Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

570 replies

Sammyp235 · 17/10/2019 20:39

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?’

OP posts:
cantkeepawayforever · 18/10/2019 21:30

Bert - yes, it's much more fine-grained now. Children get a scaled score between 80 and 120 for each subject, rather than the broad 'levels and sublevels within level 4' approach.

Gemma2019 · 18/10/2019 21:32

We didn't pay for a tutor but I tutored the kids myself with the help of past papers and the Bond online website. My DD2 just started grammar school in September and is getting on really well.

I can't say I agree with heavy tutoring but I never understand people who don't prepare their child at all and think they should pass the exam on their own merits. Children should be prepared for the exam in advance so they can get used to timing, pressure, different layouts of questions, the list is endless. My DD needed a lot of help with timing and if the actual 11+ had been her first time sitting a timed exam she would have failed miserably.

I would never have expected to pass any of my own exams if I went in completely blind without any preparation so why would our DC to be able to?

Teateaandmoretea · 18/10/2019 21:40

I think yanbu op the tutoring is nuts.

Thankfully round here our comps are okay anyway, dd1 decided herself she'd rather go that route (I was happy for her to sit 11+ CEM with just question familiarisation, no intention of tutoring) She visited the grammar and didn't like it, she's a smart 10 yo I think Wink. Most of the tutored kids aren't even that clever, they don't stand a chance anyway.

CaggieMatthews · 18/10/2019 21:40

One of the reasons I want DS to go to the local grammar (Birmingham) is because the facilities are far superior to the local comp. Why wouldn't I want that for my child?

I pay for a tutor for him. Waited until year 5 to see if he was naturally bright. He is, so why not give it a go?

I'm staying relaxed (trying to!) about the whole thing. If he passes, great but if not, he'll go to the local comp and I'm sure he'll do well.

sazzle27 · 18/10/2019 22:15

So... I haven't read the full thread, just the first post...

I attended a grammar school, I did not have a private tutor, although my family did encourage me to practice things at home.
But no formal tutoring.

I got in, and i was of the years they gave you the place you came. Top 50 out of 4009.

All the kids in my year who had been tutored struggled to keep up unless they had continued with their tutor.

Looking back I am glad i was never tutored, as I can't stand the idea of being tutored for the whole 7 years, plus prep to get in...

whiteroseredrose · 19/10/2019 06:54

DD's primary school did 11+ practice for anyone that wanted it. It was weekly for an hour before school. I don't understand why all schools in Grammar areas don't do this.

I know that schools need to focus on the national curriculum during normal teaching hours but if it's OK to offer extra curricular art, football and music why not 11+ prep?

Phineyj · 19/10/2019 07:20

That's very unusual, whiterose! Are they an academy? Possibly academies have the freedom to do this if they want, although I suspect any that have secondaries in the chain would not want to encourage those kids to look elsewhere.

CecilyP · 19/10/2019 07:51

I don't understand why all schools in Grammar areas don't do this.

Because in many grammar school areas it is expressly forbidden by the local authority. It would be add odds with them claiming their tests are untutorable. Can I ask where you are, Whiterose?

J1ckback · 19/10/2019 08:03

Wouldn’t be unusual in our area.

Tvstar · 19/10/2019 08:04

Around 50%of kids are tutored

BertrandRussell · 19/10/2019 08:05

whiteroseredrose

DD's primary school did 11+ practice for anyone that wanted it. It was weekly for an hour before school. I don't understand why all schools in Grammar areas don't do this.“

Even if they did- guess which children would turn up?

Tvstar · 19/10/2019 08:06

Practice to build up speed helps, tutoring not do much. A smart kid can work it out by themselves

J1ckback · 19/10/2019 08:11

Bit rude Bertrand, in our area kids from all backgrounds are interested in grammars. I know staff paid for to help pp kids who have provided materials and gone through papers with pp kids. I think it’s an excellent way to use such money out of core lesson time. More schools should do it.

J1ckback · 19/10/2019 08:24

I also think after school clubs outside of Kent are a superb idea. Schools could approach some parents and encourage. Parents are aspirational across all sections of the financial spectrum. With a bit of encouragement and info those hard to reach or not aware of their child’s suitability would step up. In our area specific kids go on taster days, bright pp kids would be the priority. Areas are trying hard to increase pp uptake in outreach and admissions. It will take time to bed in.

Namenic · 19/10/2019 09:31

Bertrand - I’m pretty sure houses in the areas of good comps are more expensive and out of reach for some people. The only fair system is a lottery - which is fine but can be inefficient eg kids at multiple different schools and longer commutes.

Lots of jobs have various aptitude/iq/reasoning tests. Unis have them too. Some people have tutoring for gcses/a level which generally people don’t complain about. They usually complain about private and grammar schools. It is unfair, but there are lots of different routes in life.

Namenic · 19/10/2019 09:33

I meant to add - it’s better to be pragmatic and try and teach good study/work habits and financial smartness.

funnylittlefloozie · 19/10/2019 09:37

The principle of grammar schools is great. The practice, not so much. Plus they tend to be full of over-tutored kids who are not that bright naturally, so you end up having to dumb down the curriculum for them anyway.

MrsBertBibby · 19/10/2019 09:42

What things can a grammar school achieve that can't be accomplished in a comprehensive with setting?

DrinkFeckArseGirls · 19/10/2019 09:49

But it’s the children of high ability who get tutored for 11+ not children who are struggling 🤷🏼‍♀️
A child is doing very well at school, parents think they have a stab at a selective school and want to familiarise their child with how the exam looks.
Why is OP assuming that it’s the struggling kids that get tutored for 11+?
They may get tutored because they’re struggling but not specifically for the exam which they would not do well in anyway.
I think OP you feel bad as you said so to lessen your guilt you assume some undeserving kids took a place from your DD and a grammar school is not a place for them anyway. When in fact the kids that got into most likely were high achieving at school anyway.

57Varieties · 19/10/2019 09:56

But it’s the children of high ability who get tutored for 11+ not children who are struggling

Is it though? There will be some of course but is it not more likely to be “average” children than highly able or struggling

Ali1cedowntherabbithole · 19/10/2019 10:12

But it’s the children of high ability who get tutored for 11+ not children who are struggling

I rather think it's the children of parents who can pay for it that get tutored. Regardless of ability.

BertrandRussell · 19/10/2019 11:25

“ The principle of grammar schools is great. The practice, not so much. Plus they tend to be full of over-tutored kids who are not that bright naturally, so you end up having to dumb down the curriculum for them anyway.”
If that is true (is it, by the way?) then it’s another argument for comprehensives. The ones struggling could be moved down a set and no “dumbing down) would be required.

J1ckback · 19/10/2019 11:44

What do you class as struggling?

Tellmetruth4 · 19/10/2019 11:48

In my experience it’s the children who’ve consistently performed highly who have the tutors because as a PP said, if you think they have a genuine shot at a grammar, you’ll try and increase the odds of it happening.

I think the numbers of kids who struggle and are tutored far beyond their abilities to get them through the test, are lower than those who are already bright being given an edge.

WhentheRabbitsWentWild · 19/10/2019 13:10

I went to a grammar school in the 60s - all my classmates sat the 11+ and the brightest were offered places - tutoring was unheard of. Nowadays if you can afford it you can pay to train your child to jump through the hoops. Totally discriminatory.

I agree with you
My DM went to a grammar school in the 50s , after her 11+, on her intellect as she went to a state primary and my grandparents certainly couldn't afford Tutors . Nan worked 2 jobs, in fact, to earn enough money for DMs bus fare as Grandad worked at times, at other times business not so great . He was a master plasterer/Decorator. Not sure they had Tutors then on a one to one, unless very rich.
Not everyone can afford a Tutor .