"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?

I don't think it's cheating but I don't think it's fair either. Wasn't the point of grammar schools to be a non-fee paying higher education based solely on developing the brightest?

By having an entrance exam that you can be tutored to an advantage - for a FEE , makes it unfair to those who cannot afford it and who might be more naturally intelligent and deserving of the place..
Obvs. the ideal solution would be to make the exam more reflective of the curriculum.
Having said that I don't think their is a mother who wouldn't want to give their child anything they could to help, unfortunately some of us don't have that level of income to do it.
It probably is jealousy but it's justified IMO.

It seriously wouldn't cost state schools that much to provide an after school club with homework and some generic info letters home re technique.

A lot of parents wouldn't know where to start to do tutoring but with support from school they could make a difference.

Very as to why 11 + clubs aren't provided,makes you wonder if the Tories want to keep the status quo,labour never liked grammars so you can see why they didn't support parents.

Clubs that the primary schools provide?

Aren't they busy enough with what they have to provide curriculum wise, and don't they have enough of their own extra curricular clubs to run?

As a said if they had a couple of days a year off a year,extra PPA to prepare it would be doable.All sorts of random clubs are run which involve planning and prep.The amount of hours (and money) put into sport at our school sorry I see no excuse not to have 11+ clubs.

Square - A lot of teachers aren't in favour of selectives. Others aren't keen to work extra hours. Pro active parents are busy at home tutoring their kids.

Hardly a great conspiracy.

Mts uneducated parents don't have a chance.

1 hour a week,sorry not a big deal(you should see our club list,there are masses of things on it and most schools expect teachers to do 1 club a week). I did archeology,art and several others.Wouldn't have bothered me if it had been 11+ prep instead particularly if I had some extra PPA time.

I just don't see why a school should devote their time to providing support to get a place at another school!

Surely it would be in the interest of the grammar schools to provide such a service, if anyone at all.

primary schools are not there to wallpaper over the injustices of a system that simply does not involve them, they have their own curriculum to deliver.

Is it cheating if your child goes to a private prep primary school? Or goes to an outstanding ofsted primary school instead of a satisfactory one? One hour tutoring a week will help children all have the same chances whatever primary school they have been to. At my dc's primary school I would guess about three quarters of the class in year 5 and year 6 have tutoring whatever school they want to get in to.

I don't think it's cheating- that's just a silly thing to say.

However, the selective system is inherently divisive and unnecessary.

However again, if you are going to have a selective system, deciding who goes to grammar school by using an eminently coachable for test is just bonkers, and automatically gives advantage to children based largely on their circumstances, not on their braininess. If state selective education is to remain, a way needs to be found to test thechild's ability, not their parent's "savvy", wealth or determination.

Yes an hour folks is all it would take which is perfectly doable.

Personally as a parent of non sporty kids I don't see the issue when you consider the man hours spent on sports fixtures many kids are never and will never be involved with.

I think a lot of parents wouldn't like to see all the extra competition from the oiks.

YANBU - your SIL is being so petty with her comments, its barely worth raising an eyebrow in annoyance. Good parents strive to do the very best for their children.

Having said that, I went to a comp that was rated as a fairly poor school & I thrived. I was in the top stream in everything & I went on to complete a degree & post grad. I am successful in my work & more importantly I really enjoy my job. My parents were always supportive & encouraging, that's always made the difference in my life.

Ignore her, I left grammar school 13 years ago and the majority of my year had all been tutored to get there! And we all managed to keep up. I think you would be mad not to tutor.

I think it's sad reflection on schools in England that you feel you need to get your daughter extra practice. The school should be preparing all the children - and I don't mean coaching, I just mean getting the familiarised with the form of testing.

Some people go on about how unfair the 11+ but they never advance a fair alternative.

IMO the 11+ (VR, NVR) is about as fair as you can make it. After a few weeks familiarisation the rest of the prep time was spent on exam technique ie working to the clock, if stuck move on and come back to it at the end if there is time etc etc.

Square - uneducated parents don't have a chance? A significant proportion of the kids at the Watford GSs are from 'uneducated' immigrant families where English isn't their first language.

Unless you don't know how to Google '11+ example papers' then being uneducated isn't much of an excuse.

The alternative is properly streamed comprehensive schools. As exemplified by many LEAs in the country.

Well we are a family where DS got into a super-selective (he actually passed for all the super-selectives) without intensive tutoring. We did go thro' papers at home though for about six months, although it was fairly laid back as DS is not naturally an overly-keen child!

I'm afraid I'm in your DSIL's camp. It was very much my belief that if you're capable, you're capable and if you require three years of tutoring you are getting up to speed with practice rather than natural ability and essentially that is cheating.

That said, I guess tutoring does fill in all the gaps that state primary schooling and parental guidance might not....

I agree with Coralanne though with her sporting metaphor.

It is an essentially tricky one though and there is no right or wrong answer. What does worry me though, as someone from a very working-class family who did get into grammar school myself, is that this type of intensive-tutoring-to-get-in-mentality, is just so not fair to the children with natural ability from less well-off backgrounds.

Also, because we are not a well-off family (albeit a highly educated one), I think lots of (the better-off) parents at school naturally assumed that if our DS could get in then of course theirs could too. . I think they were rather aggrieved that none of current Year 6s have got in...

I do believe though that in the areas with super-selectives, it is not as simple as throwing money at a tutor and relaxing. A child does have to have a latent natural ability. Nothing can be assumed, even with long-term expensive tutoring....

Personally I wouldn't have my son "tutored" as I think he's 10 he should be doing creative stuff, enjoying school and playing out with his friends. Its bad enough the school already getting hysterical about normal SATs next year, I think they need to get a grip.

I would never criticise another parent for choosing tutoring - I am sure there are positive motives for tutoring. But there are also grabby, competitive ones ...

seeker - The next time you post about your DC I hope that I will be around to remind you of your comments here about how the 11+ is eminenently coachable and favours those with well off 'savvy' parents.

Mts it takes time,the internet,inclination and confidence.

If you're uneducated,work all hours,don't have the Internet,don't think your child would ever be the type,don't have the confidence to attack exam prep why should any child be penalised?

I was a teacher and quite frankly find finding out about current day maths techniques bewildering and time consuming at times let alone verbal reasoning so heaven knows what a parent who works full time and left school with low literacy levels or limited qualifications would feel like.

MT- I have never said it was anything but.

It's not cheating. Peoplw prepare fir loads of exams in life. Is it cheating if I practice driving in advance of my test? unfortunate that it's as competitive as it is now but c'est ca. And yes your sil's approach to getting her own child into the school they want while criticising you would irk me greatly.