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?’

[Schuyler]

YANBU. Well done to your DC though, it is an achievement. :)
The system is biased to middle class families who have the resources (time and money etc) to prep their children. Many MNers will defend it because it suits them. No prizes for guessing why.
It used to be that grammar schools were for brightest children and they were much more diverse places. It’s not the same these days. Many grammar schools have a significantly lower number of pupils on FSM compared to the comprehensive across the road. You only have to look at private primary schools who boast about their pupils’ success in the 11 plus.
(No axe to grind as we aren’t a grammar school area and I’m glad.)

[VaperCut]

I hear you OP..

We can't afford tutoring for DS and thankfully he isn't fussed about going to a grammar school although he is incredibly bright. I believe he will do well wherever he gets a place. We do a lot of work at home through workbooks and he's always been on top of the class. However a couple of his friends have started 11+ tuition this year (year 5), and DS was saying they have moved onto his top table for maths and english. So tuition helps but if they are anything like my Dnephew who had tuition from an early age, on and off through high school and the poor bugger felt he needed it in college Dsis said no unless he paid for it himself. So some kids can't cope without it.

DS's primary school gave out a newsletter to parents recently suggesting they (rightly) work with their kids at home. Then added if possible supplement their learning with tuition because it helps greatly. School won't admit the teachers are shite, HT is useless and getting crap SATs as a result. They want the parents to pay out for tuition to do the hard work for them!

[cavendish4]

Truth is (DP is a private 11+ tutor and we are Essex Grammar area) that if your kid is smart enough then they don't need tutoring.
EVERY child needs practice though to understand the format and what they need to do.

The kids who have tutoring would either have done well without it or would have not got in without it. Rarely an in between. It's also down to personal dedication and commitment to practice.

[BertrandRussell]

“ Surely the most obvious way to make things more equal is to allow primary schools to teach 11 plus skills...”
That wouldn’t help. Privileged kids would just get double the tutoring!

[cavendish4]

Also the results aren't just simple it's on standard deviation.
It gets standardised for age AND lower boundaries for those from pupil premium.

[GrumpyHoonMain]

Did you not do any research before putting your dd through the 11+? If your local grammar selects by result then you need to tutor.

[BertrandRussell]

It gets standardised for age AND lower boundaries for those from pupil premium.”
Not everywhere. Most places do not “lower boundaries” for pupil premium kids.

[Schuyler]

@bigtotwig

“ In the meantime, my very bright DD needs to be stretched and inspired.”

Your child is not the only very bright one! Even not bright children need to be stretched and inspired. I get it, I’m also a parent, we prioritise our own. However, this thread is an example of how some people think they can step over others by using money or that their child deserves better.

[Bluerussian]

Full of privately tutored children? I live close to at least three good grammar schools, 1 co-ed and two single sex that take opposite sex in sixth form. They are excellent. Neighbours and ex neighbours have been or go to them and were not privately tutored, they went to state primaries and passed 11+.

Private tutoring isn't that marvellous for 11+, the NVR questions cannot be anticipated and a large proportion of kids who go to a tutor as well as school, fail the exam. As long as a child is confident, on the ball, numerate and literate, they will manage. Do puzzles and that sort of thing at home together so the child is used to working things like that out logically and have fun.

[Bluerussian]

I mean children of neighbours, not the neighbours :-). They left school long time ago.

[cavendish4]

@BertrandRussell this isn't true. There HAS to be a set number of places for pupil premium children in grammar schools. This is part of the funding criteria. As a result, naturally there is the possibility of lower entry for pupil premium. Also I had just said I was referring to Essex.

We've been to so many examiner sessions on this as we both taught it but now I don't.

[cavendish4]

Also no one from my Essex Grammar was privately educated. People had tutors, I didn't but I also was pupil premium which helped me

[BertrandRussell]

You only have to look at the proportion of pupil premium children at grammar schools to know that the system is wildly unfair. Unless you think that poor children are intrinsically thicker than better off ones.

[Miljah]

Why do the politically left wing revile grammar schools? Because they entrench privilege.

Why do the politically right wing endorse grammar schools? Because they entrench privilege.

[MrsBertBibby]

Give me a comprehensive system any day.

[AntguaGuate]

Of course its not a level playing field. But the differences start well before parents pay for extra tuition. Children from stable family backgrounds where parents take an interest in their education, eat meals together and read books are already streets ahead by the time they enter infant school. How do you level that out?

Honestly though, I think its a bit rich moaning about uneven playing fields while simultaneously trying to get your child into a selective grammar school.

[BertrandRussell]

“BertrandRussell this isn't true. There HAS to be a set number of places for pupil premium children in grammar schools”
That may be true where you are- I don’t know. It is certainly not true in Kent-which is the biggest wholly selective authority remaining.

[CampingItUp]

OP - your Dd may well still get a place.

There will be those that go private, others who are on waiting lists for grammars they prefer, and the occasional one who moves house over the summer.

But in general I think the whole grammar system is nonsense and we shouldn't need to segregate kids, based on a test at 10 years old (some of them) from other kids a few points difference on the 11+ test.

The 11+ generally, in any case, does not pick up the language and literature geniuses who struggle with maths, the immature summer borns, especially boys, who mature just too late, those who have a bad day, etc etc.

So why segregate children on such a flaky system?

[Schuyler]

If I looked at the number of children who receive PP in 10 grammar schools and compared to 10 comprehensive schools - would they be roughly the same? Assuming I compare fairly and compare say a GS in Kent to a comp in Kent - same location and demographic etc.

[BertrandRussell]

@ Miljah

[bigtotwig]

@Schuyler should I just send her to the 'crowd control' nearest comp then with 24% GCSE pass rate?

It's not about wanting to step over others, if a child is in the top 5% in their primary, then they really belong at a grammar school (in the absence of an outstanding comp anyway and we don't have one of those near us).

We had to make sacrifices to afford the tutor. But I believe it really was that important in order to get her into a school that will work at her pace.

[Judashascomeintosomemoney]

Not until there is a fully comprehensive system everywhere with excellent teaching though
That’s not going to happen in areas with grammar schools while grammar schools still exist!

Could you expand on this? What about abolishing grammar schools would make comprehensive schools better?

[CampingItUp]

"Our local comp (and there are no grammars in our city) fail to get three quarters of their kids to pass Maths and English GCSE after five years"

This tells us nothing. There could also be a top set getting 9s and heading for Oxbridge.

[AliMonkey]

First, if your DC is 160th out of 150 they will almost certainly get a place. At least 10 of those will have sat as a backup if they didn't get a private school place but will send their DC to private instead.

Second, I agree with you. I think though there's a difference though between "did a few practice tests to get used to it" and "had a tutor for a year or more". DD did some practice tests at home and there were a couple of bits of maths we had to teach her as round here the test includes lots of Y6 maths before they've learnt it at school. But I was really against a tutor as I only wanted her to get in if she was gong to do well, not struggle at the bottom, so the fact she got in without tutoring meant I knew she would do well. And she is doing well, consistently near the top of the class for most subjects whilst some kids are struggling. Having said that, my principles might have gone out of the window if the choice was grammar or terrible school, but I knew our choice was grammar or good comp.

Parents sending their kids to regular tutors aren't doing them any favours. At some point in their life, they won't have tutors. Even if you keep it up in secondary, they won't have that sort of support at uni. They have to learn to learn independently. Again, I think it's different if you have a specific issue, eg a friend's DD is really bright but really struggled with English, so had an English tutor and scraped a C in her GCSE, alongside a host of A and A* in everything else.

Just be proud of your DC for doing so well and try not to think about everyone else.

[TryingAndFailing39]

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 work in a selective school and I don’t agree with this.