AIBU to think you should have to declare if you've had private tutoring on your UCAS form?

[ArcheryAnnie]

DS and his mates are at a state school and have sent in their UCAS forms, and are getting offers. They are all good kids of varying ability, most of whom get their heads down and work, but it is really noticeable that the kids who have had extensive tutoring in addition to school are the ones who have the best predicted grades and who are therefore getting the offers they want.

This is obvious, of course. Tutoring works, otherwise people wouldn't pay for it. I have no criticism of anyone who can afford it helping their kid in this way - and plenty do. 42% of kids in London get private tutoring, and the national average is something like 27%.

But other factors in your life that might confer advantages or disadvantages - like going to a private school, or growing up in care - are asked for there in plain sight on your UCAS form. Tutoring, which has such a big impact on your A-level grades, isn't asked about at all. It seems only fair that this is asked about too.

So - AIBU to think the UCAS form should ask how much private tutoring you have had?

This is ridiculous.

What else would you have to declare in terms of advantages? Having a stable home life? Having healthy parents? Having a degree educated mother? How much time people spent talking to you between the ages of 0-5? Whether you ate home cooked food most of the time? How much time each member of you family spent reading in any given week? The average household income of your peer group? Your birth order in your sibling set? If you have a quiet desk to work at in your home?

Just to add, when my daughter got 20/20 in the SATs spelling mock, she readily told her peers it was because she had a tutor.

Her school use a spelling app, and we’re in an area where I’d say almost everyone has access to a smartphone, if not everyone. The spelling points leaderboard is by class and uses real names. Despite it being officially homework that the app should be used every week, one term in I can see that 1/3 of her class haven’t used it even once. My daughter has used it a lot, and it’s really helped.

So to the PP who thinks at least her untutored kids know they got their results from their own hard work... tutor aside, my daughter has - objectively - spent far more time on the spelling app than anyone else in her class. She has earned her attainment, with her own hard work.

DH and I are both bright. Both achieved top GCSE and A-level results, both achieved top degrees from top universities. Neither had tutoring. Our DC are still young, but the ones at school are showing signs of being very bright. Both ‘above age related expectations’ across the board since starting school. If they struggle with something down the line, DH and I will be able to help them. SIL teaches in an independent school, she will also be able to help them. We both speak a few languages and are teaching those languages to our children. Academically (which I know isn’t the be all and end all) they are generally at an advantage. How should we declare this on a UCAS form?

There’s crap ideas and then there’s this.

You haven't said whether your child has a tutor OP but considering you think it such an advantage, my guess is not. At A-level any good tutor is probably an A-level teacher and the children being taught by them will be at no more than advantage than the children in the tutor's class. If they really are doing far better than your child it is probably because they are doing more work.

I went to state school and had a tutor (my request) following moving schools due to moving areas, at the start of what we now call Year 11. It was to cover the topics I had missed because my schools had different syllabuses. It wasn't to hothouse me....I wouldn't see it had any bearing on my UCAS application and no can't see any reason it would be included

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

Those London figures are correct.

I agree with others that it's not realistic, but there's no denying that some children have educational advantages that make a huge difference when it comes to eg getting into grammar or not, GCSE and A level grades, and of course university offers.

I'm not sure what the answer is though. Some parents will always want to prioritise their children's education, whether that's by paying for independent school or tutoring, by providing them with other opportunities (not necessarily paid for), or simply by providing support and encouragement. Others won't. The Pupil Premium ought to be helping to give the most disadvantaged children additional support but I'm not sure how well it is used in practice.

My daughter was recently involved in an interesting initiative arranged by her university in conjunction with a local secondary school. The students were paired up with a year 10 or 11 pupil (chosen by the school) and provided weekly tutoring/coaching in English, maths or science. They needed an A level in an appropriate subject. She found it extremely rewarding and a real eye-opener into how little support and encouragement some children receive. I wouldn't say she'd had a particularly sheltered life, but after her state primary she went to a selective independent girls' school where parents and students had high expectations of them. No one appeared ever to had have high expectations of the girl my daughter was working with.

I don't know why, but it only operated in the autumn term. It can't have been too expensive as the students were all volunteers and the only cost, other than in terms of admin time, was in the transport to get the students to the school (the school my daughter went to was about 5 miles out of the town). An expansion of this sort of programme could make a big difference, I think. The girl my daughter was working with gave her a lovely card at the end of the term saying how much she'd learned.

If they know the course content then brilliant. It doesn’t matter if they’re self taught, just really bright, had tutoring or had helpful parents.

As an employer I need those people. I don’t care if they’ve had a tutor to gain that knowledge. I care that they HAVE the knowledge now. If they had tutoring to achieve it it wouldn’t make a jot of difference.

Odd OP.

but your assuming universities care, they really don't care how or why you get there and some don't care if you complete a program. the level of first year attrition is well factored in.
after all they take in students not only from the uk but worldwide.
they are money making institutions not your bff.

It can't have been too expensive as the students were all volunteers and the only cost, other than in terms of admin time, was in the transport to get the students to the school (the school my daughter went to was about 5 miles out of the town).

I'm not so surprised it only ran for one term. It sounds like a great scheme but what you call "admin time" is not remotely trivial, a scheme like that needs someone very dedicated and with time to put in both at the university and school ends. Did the students have to be police checked? Who paid for that? You'd be surprised at how expensive and how to organise these schemes can be.

how to organise = hard to organise

Get them to record if they were breastfed, and how long for. That gives a boost to IQ. Get them to record how much their parents read to them and talked to them as babies and small children. Get them to record how much sleep they get because that has a big effect, too.

OP, YABU.

Mumtown, universities DO look at what school a dc has attended and many give contextualized offers based on overall school performance e.g average GCSE across the school. and tbh I can't see a university would be that impressed with an applicant who had to have lots of additional tutoring, so it might disadvantage rather than confer any advantage.
FWIW my dc has just had 5 offers including Oxford, from an ordinary state school, no tutoring

but your assuming universities care, they really don't care how or why you get there and some don't care if you complete a program. the level of first year attrition is well factored in.
after all they take in students not only from the uk but worldwide.
they are money making institutions not your bff

They do care and they certainly care if you complete or not. Retention is a HUGE thing and questions get asked if you have a high drop out rate.

Wouldnt it be better if the state schools were funded better so they could offer homework club, followed by tea so that those who perhaps dont get a proper tea have the opportunity for healthy nurishment and similarly those that dont get support have access to help with homework and tricky areas ... as they do in many independent schools.

Er, no.
DD had tutoring in English as there were some teaching issues at school in Yr10 and they didn’t have a proper teacher until Yr11.
That wasn’t her highest grade though, and so what if it was anyway. She worked hard and reaped the rewards.
I also helped her where I was able, as did DH and we will do the same for DS.

Hepsibar, I can't decide if you are trying to.be sarcastic or not. But really parents need to be responsible for nourishing their own children. 100's of areas that need money but HW clubs and tea just aren't part of it.

Hepsibar, 60-70% of privately schooled children have tutors.

Did the students have to be police checked? Who paid for that

DBS checks are free for volunteers.

But the cost of the bus was probably prohibitive.

Hepsibar, I can't decide if you are trying to.be sarcastic or not. But really parents need to be responsible for nourishing their own children. 100's of areas that need money but HW clubs and tea just aren't part of it

Disagree. There are a lot of people out there who genuinely can't afford to feed their kids (and before you all start saying why did they have them then, you can fall on hard times after having your kids). A breakfast club, free school meal and snack at a homework club can make all the difference. Hence why you should donate to food banks in the school holidays because that is when people really struggle due to no free school meals.

There are a lot of people out there who genuinely can't afford to feed their kids

What does lots mean here? Surely as a percentage of the population the vast, vast majority of parents can afford to feed their children?

I wasn't tutored. I did tutor other pupils though.

I achieved incredibly good results. My English A Level result was 100% in all exams and course work - top for my exam board. I was top 5 for GCSE (they send you a letter with the result).

I have a very retentive memory, and a precise knack for understanding what is wanted of you in exams. Where I tutored other students, they performed well above their personal average. I was mainly teaching them methods, not content.

To be honest, I think tutoring other students was as a bigger boost to my results than anything else!

I had tuition in high school as I was part of the first intake in our schools doing separate sciences and we had one extra lesson a week. This was not enough to cover all the content and when I realised I would have got better grades if I had stuck to double science it was too late to pull out. My parents were not able to help me and school didn't so my dad arranged for tutoring. We were a working class family and to find the money for it my parents had to make quite a few sacrifices. I am grateful and the GCSEs I got allowed me to pursue the A-levels I wanted and uni degree. I now work in healthcare.

Your post makes it sound like only the wealthy put their kids through tutoring and this is just not the case. Lots of parents do they just have to tighten their belts and make other sacrifices to afford it.

I am better placed than my parents to tutor my own children and will actively do so if they need the help.