that parental income and educational attainment influence children's outcomes far more than their IQ or school selection.

Knowing that, I think it's time we changed our focus on education. It doesn't really matter what type of school it is. If we really want to level the playing field and improve social mobility we need to focus on that bridge between home and school.

Joined up thinking is what's needed. In some cases the only way to improve a disadvantaged child's chances will be social services intervention or for the school to provide many of the roles that should (but aren't) being taken on by the parents.

How that would be funded is another matter entirely, of course, which is why it is unlikely to happen. Most people only want social mobility to the point where it doesn't increase their tax bill.

[wordfactory]

Well my Mum was both! She was like Amy Chua but with a perm and an embassy regal!

And I can assure you I am resilient, successful and the most motivated person I know. DH calls me Boudicca and my agent gaveme my MN name The Wordfactory.

[Bonsoir]

Children actually spend very little time at school - by my calculations my DD (8, Y4) spends 10% of the year in compulsory school. Obviously quite a lot of time is spent sleeping, but even if I remove sleeping time from the calculation, she only spends 16% of her waking hours at school. That leaves the vast majority of her time free for me (and her father) to structure and influence. Of course what we do is going to make far more difference to her intellectual, emotional, moral and physical development than what school does. And we do a lot of it.

[CloudsAndTrees]

Exactly Bonsoir. It is ridiculous to blame schools for a lack of social mobility. Likewise it would be ridiculous to give them any credit for social mobility, when the biggest factor will always be parents.

Parents are the reason why schools differ so much, and parents are the reason why some schools continually fail.

[wordfactory]

True bonsoir and that is why schools of any description cannot be the driving factor in outcomes for DC.

I can see that clearly now I have DC of my own.

[Bonsoir]

I suspect many of us somewhat underestimate just how much hard work and £££ we are going to put in ourselves as parents, before the event!

[Bonsoir]

For all that, schools do make a difference, even when parents are supportive and involved. We saw very clearly that when we moved DSS1 and DSS2 from their local state school to a private Catholic school (French system), they did better and learned more, in particular in non-science subjects. DSS2 was always rather bad at French, for example, but he is really rather good now - I suspect because the socio-economic environment of both teachers and pupils is much more highly verbal.

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

True Bonsoir. Which is why I wonder why it's so important to some parents that that bit of time is spent in an exclusive environment?

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

And does this mean we can now say that comprehensives, and spending money on them, are not the reason social mobility hasn't improved after all? I've been very intermittent today, and regret not being able to pursue that conversation.

[CloudsAndTrees]

Personally, I think it does Nit. But no one wants to be the one to point the finger at crap parents, especially when it's easier to blame the government for anything and everything.

The state cannot and should not be expected to compensate for crap parenting. And children from families who do give a toss about education should not be expected to help raise the attainment and aspirations of their disengaged peers.

[wordfactory]

nit because somehting isn't the main factor on a child's outcome doesn't mean it has no impact or it matters not at all.

School does matter and it does have an impact...just not as great as parental involvement IMVHO.

And from observation, I'd say its impact increases as the DC get older.

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

ah, I see!

[CloudsAndTrees]

School does matter, absolutely! And because of that we have to acknowledge that school can give a disadvantaged child a step up, but also be willing to admit that school can be a negative influence as well.

That's why many parents choose grammar school, because they want their child to be amongst children from like minded families. But admitting that you don't want your child to go to school with children from dysfunctional families just leads to accusations of snobbery.

[wordfactory]

I think of myself as a home educator who uses school as one of many resources.

I want all those resources to be the best quality and most apporpriate resources that I can lay my hands on.

[FreyaSnow]

I agree with you wordfactory. That is also how I see my role as a parent. It does get more difficult as children get older, because I'm not capable of teaching every subject my children might decide to take to A level standard. I need the school to also be good at its job.

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

But admitting that you don't want your child to go to school with children from dysfunctional families just leads to accusations of snobbery

Lawks, can't think why! Good job you never get clever children from dysfunctional families, eh!

[FrauMoose]

There are a fair number of dysfunctional kids/children from dysfunctional families at grammar school. Anorexia - yes. Alcohol and street drugs - yes. Self-harm - yes. High functioning autism - yes, in abundance. Shoplifting - yes. (It's just the school doesn't advertise it on the prospectus, and most of the parents would really rather pretend not to know.)

I also think as they get older children essentially educate - or do not -educate themselves. So much depends on their own curiosity about their world and their own ambitions. Which can, to an extent, be nurtured but which cannot be grafted on to them by others.

[CloudsAndTrees]

Of course their are Frau, but at least they come from families that are much more likely to value education and will do what they can to help their children cope with their problems, rather than leaving them to get on with it, or even make their problems worse.

You do obviously get clever children from dysfunctional families, but even clever children can learn that education doesn't matter if their parents don't care about it.

I'd rather my children were friends with children whose parents give them good values and were in all the bottom sets than children who are as intelligent as it gets but have parents that allow 18 rated films at age 13 and never turn up to parents evening because they couldn't care less about their child's education.

I don't care if that makes me a snob in some people's eyes.

I don't want to be around adults that can't be arsed contributing to society, so why would I be ok with much children being around people like that?

[OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni]

I think though that if we venture into the world of Private you can definitely get parents who think that because they are paying they are absolved of all extra parenting...especially some of the boarders. So it isn't necessarily a class distinction, again back to what kind of parents they are.

[exoticfruits]

I agree that it isn't a class thing.

[exoticfruits]

It is attitude.

[CloudsAndTrees]

That's true Yoni. I went to private school as a day pupil, but there were boarders there too, and definitely some parents that left almost everything to the school.