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?’

From my experience of GS, the majority cope fine without continued tutoring. Tutoring only comes back into play during gcse and a-levels when tutors are hired to top up lessons to ensure good grades or a pass. Then it’s a case of filling in when teachers have been deficient, rather than being pushy parents, although pushy parents obviously tutor as well.

Why take part in trying to get in if you disagree with grammars? People hire tutors. Not just for 11+, now many parents hire them for primary years and then in senior school for GCSE's regardless of being in a grammar or not.

That won't change even if you take away grammar schools, there will always be dc who are tutored through their exams and therefore get better results.

Re NVR there is a variety of exercises. Some you can do and some you can’t. You can pick up marks in the VR which has a bigger part to play. 2 of my dc couldn’t do aspects of the VR without spending ages on them. 1 hardly any. I simply told them to just ignore and carry on, speed is key. They are all v good at maths and reading comp as avid readers with v good vocabulary. All passed v well. Interestingly much of the VR supposedly on the exam didn’t appear. The content of CEM is unknown . Nobody knows what is in it.

It's completely unfair but the sharpest elbows get the places. Be thankful you have state grammars though, none here so it's pay for private or send to sink comp. we did the latter, so dd missed over a year of school due to the horrendous disruption (set school on fire etc)

Out of interest, do grammars do widening participation work like universities do or contextual offers?

I’m not in a grammar area but I’d I was, I’d be prepping my children because I can a) afford to and b) have the education to do so. That is an inherently unfair system for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. I also think it’s wrong that state primaries in grammar areas do no prep. Surely a few sessions or practice papers wouldn’t be that difficult to arrange for those interested in applying? That wouldn’t leave the playing field but would at least give some children practice that might not have had the chance otherwise.

And they aren’t just for the middle classes what a myth to peddle. Plenty have pp kids and just above. Increasingly grammars prioritise pp kids in admissions.

Ps I went to one in the 90's I'd say at least 90% went to prep, it's not a new phenomenon.

In our area (South Coast) A lot of people send their children to Private Schools to be coached for the Grammar! Most children who pass have been prepared since about year 1 or 2 !.My Son had a Private Tutor for about 2 years but didnt pass on the English paper .Felt upset at the time .However at the all boys secondary he attended ,passed several GCSES with high marks ,A levels in science subjects ,and has now got a Masters in Chemistry from a Russell Group uni!Your DCis bright and will do well wherever she goes I expect .However most children will benefit from some coaching if possible (can do it at home with past papers too).This is obviously not a new thing ,as my Mums friend told me she failed her 11 plus in the 60s and many of her friends had been tutored to pass!

Getting bright pp kids up to the necessary levels within primary years, making them apply and reassuring parents re transport is what is needed but you can say that re op kids attending high sets in the better comps too.

We live in a super selective area.
That 1300 sitting for 360 places.

The tutoring is not just about exam practice and familiarity, it’s about teaching the year six curriculum. Children sit the exam in September and it includes the curriculum that they have not yet learnt.

Yes it a horribly flawed system, it puts immense pressure on 10 year olds, costs a lot, skews the local comp.

There are children in my sons year that have been tutored from year two. That’s 4 years! They still are miles behind him in maths as he’s naturally gifted in maths. The brightest children, with help, should still succeed. If they don’t, they will still do well at the comp, as they are bright.

Are you talking about maths?Ours state on the school website it’s year 5 curriculum. What aspects haven’t been taught by Sep year 6?

Prime numbers, algebra spring to mind.

If however you have a child that has been tutored for a year to give them the edge (fair enough) then if that tutor is no longer there, it would be fair to assume that they may struggle on their own as the helps been taken away.

I think a fairer assumption would be that less able kids who've been tutored and passed are also on the waiting list. I don't believe that tutored kids with the highest pass marks achieved those purely from tutoring. It will have helped but they'd have needed capability in the first place.

Prime numbers are taught well before then and are easy. They’re part of most primary classroom displays. Ditto algebra to a certain degree.

Prime number, ratios, algebra all touched on in year five, they don’t go into any depth until year six.

Our school sets it’s own maths, it’s hard. Its not just pick a prime number.
I haven’t time to give you examples as I’m going on the school run!

I worked at a grammar school, it was very painfully obvious which students had been extensively tutored just to gain a place and then all tutoring dropped when they started. If they are not smart enough without all the tutoring for the grammar system it can actually be very cruel. Within 3-6 weeks they are very upset, struggling to keep up with the pace of learning, and having all the self confidence knocked out of them. They may have been near the top of the class in their junior school but put in a class with the brightest of the bright they start to fall down the class.

It will never change though, not while we have the grammar system, and not while the people who can afford tutoring no matter what the cost put having a grammar child above a happy and well rounded, resilient child.

My two grammar children are happy and well rounded, resilient children. They are not mutually exclusive characteristics. I do resent the implication that they are not. We applied to grammar as the only other 2 good school options were religious and we are not of either appropriate religion. Why should my kids have to go to a poorly performing school in special measures because of that.

Life is not a level playing field and whilst we should do as much as we can to level it there will always be unfairness. It is our obligation as parents to do the best we can for our kids in whatever situation we find ourselves.

@Judashascomeintosomemoney

Yes, my dd got into a selective school on musical ability- she had music lessons but did not get selected at primary to play an instrument. A family member had the instrument as we couldn't afford to buy one at the time.she did very well but then I think she would still have done well at any school as she was very driven

Every parent should know if grammar is the right path for their child.
We were told throughout primary that ours was bright (brightest in the class for some subjects).

We had tutoring to ensure he got a place at the school. Everyone does it and we found the money.
It wasn't about tutoring a child who wouldn't cope. I went to grammar as did my husband and we both knew it's the wrong environment if you're not clever enough

windygate

My dps and mil all passed the 11+ in the 40/50s but I seriously doubt their dps could have afforded any tutoring. They barely afforded the uniforms.

Perhaps the primary school teachers may have assisted possibly but I'm speculating. They were definitely from working class backgrounds

“ Why should my kids have to go to a poorly performing school in special measures because of that.“
Why should any child have to go to a poorly performing school in special measures?

I also think it’s wrong that state primaries in grammar areas do no prep. Surely a few sessions or practice papers wouldn’t be that difficult to arrange for those interested in applying? That wouldn’t leave the playing field but would at least give some children practice that might not have had the chance otherwise.

That’s something you would have to take up with LAs that still run selective systems. They are the ones who forbid primary schools from coaching to the test. Often with the added pretence that their tests can’t be tutored for.

@BertrandRussell I have to work within the system as it exists now as it won't change before my kids go through it. Not saying I agree with it 100% but a perfect system is not possible within the budget constraints that schools are under.

The best solution is to properly fund all schools so that individuals can be catered for in the way that suits them best but we can't afford that so we have an imperfect system.

I also think the whole 11+ system ignores the children that will bloom later.

I have a July birthday DS in Y9 and he is almost unrecognisable as the idiot that he was in Y6 I also have a very bright but inconsistent 10 year old daughter - guess what - she's inconsistent because she's a July birthday Y6.

I have no doubt that both of them will do very, very well at GCSE and A-level (as my son is already starting to prove) but an 11+ wouldn't have picked that up. It really annoys me when people say that if you're tutored through the 11+ you wont succeed in a selective environment. We didnt sit the 11+ as we're lucky enough to be able to pay for private but we could well have tutored to scrape through into a super-selective and that actually would have been a brilliant environment for them once they had matured a bit.

I tutored my ds for the 11plus.
Obviously it would be negligent for me to send my child into an exam setting with zero exposure to the material he is being tested on. That would be stressful and potentially damaging to his confidence. Primaries in our area do zero prep for these tests, there are concepts and approaches required that he would have had no experience in.
That is what he was tutored in, not learning all possible answers by rote.
It's not a measure of intelligence, it's a measure of the child's ability to score at a level in a pressured setting and in a way a check to see if they have the support behind them. The support isn't a matter of money, anyone who has the time and patience can access free material and advice on line to give their child a heads up and practice exam techniques.
I chose to use a tutor because it gave us the discipline we required and I have the money, other child I know had no tutoring and passed fine.
The state secondaries around us boast of their 40% a to c pass rate (or whatever the new markings are!). The grammers are 95% plus a or b in some subjects.
It just doesn't compare. Setting makes a massive difference to achievement.
Even the comps around us are using grammer streaming in their year groups. What's the difference apart from scale.