To be frustrated that Grammar schools are full of private tutored kids?

[Sammyp235]

So my DC sat the 11+ and passed it and was placed on a waiting list (number 10) to get in to local Grammar school.

490 kids sat test and there were 150 places provisionally set aside for the kids who scored the highest.

Now of it was an even playing field then that absolutely fair enough, but I know that it’s not. Many parents ‘prep’ their kids with a private tutor for years in some cases.

I know this as I have a couple of friends who are private tutors and we’re surprised when I said DC was going to sit the entrance test without any previous tutoring. They both advised they’ve tutored kids for up to 2 years prior 😳

There’s a child in DD’s class who’s had years of private tutoring and secured a place (it’s common knowledge and said child happily discusses it with other classmates and it was with the purpose of getting in to this grammar school)

I’m frustrated that the schools website says you don’t need any extra tutoring. The reality is that should be the case, but that leaves those that can’t afford it at a disadvantage as there are definitely plenty of kids that get the extra help then get the places.

There’s 3 kids in DC class that all have private tutors and all secured a place.

I’m of the opinion that if you need a private tutor for you DC for several months/years to pass the 11+ then perhaps it isn’t the school for your DC.

I find it annoying that so many kids have the advantage over others and take up the places. Of course if you have the money then fair enough, why wouldn’t you get private tutors in. I don’t blame the parents, but I feel that school should not have stated you don’t need extra tuition. You absolutely do as your up against it if not!!

I just feel frustrated for those kids that have a natural aptitude and academic ability, but are up against those who have been tutored to the max. It’s not an even playing field at all.....

Oh and I had to laugh to myself when one of the said mums asked me what ‘rank’ my child was placed in (none of her business) and said ‘oh so out of 500+ places your DC is 160th most intelligent 😳..... I was dying to say ‘erm actually it wasn’t an even playing fiend though was it?’

So do you think that parents need to provide private tuition in order for their child to pass the 11+???

One minute you’re saying everybody is tutored and it’s impossible to get in without it then only some tutor and struggle( even though going by data most grammars show pupils progress well.

Some people buy their way into good comps with small catchment. Don’t feel bad about it, just continue to support your dc. I’m sure grammar school is good for some and less good for others - and you can’t always tell....

No- I’m waiting to see your answer and then my point is proved.

I noticed you didn’t answer the question and then tried to divert it back.

If you think that private tuition is needed to secure a place then that proves my point. Those that are private tutored have an advantage.

Do you?

If not then and you don’t think a private helps a child secure a place why pay for it?

Kids from poor backgrounds mostly don’t have that luxury. They are at a disadvantage. The ones with private tutors have the edge abscess get the majority of places. End of.

*and

A bright child with interested parents in a home where people read will do ok. I don't believe in hothousting kids. There may be some advantages to grammar or comp. private schools have social advantage. If dc is happy and making progress don't worry

I agree with you it has become a situation that almost requires it, like we must do it because otherwise we arent giving it our all. I say this as a parent who had a child sit the test in 2013 - he failed (although would have passed most other years if it went on pass mark only) I was quite adamant at the time I didn't want to tutor or appeal etc. He has just done his GCSE's and smashed it. But that being said, we decided in April that we would join the ranks of tutoring parents for our DD. I dont even know when or why I changed my outlook, perhaps it was because i knew alot of others were doing it and i didn't want her to not get the best shot at it. I'm glad i did though if I'm honest, not just because she passed but because her knowledge and most importantly her confidence has been massively boosted. She believes in herself now and frankly she didn't before. So for me it was worth the going a bit short for those months. Just my honest take on it all..x

No I don’t think it’s necessary and many pay for it who don’t need to. I think most schools have enough details on their websites. Ours certainly does giving sample questions.

My mum (non teacher) tutored me to a scholarship at a public school. It depends on people’s skill at teaching and the syllabus and exam technique - but I would say most things can improve to a certain extent with practice. But don’t dwell on it - focus on developing good habits and study skills (including taking breaks!) for gcse.

Private tuition is definitely not necessary for children to pass the 11+ as long as they are taught properly at school.

Where I grew up everyone say the 11+ in primary school and virtually no-one was tutored. Me and 2 siblings all got in. Where I live now grammar entrance exams are optional and many many children are tutored.

I’m genuinely not sure how much tutoring can help with the NVR questions though, maybe helps with the VR a little. To be honest I am sure that practising he type of questions is probably more helpful than anything but there are practise papers available on the schools websites and a tutor isn’t really needed for those.

I know friends with clever kids who have got in without tutoring and friends with less clever kids who have spent a fortune and got nowhere. I’m really not sure how much difference it makes.

All primary schools should teach pupils what they need to know to pass 11+ or equivalent, as well as enrichments. Unfortunately a lot don't do that and it's beyond me why not.

On this specific point - where I live and work, state primaries are specifically prohibited from teaching skills for the 11+ (e.g. VR or NVR), and work towards their own end point of SATs (Maths, Reading, Writing and Spelling / Punctuation / Grammar) in the May of Year 6.

Private primaries specifically work to the end point of the 11+ (September of Year 6, so essentially the end of Y5). It is worth noting that the content of the 'English and Maths' parts of the 11+ contain the full Y6 national curriculum, which in state schools is (obviously) taught during Y6, not by the start of Y6. The private primaries teach 11+ specific skills regularly from the earliest years.

The problem is that it is an 'arms race'. The parents at the private primaries worry that their children won't get into the 'best of the best' superselectives, so they tutor on top of 6 years of specific teaching. All those at the private primaries get the 6 years of specific teaching. Then parents of children at state schools try to replicate that with home or paid-for tutoring. Other parents don't or can't prepare, and state schools aren't allowed to.

All this is fine IF every child is given the same preparation - that would then mean the 11+ would test genuine ability. However, the huge disparity in the amount of preparation done means that the 11+ ISN'T a good test of ability - it is a test of a complex mix of family background, school, tutoring and narrow ability in very specific areas.

There is also the fact that the 11+ isn't a very good test in terms of reproducibility and reliability - I can't remember the figures now, but the reliability and reproducibility is so low that the same test taken n a different day would give different children places - and for example if this year's children sat last year's test, the results would be very significantly different. It's fine from the grammar school's point of view - they may want the 'top 10%' but in fact will cope absolutely fine with someone from the top 30-40% with e.g. no SEN, supportive families, the 'right' background with a willingness to hire tutors and no highly disruptive behaviour, so the test doesn't need to be that good at the margins, as it just needs to admit enough 'good enough' kids. It can be very far from fine for individual children, especially in fully grammar counties.

Not unreasonable at all. DD has recently sat music aptitude tests and it looks like some children have been tutored for a long time.

It's my own fault for not realising sooner but I'm gutted for DD as the system is hugely unfair.

“Some people buy their way into good comps with small catchment”
I do wonder about this. How do they do it? Compulsory purchase?

“ All primary schools should teach pupils what they need to know to pass 11+ or equivalent”

1. This would completely blow apart the orthodoxy that it is an untutorable test of potential 2)Middle class kids would still get outside coaching as well, so the pass mark would just go up.
2. what would the non grammar types do while the others were getting the coaching?

OP your daughter is obviously pretty smart. She almost got in despite not being tutored. Even if she doesn’t get in on the waiting list she’s got fantastic potential by the sounds of it

The problem is your all discussing the 11+/ entrance exams as if they're the same all over the country and they're not.
Some grammar schools are much harder to get into than others. There will be more of a mix in some than others.
The system is completely unfair.
I can only speak from experience of my area (Trafford) everyone tutors, yes it's unfair but that is what happens.
I tutored my dd but not because she wasn't bright (she was and got the highest SAtS in her year) but because she wasn't taught Non verbal at her state primary but also for help with exam technique.
We have individual exams for each grammar so she sat for Altrincham girls/ sale grammar and Loreto grammar (Catholic girls grammar)
She passed everywhere and I immediately stopped tutoring and she is doing really well at the school she chose.
However I know that the grammars will not be a good fit for dd2 we have chosen somewhere else for her, we could tutor her to death but she won't keep up and I'm not prepared to put her through that.

I’ll be giving my children every advantage I don’t see the problem in that.

@Witchinaditch that's fine but at least be honest and realise it's completely unfair.

“ I’ll be giving my children every advantage I don’t see the problem in that.”
No. People with that mindset don’t.

What does “got the highest SATs in her year” mean?

@BertrandRussell it means when she was in y6 at primary school she achieved the highest sats results in year group.

Sorry- SATS must have changed since my day!

When DD1 took her 11+ over 20 years ago, she and most of her cohort just did a couple of test papers for familiarity. 10 years later when DD2 took hers she was tutored for a couple of terms before as were most of her year. It would seem there is now a whole industry around tutoring and for a child to have any chance at passing the parents must buy into this. So unfair on those bright children whose parents can't afford the cost of a tutor.

No worries @BertrandRussell I think change on a pretty regular basis!