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?’

With ds1 he passed 11+ without any extra tutoring and was accepted by two good private schools but with ds2, on advice, we bought a book on non-verbal reasoning, as we were told that as a state schoolchild, this is an area that would not have been covered. We did a few questions a night over a month (literally in minutes), but that was all and he got into his grammar and, although he is bright, he is not a ultrasmart hyper intelligent kid. So some get in. However, I do agree it is not fair. We found out that all his classmates in his first year had had extra tutoring on top of the advantage that most were from private schools anyway. The school is pretty anti this as some kids can be tutored to get in and then flounder (and bring down exam grades!).

I also think feeder schools to good private schools are unfair, as they tend to pretty much guarantee a place even when the places are limited. ds1's school had one place for every two applicants and yet everyone from the feeder school got in - I don't think they just wave them through but they are prepped (in the same way as the tutored kids) and know what to expect in the entrance exams and how to word replies.

Don't know how you get around this though

Fluffy grammars don’t really have sets bar for maths. And frankly I wouldn’t be the slightest bit bothered if my dc were statistically at the lower end of the cohort.

Re struggling if no longer tutored. Is that the same for those who have everything thrown at GCSEs in order to get the relatively low grades needed for A levels in 6th forms or those who have everything thrown at getting the A levels needed for uni?

So many parents tutor for everything now and there are so many double standards.

Nearly half of secondary kids are tutored

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-49826715

Apologies a quarter. Nearly half in London, on top of the extra funding London kids get compared to other parts of the country.

And all for what end though? DD went to a comprehensive, slightly above average student. Graduated from a RG last year, had grad job waiting. Friends at uni came from very expensive private schools, top uk grammar schools, catholic girls’ schools as well as inner city comprehensives and they all graduated with similar grades from the same uni 🤷‍♀️

My child will be tutored from Year 5.
The tests cover English, maths and non verbal reasoning. What if a child is brilliant at one or two of these but weaker at the other?
My son is only a baby so it is too soon to know where his abilities lie, but I will do anything to give him an advantage over others.
I have taught at private schools, grammar schools, academies and community schools. I hope upon hope he gets into grammar.

I thought grammar school were opportunities for kids from lower income/social background to get into a higher rated school?

Sad that middle class parents who could afford private schools are taking up places.

My DD would never get in a grammar school so I never researched the subject.

Of course some of the children who put in the extra work at tutoring is going to get the place, and so they should? Of course the places shouldn’t all just go to kids who pass exams easily. Some incredibly intelligent children can’t structure exam answers and need extra help in learning to do so, which tutoring provides. In my opinion as a teacher, a less academic child who tries incredibly hard and puts in the extra work through tutoring is just as deserving of a place as a naturally academic child, and just as likely to thrive. I find this attitude about tutors so odd - it’s like a bunch of parents sending their children to do a swimming race and half the parents not bothering to send them to swimming lessons beforehand, and then complaining about those parents who did.

Very few things in education are a level playing field.
Natural ability is hardly merited.
Hard work can be a habit instilled by those around you.
Educated parents can help educate their children.
Availability of resources, e.g. it used to be books but now the internet offers an incredible amount of diverse support from information, to practice, to adapted apps, etc.
Invested parents put more time in supporting and expanding their DC’s education.
...to name but a few factors.

And as an aside IMO private tutoring is always on the rise when the public education system is deteriorating because it is a much more affordable way to support children than private schooling. In countries with rubbish educational systems, e.g. Greece, everyone relies on private tutoring. DCs take as many days off public school as possible so they can concentrate on evening classes and private tutoring evening schools are one of the few businesses to have survived the crisis.

Agree with the last post. A growth mindset is what is important. Studies show it’s work ethic and mindset that get you further than brains. Being bright is not enough.

And sorry I don’t buy this grammars should only be for the poor stance.Most middle class( which is a massive bracket) parents can not afford private schools. Why is this country so class focused anyway?

Would also like to point out that pp numbers are around 30%. Ridiculous to suggest that grammar numbers of pp should be the same. A comp takes all abilities, pp children range in ability. It’s like saying all pp kids should be in the top sets in comps. Those that supposedly care about pp kids should be gnashing their teeth re the high numbers of pp kids that don’t make the progress they should from Sats wherever they go. That is something truly worth getting in a lather about and starts way before secondary schools are even applied for.

I read an interesting article that said the concept of “good at maths/bad at maths” doesn’t exist in a lot of Asian countries. They believe maths achievement is based on effort not innate ability. You do not have to be wealthy to get extra tutoring for your child, you can by prep books and do it yourself as a parent.

The wider societal problem is that many low income houses don’t have a culture of education. Parents don’t read to children or read themselves. Grammars aren’t going to solve that because students from those families are unlikely to get support at home and in a competitive

Sorry posted too soon.

In a competitive world those without home support may indeed suffer.

Back in the 60’s when I went they took your father’s job into account on whether to admit you as well as the 11+

“ And sorry I don’t buy this grammars should only be for the poor stance.”

Well, they are only for the middle class now- do you prefer it that way?

I actually think it is okay that people hire tutors as all they do is go through sample papers and practice / teach them to your child which you can easily do yourself at home. All the resources are available easily to buy and it seems wise to be prepared and to practice in advance regardless as to whether you can afford a tutor or not. You wouldn’t go to a drama audition without practicing and preparing for it for example. I think you should probably have spent a bit of time sitting with your child and prepping them in advance to give them a bit of an edge. Hiring tutors is not really necessary, just saves you time.?

Both of my children had eleven plus tutoring and both passed. Wouldn’t have made any difference if they hadn’t had some prep as they are both very bright but a bit of familiarisation gave them confidence.

Parents what to do the best for their children and tutoring is legal. Grammars give bright children a chance to have a fast track academic education commensurate with their abilities and needs. They then go on to university and lead lives which benefit others in terms of achievement, employment and taxation.

Shakespeare, Pepys, Marvell, Coleridge and Tim Bernars Lee went to grammar schools and benefited, in some cases, millions of others and enhanced their lives. I have no problem with that.

While I was training to teach, we were told that research showed that around 10% of children who got into a grammar school shouldn't have (i.e they only got in with lots of tutoring, but weren't really up to it) and a similar number who should've got in didn't.

It's life, ie. it's not fair, but then neither is it fair that most areas in the UK don't have any grammar school, so naturally clever kids have to make due in local comprehensive, some where they have no option but to go to poor rated ones, unless they can afford to go to private schools, which many can't.

At least your child had the option.

TBF my two went/goto the local comp-amazing school- and they were also surrounded by other kids being tutored up their eyeballs in eng, maths, sciences and whichever language they did/do
It’s rife
I am a teacher and out of school I occasionally tutor but only tutor young chn struggling with phonics- I disagree with 11+ tutoring.
If I’m honest, if I could have afforded tutors for my two then I would have done. I can see why people do, it’s just not bloody fair.

“ so naturally clever kids have to make due in local comprehensive”

Oh, purhlease......

The eleven plus system was introduced in 1944, tutoring was used by parents then as well.
Some parents have always had their children tutored to pass public school entrance exams as well so perhaps it was inevitable that grammar school hopefuls would also opt for tutoring.
Fair or even wise? Probably not but I don't think anything will change.

@Ihateedmundelephant No one is saying that kids who have private tuition don’t deserve a place and no one is suggesting the don’t work hard. There’s nothing remotely odd about the concert that those who can’t afford to pay are therefore at a disadvantage? No?

The question is whether they can continually do well if say young Harry’s parents can’t afford to keep paying?

I’m talking about a particular situation and set of circumstances that I can now relate too. I’m guessing the situation is somewhat similar across the board.

In DD’c class 2 kids have been tutored for years, one 3 times a week. Now there’s 6 of them roughly that take it in turns at the top of the class. Sometimes my DC will do better sometimes one if the other ones but generally these kids as a group get taken out if the class to do higher level work.

My point is, if child A) has had a private tutor for say 2/3 hours per week, covering a range of topics for years then there’s a worry if this stops they won’t be able to keep up. So it’s then becomes apparent that they needed the extra tuition in order to pass and a child who passed it without abscess could thrive there, loses out.

I don’t understand how that concept is hardcore to follow? I feel like a few people are suggesting I’m taking away something from kids that are tutored privately? Of course they work hard and who is to know if they would still be where they are academically if their parents couldn’t afford to pay?.... but that doesn’t help the child that has not been tutored....!

In a class of 30 the teacher has to get on with it. They can’t spend hours teaching the same thing until everyone keeps up and gets it. You will always get those where it just ‘clicks’ and they get it straightaway and don’t struggle. You will then get those who take a lot longer to grasp the concepts and need that extra time spent. This is where the private tutor comes in. They bridge the time until little Harry gets it. He’s then top of the class but it’s so obvious it’s because he’s getting so much more support.

Don’t take it personal. It’s not to say that kids ego are tutored only get there because if this but it becomes difficult to establish how much of an advantage this becomes. This is the sad part for the kid from poorer families.

I utterly despair of some of the attitudes on here. Utterly hideous.

I think there are two different issue here. Specific tutoring to pass the 11+, which is a very particular skill set, and tutoring in actual school subjects once they are at secondary school.
Tutoring of some sort for the actual exam is necessary for most people because you need to learn the “tricks” to answer the NVR questions. I have the required Mumsnet 2 degrees and used to have a high powered job. I can’t do NVR. No problem with the maths or rhe VR, but even after being shown I find NVR very difficult. Some people can do this stuff naturally, but most need to be shown. And tutoring has introduced an “arms race” which pushes the pass mark up. So a kid with just natural ability hasn’t got a hope against a kid who’s done hundreds of rhe bloody things every week for 2 years.

Oh, and the romantic story of grammar schools as a hand up out of disadvantage for the poor but clever is an absolute myth. Of course there were some examples, but they were the exception. It’s alswaya been the preserve of the middle classes. And whoever mentioned Shakespeare and Coleridge - a grammar school was a very different thing in Olden Times!