to really regret the whole grammar school thing.

[newrecruit]

DS1 is in year 4 (DS2 in year 1).

I went to a girls grammar school and loved it. So when we moved out of London one of the reasons we chose this area was the schools. I don't think we are super selective (don't quite know what that means)

However, I was explaining the schools to him this morning as we drove past one and had an impending feeling of doom.

He's bright but can't be arsed. Resists pushing and I am against tutor on principal. I don't think he'd suit an all boys school.

What have I done! We should have just moved to a comprehensive area with a decent intake.

Some parents are already talking about tutors and its 2 years away. I want to hit them quite hard.

Please pile in and tell me to get a grip.

Nobody has to pay for a tutor.There are masses of materials online or in books,most of which kids can work through themselves.Many people use tutors if they work or don't having confidence in their own abilities often paying less for an hour a week than after school clubs and after saving money elsewhere.

Many kids aren't getting hours of homework or being stretched at all.For some the 11+ curriculum ensures they are on a level playing field whichever secondary they go to.I will be following it with my dd regardless of whether she actually sits the exam.It gives a good grounding and prep for secondary.That way she will have had the same exposure as the kids from Outstanding primaries who do push their pupils.

This "let kids be kids" normally comes from parents lucky enough to have their kids in private or the best state primaries.Sone of us aren't so lucky and have no intention of just sitting back and doing nothing to tackle the unfairness.

I'm not sure that I recognise those primaries where children aren't 'being stretched.' This sounds rather uncomfortable. Nor am I sure why 'hours of homework' is automatically a good thing during primary education.

The OFSTED regime and the National Curriculum have resulted in a system where - for better or worse - education is tightly structured, and progress monitored. If schools aren't perceived to be 'good' or 'outstanding', change in the form of forced academicisation is imposed on them. My stepdaughter has just done her NQT year in a primary school in a deprived school in a deprived region. I know just how hard she and her colleagues work to expand those children's horizons and to help them.

I did let my child be a child in the sense that she went to the local primary school that seemed warm and friendly, rather than the other nearby one that was higher in the league tables. What my Spouse and I did - above and beyond what the teachers were doing - was to encourage her reading, talk to her, take her out to places around the city, answer her questions etc etc.

Around the end of Year 5 she expressed interest in the local selective secondary school, and we bought her a few test papers - as the school recommended. She was offered a place.

Not read whole thread but one of the reasons for having a tutor is that some of the maths at 11+ level has NOT been covered by the primary school at the point that the children take the 11+ exam.

In these parts the tutor get booked at the begining of year 4 to start tutoring at the begining of year five to take the exam at the beginning of year 6. You need to a tutor booked in now.

My dc are at a Good school,DS is already working at 5s.He is bored.His homework this week was laughable.Said school is Good pretty much because results are handed on a platter.

It doesn't take hours.2 hours a week of school homework(his takes 10 mins) that stretched or him coming home saying he and his friends weren't bored and finding the work far too easy would suit me.

If you start in year 5 you could easily cover the maths and literacy concepts not covered in an hour a week.

What do people actually get out of tutoring?
Is it really worth £25 per hour?
Do tutors really do things that most parents are incapable of doing themselves?
One of my sons is currently waiting for 11+ results (for superselective) and we didn't have a tutor. I bought some familiarisation papers for him to practise and I helped him with stuff he found difficult or didn't have a clue about (due to not covering it at school yet).
I don't know whether he will pass or not but I tend to think that a child who needs to be intensively tutored to get into grammar perhaps isn't really grammar material. What happens once they are at the grammar school, do people continue paying for tutoring to ensure that their children keep up with the children who gained their places on intelligence rather than having had their exam techniques fine tuned by a tutor?

But you are a tutor and doing nothing different to that of a tutor.

What you have described is exactly what a tutor does,some people just prefer to outsource.Both are tutoring.

For those kids in schools covering the work needed clearly tutoring from a parent or a paid tutor is needed less.Lucky parents.

That is why I asked what is it that they do that is worth £25 per hour. Are they doing anything that most parents are incapable of?
Why would people pay for something that they can do themselves?
I wanted to know if I had not understood what it is that tutors actually do.
What is it about tutors that so many parents are prepared to pay £25 an hour for? Is it just that they can't be bothered to make an effort themselves and deem £25 per hour for goodness knows how long to be worth it in order to not need to make any effort themselves?

I suppose I imagine tutoring to be more than what I did which amounted to buying some familiarisation papers and leaving my son to get on with them by himself and me probably helping him with the odd question.
I can't imagine that people would pay £25 per hour for that but if they do then tutors are making a killing for doing very little.

Move to Finland OP, and if you can afford it, can I bring my family too.

I wonder if you are in Gloucestershire ? Here we have ( i think )2 Girls Garmmar Schools, 3 Boys ad one mixed. (unless the rues have changed)
You have a good chance of getting a place but tutoring is usual, and the good turtors get booked up early. Both my sons had a wonderful education at the local Grammar, and got beter A level rsults than their equally talented friends who went to the local fee paying secondary.

Thanks tiggytape that makes a lot more sense now and gives me some idea as to what people are paying £25 per hour for (or much more ££ in your area and no doubt other areas).
It's terribly expensive though. Prep schools near me charge between £6k and £7k pa but for that you are getting 22-25 hours per week so the cost per hour is much less than tutoring (I understand it isn't nearly the same input as 1:1 tutoring though and that many at prep schools have tutoring as a top up).
I am really shocked that people will pay up to £50 per hour for tutoring and I do wonder what happens to those children once they have passed the exam and struggle at selective schools without the tutoring; or do many people continue tutoring once the children are at senior school?

Why are those going to struggle any more than yours will?They've had the same,the only difference is their parents have paid for it.

Have to say I find parents who push their kids beyond their natural ability (tutoring them to the brink of exhaustion) really incredibly tiresome. Their children don't actually benefit from it- all it does is push a properly bright child from an unsupportive background (arguably the very children who ought to be getting into GS) out of the grammar school system.

How do you tutor beyond ability?

I am not saying that they will struggle or that my own son will even get a place. I am simply asking about children who need to be intensively tutored in order to get a pass and whether they are likely to struggle once the tutoring no longer exists. What do the parents do if they struggle once at the senior school?
I don't actually think my son will get a place at the super selective and I'm not sure we would accept the place if he is offered it as we have a preferred other option (but just out of catchment).

I suppose I am thinking: if 200 children get a place at a superselective and 50 of them are less naturally academic than the other 150 but they passed due to intensive tutoring and a good tutor who is used to the exam format then will they be able to keep up?

But I don't get how introducing kids to imagery,Bodmas,exam technique and the like makes an average kid past an exam way above their ability.

A friend of mine has her son in a prep school and he is also being tutored.He still isn't getting the grades he'll need to get a place.

It's a valid point lepetit but obviously not one the parents follow or surely they wouldn't be paying £50ph?

I think some think they're paying for a golden ticket,they're not.

Lepetit - I think what is meant by 'tutoring above their ability' is that if a child has intense tutoring and passes an exam but can't maintain that level of understanding and progress without continued 1:1 tutoring then they have been tutored beyond their 'natural' ability to achieve in a school environment.

Also a lot of 11+ tutoring is tips and exam techniques which are specific to that test. They will be of absolutely no use in secondary school. Therefore a child might be able to achieve a high pass in a very specific test but then but not maintain a level of high achievement later once success relies on natural ability rather than techniques and repeated practice of the same type of questions again and again.

The way grammar schools entrench social disadvantage narks me enormously. I find it shocking. Am so grateful that in my ignorance I didn't land up in an English grammar school county. Kids with parents who are involved / can pay / organised enough to find tutors get the best education. Kids who might have equal ability but not the most involved/rich/clued-up parents have high risk of being consigned to 2nd tier on the basis of a single test at the age of 10yo. It's outrageous.

I do agree Tiggy that the being tutored intensively to pass then struggling is less likely to be prevalent in the super selectives. I would guess it's more a problem for children who have just scraped a pass through tutoring and are choosing between a comp and a grammar.