Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

AIBU to think Mumsnet should turn down advertising for 11-plus tuition?

37 replies

TootingJo · 10/05/2017 21:08

We all know that 11-plus tutoring works, which also means grammar school admissions are a competition that poorer parents lose. Mumsnet is taking cash for 11-plus tutoring ads. I think they should take a stand and turn down the business.

Yes, 11-plus tutoring will still go on whether or not Mumsnet take the tutor's cash. But Mumsnet is sending an advertising reminder to poorer families that they are not on a level playing field for getting a grammar school place. I wonder how many families who care about their kids, but have little cash, are encouraged to pay money they can't afford to hire an 11-plus tutor?

OP posts:

x2boys · 10/05/2017 21:12

makes no difference here as we haven,t had grammar schools in my town since 1982 just one example of the hugely unfair system that allows grammar schools to still exist .

bigchris · 10/05/2017 21:16

Well you could say the same for advertising for Boden and waitrose

Should only primark and Aldi advertise ?

MyPatronusIsAUnicorn · 10/05/2017 21:21

YABU. Why should those who can take something up not have the options even there because there are those who can't afford it? You could apply that to so many things in life.

We aren't rolling in it. DS has a shot at passing the 11+. We are just saving before to pay for tutoring. If DD wants to do it, we will have to start saving a lot earlier as our circumstances have changed and our income has reduced by quite a bit.

wildflowermeadows · 10/05/2017 21:22

I went to a grammar school and no one had any tutors to pass their 11plus. It's not meant to be something you are tutored for, it's meant to determine the children of all backgrounds who would benefit from going to grammar school. I was from a single parent family and we would never have had access to that type of education if it was paid for and I think that's essentially the point of the 11 plus.

Mushypeasandchipstogo · 10/05/2017 21:28

I went to a grammar school too and nobody I know was tutored BUT times have changed and round here everybody seems to be tutored for the 11 plus. It is a horrendous and unfair system and I really don't think that MN should be supporting it in any way!

Butterymuffin · 10/05/2017 21:29

The site is free because advertising raises money. I think poorer families are better off with the free advice and support Mumsnet provides, and putting up the adverts (and Mumsnet didn't create the unfairness) as opposed to potentially having to pay for access to the site. It is a business.

ThroughThickAndThin01 · 10/05/2017 21:29

I don't think it's down to mumsnet to make a stand. These advertisers are trying to earn some money, just like everyone else.

YABU.

booellesmum · 10/05/2017 21:33

I have 2 kids in a super selective grammar currently.
Neither had a tutor and just did a few practise papers at home in the month before the test.
They weren't stressed and not pushed.
I don't care about the adverts.

Original poster

TootingJo · 11/05/2017 07:07

With the next government giving the opportunity of a grammar school to every child, they are giving every parent the pressure to pay £30 a week for 11-plus tuition. But at least Mumsnet's ad revenue will go up significantly!

This is quite different from ads for expensive Boden clothes. It's not a problem if poorer kids wear Tesco clothes. It is a problem for poorer families to get worse schools, which is what happens in grammar school areas due to tuition. (I live in Kent.)

I'll try writing this post again in a few years when everyone knows how the 11-plus works.

OP posts:

ParadiseCity · 11/05/2017 07:13

We live in an 11+ area, it's all fucking hideous. The test includes things state children don't learn at school until the year after. So you generally need a tutor (or a parent who doesn't believe in tutoring but just so happens their child does maths for fun as a self driven hobby ) etc. When my eldest did it, only the kids with teacher parents or from private schools got grammar places.

ParadiseCity · 11/05/2017 07:14

So I'm not sure where I stand on the MN advertising... probably against it but i like having a free site....

Havingahorridtime · 11/05/2017 07:18

YABU. My son was offered a super selective grammar school place and I didn't pay a single penny to any tutors )couldn't have afforded not anyway). There are greater factors to poorer children not getting grammar school places than just tutoring. We're technically disadvantaged both financially and by other descriptors but my ds got good selective school offers. Just because not everyone can afford something doesn't mean that it shouldn't be advertised. There's nothing illegal about 11+ tutoring.

UrsulaPandress · 11/05/2017 07:21

Perhaps you could provide a list of the prospective advertisers of whom you do approve so we could all cast our eyes over it for any possible triggers.

StillDrivingMeBonkers · 11/05/2017 07:34

Perhaps you could just have a bright child like mine who didn't need tuition for grammar school? (His friends didn't either)

You make sweeping judgemental accusations which unfortunately reflects on your childs ability and your jealousy.

YABVU to tell people where they can earn their legitimate income.

TheNaze73 · 11/05/2017 07:38

YABVU & ridiculous with it

Fortheloveofscience · 11/05/2017 07:43

YANBU on the basis that there's already a list of products that MN has 'blacklisted' from its adverts, such as follow on milk.

No harm in suggesting that MNHQ consider adding another to the list.

coldcanary · 11/05/2017 07:43

YABU and very silly, not to mention patronising to assume people who disagree with you don't understand the 11 plus.
People can educate their children as they see fit regardless of whether you agree with them and Mn are well within their rights to advertise services that cater to every aspect of education.

Fortheloveofscience · 11/05/2017 07:48

And OP isn't 'telling people what they can earn with their income', merely highlighting that tutoring does make it more likely that students pass exams, and that pressure on parents to provide the tutoring will increase with the competitive grammer school system.

Peoples' stories about their wonder kids who got into grammar schools without tutoring, or from posters who are indignant because they paid for tutoring and don't want to be made to feel like they 'cheated' are not really relevant to the OP IMO.

JigglyTuff · 11/05/2017 08:01

If you live in a grammar school area, tutors (or going through the books yourselves but they are also expensive) are the only way State school children will pass the tests.

What is utterly batshit is the fact that private schools are allowed to teach them during school time whereas State schools aren't. If State schools were also allowed to teach the 11+ - given that it's an exam to get into a State school then I can't see any good reason why they're not - then no one would need tutors etc and it would be a level playing field.

The current system favours private school children and those whose parents can afford tutors and books. There are a lot more less able private school pupils in grammar schools than there should be. Places are certainly not on merit alone at the moment

GreenGinger2 · 11/05/2017 08:04

Well then they need to turn down ads for books and museums etc too. You can tutor all you like but if your vocabulary isn't of a high standard I doubt it would make much difference. Kids who are read to,taught,given experiences have the biggest advantages and a better vocab.

Oh and those in the best primary schools of which places are often bought through property have an unfair advantage too.

What are those who are not in the fortunate position of having DC who attend a strong primary supposed to do?

And good Sats results gets the better set positions in secondary. Should all Sats materials be banned too?

Think this must be one of the most ridiculous ops I've ever read.

KatyBerry · 11/05/2017 08:13

I'm pretty sure private schools aren't allowed to teach them - ours certainly maintains that approach.

The ads you're served are driven by your browsing history, so you're obviously posting/ searching around the subject (I've got m&s party food because I was ordering a cake -not Frizen - and comically, Christies fine jewellery auction geneva, based on something I googled. Shall I complain to mumsnet that I can't afford multimillion euro jewellery and make them ban it? We're all bombarded with advertising for things we can't afford.

GreenGinger2 · 11/05/2017 08:16

Yes I get Gk island ads( hopeless dreaming)and shops my dc browse in.

Middleoftheroad · 11/05/2017 08:16

OP not everybody lives in a grammar county. you say you understand the system, but in some areas kids ate not aitomatically entered as there ate no grammars.
Also the level of the test will be different in say Birmingham to Bucks. In Bham jjust 1 in 10 get a place due to limited grammars, amd competition as opposed to say top thirty in Bucks where there are more. It's not straightforward.
If you censor advertising based om ethical reasons then there would be no advertising asfew are without criticism for one reason or other.

Havingahorridtime · 11/05/2017 08:20

Oh and those in the best primary schools of which places are often bought through property have an unfair advantage too.

This is a really valid point. Take Trafford for example - houses in the catchment areas of the best grammars are prohibitively expensive. It is much cheaper to pay tutors to try and obtain an out of catchment place than it is to move into the catchment (a higher score is required for out of catchment places at most of traffords grammar schools).
So the inequality goes Way beyond a parents ability to pay for tutoring. On that basis should we ban any adverts for right move et al and ban jobs being advertised in pricey catchments?

JigglyTuff · 11/05/2017 08:21

Well, officially they're not supposed to but they mostly do: schoolsweek.co.uk/kent-private-schools-ignore-11-plus-tutoring-ban/

I know all the private schools around me are pretty blatant about it (and there are lots of preps and very few secondaries for obvious reasons). Last year, 1/3 of super selective grammar places in Kent went to privately educated children. It's a crap system

Flip

1 2