To not understand why parents are so unwilling to take my advice (tutor)?

[rosesinmygarden]

I'm a very experienced tutor and teacher. I tutor students for high stakes exams and have had excellent results and many happy customers for about 15 years.

I offer a lot for my price. Homework, lesson reports, parents' consults, extra resources and advice between sessions as well as years of experience tutoring students in the area. I do all this happily as I want my students to succeed.

Over the past couple of years I've noticed parents are becoming really unwilling to take on my advice. I'm constantly finding that they argue back and become very angry and accusative if I give constructive criticism/advice. They seem less and less willing to support their child or put any effort in, yet want stellar results. This exam requires a team effort for success. An hour a week with a tutor will not guarantee fabulous success for most. And why hire a tutor with my experience, then choose to ignore their advice or even accuse them of having an ulterior motive when they attempt to tell you something you don't want to hear?

I've been accused of all kinds lately and am finding that my results are slipping as a result of this change in attitude. It's really affecting my motivation. I've always loved my job but am finding it quite soul destroying at times lately.

All you have to is look at that thread about the woman whose 13 yr old ddwanted to bunk a presentation because the dds picture was going to be shown Along with the rest of the class.

Half of posters were like support your dd! demand the teacher remove it.🙄
I'm apparently old skool as i thought it was fucking nonsense and she should tell her dd welcome to the real world where sometimes you do things you dont like. Everyone lives and eventually you get over it....

I think its modern parenting styles / insta parents

I'd suggest a "contract" or standards of behaviour" you review with parents when you accept them.

@Ifyubrgku I think the original idea (many many years ago) was that by testing material that hadn't been taught you would discover someone's innate, raw intelligence rather than how well they'd been taught. For example, some language aptitude tests (not for the 11+) use an unusual language, that none of the participants will know, and test their ability to spot patterns and apply general principles. Back then grammar schools had egalitarian principles.

However these days, the schools are fully aware that it's very difficult for a bright child to get a place if they haven't been tutored. They don't care, because they want to get "middle class" children whose parents pay for tutoring. Grammar schools now are widening the poverty gap, rather than the original aim of giving bright, poor kids a chance.

To be able to thrive at a grammar school, you need to show that you’re capable of studying above and beyond what you’re being taught in the classroom and that you have to motivation to do that.

Gerbils,

I think you are more than capable of helping your 10-year old. A lot of “help” is just getting them to do the work. For example, I think I used to support/help my 2 DC quite a lot, but that didn’t entail me being a maths or English teacher. It involved me being organised and up to date with what they were doing at school. It was me recognising that at school, they aren’t actually learning as much as you think, and you needed to supplement it at home.

When I say supplement, I mean things like; making sure your DC has books, and encouraging them to read every night. At 10, they can do that alone. Buying age appropriate maths books and have your DC sit at the kitchen table and do a couple of pages most nights. Or, as I did, I took my DC to Kumon and they did maths for 10 mins every night. This also encourages discipline and that is why I said I used to help/ support my DC, because they now don’t need to be prompted to study.

My 2nd DC is struggling a bit with English Lit GCSE and I asked on here for resources and got amazing tips. I then bought a couple of things to help him. I downloaded the audio book.

You don’t have to be a teacher to help your child. You just need to support them and be a bit resourceful.

Exactly this.

Priorities.

Priorities, yes. But largely the priorities of the parents. As it's not really possible for a bright 10yo whose parents don't understand the system to organise tutoring for themselves.

For me this is just another reason to scrap Grammar schools. They're mainly only accessible to those whose parents can afford tutoring. And the parents' attitude reflects that - you pay to get your DC into the only decent school in your area.

Yes, this is a massive issue for me and why I have had serious concerns about whether to even let DD apply. It just feels like a lot of kids with a disproportionate number coming from families with very pushy parents. And it worries me.

I think some PP are overlooking the appeal of a grammar school place to many parents. If your DC gets a place, there is a guarantee that every. single. child. in your DC’s classroom comes from a family where parents actively sought out:

• registering their DC for an exam 3-6 months in advance.
• taking their DC to an exam outside of school hours, more often than not, on a Saturday.
• most likely doing some sort of exam prep, be it self-study in workbooks, tutoring, or a mixture of both.

Every pupil up and down the entire school comes from a background where education is valued to that level. The difference it makes to the culture and learning environment within the school is worth its weight in gold.

Absolutely this. And unfortunately the effect of all the money going there is that the Grammar schools (and church schools - back up if don't pass) end up being the only decent schools. Our Grammars and Church schools around here are fabulous. But the Comprehensives are dire. It's not right.

@Riversideandrelax We are lucky that the comprehensives around here are good. So I'm conscious that I have room to be all lofty and "that doesn't fit with my principle" if I want to because DD could go to at least 2 other schools and get a really good education - the key thing we're debating is single sex vs co-ed and culture of the school, including extra curricular. I know that's not the case everywhere.

I have to admit - this is one of the things that puts me off a bit. Not so much the ones that you're talking about here, but the reality that there are LOADS of parents at grammar schools for whom the list would look more like this:

• Have been tutoring children since year 2, insisting on lots of homework and self learning over other activities/free play.
• Obsessively talked to other parents and was secretly (or not so secretly) very competitive/judgemental if other children did better/worse/less effort
• Spent hours weekly (or daily) with their child teaching them and cajoling them to learn the additional material

This thread is a demonstration of why grammar schools need to be abolished

1. full of 'average' children whose parents can afford tutors
2. description of children as 'average'
3. hours a week for 9 and 10 year olds in extra school work when they should be developing their physical and social skills outside school

Instead comprehensive schools need to be given resources to make sure pupils have opportunities and develop confidence. Schools managed this under new labour but funding cuts and Gove's curriculum have put this on back burner

My DC went to super selective grammars without tutoring. They thrived there, got excellent A-Levels and had a great school experience. It was clear who had been heavily tutored to get in and some had really awful school experiences, struggling to try to keep up. Over invested parents were the real culprits in this. I would say this is a worse scenario than what you describe.

As a GS parent, this is not my experience, nor do my kids’ friends’ parents give me this impression.

Yes drive to succeed is important but that has to come from within the child themself, rather than being imposed on them.

Reassuring to hear.

I do worry though because around here, it's super selective. And I've met some of these sort of parents already. Admittedly, I've also met ones who are NOT like this and who are working on places at local grammars. But it's a concern.

Ultimately though, I am not convinced that DD is motivated enough for academics for grammar too. This thread has really reminded me that I've said all along - I'll get her a tutor to teach her the stuff she doesn' tknow but SHE has to be the one who is driving it as otherwise she'll never make it. So I'll stick with that.

Children will get tutored whether grammars are abolished or not. I was surprised once I became the parent of teens just how many are being tutored for GCSEs—friends, colleagues at work, SIL…the more parents I connect with, the more I’ve found out how widespread it is. What next…abolish all exams because people are paying for tutors?

OP said it herself…paying for a tutor doesn’t guarantee anything. The child has to actually put in the work for any good to come from it.

Parents will always do what they will believe to give their DCs the best chance at a great education…be it 11+, GCSE tutoring, private school, etc. This shouldn’t be a race to the bottom.

Mine took the 11+ and I made it very clear that it wouldn’t be easy to get a place, and that they were going to need to work hard for it. I regularly checked in that they were certain they wanted to continue, otherwise we would’ve stopped.

@LemonCitron I have seen a similar attitude in top indep secondaries re: entrance exams, a ‘line in the sand’ approach with an eye on who will get to Oxbridge & excel at exams at GCSE & A level.

‘My God this is the best English composition I have ever seen in all my 20 years teaching BUT he ran out of time so it’s a C grade & fail, we’ll not admit even though he’s good enough in all other areas & looks like a future Booker winner with that natural flair!’.

As a former pupil of a Birmingham grammar school, I'd like to point out that at least a third of pupils were from "poorer" areas of Birmingham. Whether their parents managed to afford a tutor or not, I don't know. I have no idea how much a tutor costs or whether it's a realistic amount of money for working class parents, but the idea that everyone going to Grammar school is a "rich with average intelligence" person is false. Comprehensive schools need more funding, yes, but you can have that without abolishing Grammar schools.

I tell my Clients that I CAN get their child higher grades (I've had students get two or three higher than their predicted grades) but that the child needs to work with me to achieve that.

Sadly, it's not in your, or the Client's interests to keep a relationship going where they are undermining you or have unrealistic expectations. I have a tutee who decided to only answer one question on a two question paper. Is already agreed I wouldn't tutor them on that subject because they had shown no interest in learning it.

The main subject I was tutoring in, the student could write to a level to get a 6 (B). However, they didn't bother answering some if the questions again so I've had to explain to the parent that I can only take them so far.

I've also given up teaching 11+ to students who are argumentative or whose hearts are just not in for the slog. I've usually had a word with the parents and they've made the decision to stop rather than me having to put a stop to it.

These types of people are just not worth your time or the money. They will damage your business reputation.

I appreciate you explaining OP, as no grammars around here. Still confounded that these are schools fully funded by the taxpayer & they are selecting children based on material that hasn't been taught in their state-funded primaries by exam date!

As others have said, the VR & NVR tests are supposed to be there to cut through to underlying ability, not add a layer that has to be honed to the test (or by completing so many past papers that 50% of the questions they see, they know because they're esentially repeats).

But silly me thinking that grammars are a way to stream the kids that have the raw ability, rather than those who pay & hothouse their Y5s beyond what the DfE expects them to know!

And it certainly stacks up that if the child needs this much practice, they will inevitably be taking a place away from a more suitable/naturally capable child who can't access tutoring-but would take the pace & academics of grammar school in their stride more easily over the following 5 years 🤷🏼‍♀️

House location & 11+ tutoring are certainly the hallmark of buying your way to a better place within the state school system...perhaps we should add VAT to both of those too?

VAT on house purchases…isn’t that essentially what stamp duty is?

You describe yourself as a former pupil, so perhaps you attended in the era before tutoring became widespread? It's a different landscape now.