To NOT arrange for my child to be tutored for 11+?

[Spongblobsparepants]

I know I’m a bit late to this one, but it’s occurred to me that every single family I’ve spoken to, who’s child is attempting to get into grammar school, is having their child expensively tutored to within an inch of its life.

I always thought that the point of the gs system was to act as a leveller and allow clever children from all backgrounds to have an excellent education. I remember saying as such to the mums of the two others in their class who are doing the 11+….before realising that they too are forking out vast sums for tutoring.😳

Now in feeling like the idiot, as all I’ve done is shove a few past papers and a workbook in front of my child, to give an idea of what to expect.

It helps that mine is ambivalent about where they’re going, the gs itself is out of county and the local state comp and its sixth form is good. My main worry is my child getting bored and mucking about there to be honest. They’re very bright (not bragging, but it’s true, has been doing yr 6 work for a while) but I’ve not particularly been pushing. I ‘never my fulfilled my potential’ as my mother would say 🙄and am now wondering if I should have approached this as a ‘project’ like the other ambitious parents appear to have done.

AIBU?

I do get that point.

Which is why I liked dd group tutoring. It was as you describe with the VR and NVR. It was exam technique, timing, etc.

When you enquire about the tutoring, they do a maths and English assessment first to see if the children are at the required level in those first. They do say that the 11+ tutoring isn’t advisable for those who don’t pass that assesment and they don’t take them on.

I didn’t bother with tutors for DS. I wanted to know that he’d thrive in the grammar school environment and didn’t feel that may be the case if the been coached to pass the tests; I wanted to know he had the correct natural ability to do well. He passed. We just did a few past papers at home and I bought a couple of workbooks which sat unused.

I kind of agree with this. My son was bright enough to get into a super selective with minimal preparation. He practiced a handful of papers (I agree it would be crazy not to given them some familiarity with the type of questions beforehand) and we had a day before "ooops it seems he needs to know some algebra" panic. However, he didn't get on particularly well as he is fairly lazy and not that interested in very structured academic school work. I suspect the slightly less bright but hard working and conformist pupils who were happy to do lots of preparation for the test probably got on better!

I find this thread so confusion.

Tutoring is basically cheating, oh but I spent x hours a week doing test papers with Johnny.

Oh YOUR kind of tutoring was cheating, mine was "just" exam prep.

1-2-1 tutoring? Oh, expect to pay for tutoring for the rest of your life as your dummy child won't possibly manage grammar. But yes MY group lessons is fine because they aren't getting personalised tutoring which is definitely just cheating.

Look, I get that pushing a child to just "pass" a test might not set them up for success at grammar. But all children are different aren't they. I would say all would benefit from having some idea of what is expected of them. Most from being introduced or even - god forbid - being taught math concepts they haven't yet learned, or explained how poetry comprehension their school hasn't covered works. Some might be great at 3/4 but need a little more help in the remaining subject, do they really not deserve a chance of place in grammar just because they have one area of perceived weakness at 11?

I know, it’s crazy isn’t it.

At the end of the day, children need to be prepared to take an exam (thier first one under exam conditions, pretty daunting for most ten year olds).

The exam contains things they haven’t covered in school. So, how are you ever going to prepare them for that if you don’t teach them yourself, or get a tutor to do it?

FWIW, dd only had group tutoring sessions as they were the cheaper option, and dh has a maths degree so he was really competent to help her with work books at home.

If it had all been left down to me, who didn’t have a clue (and I passed the 12+ myself, back in the day, 30 odd years on, I’d forgotten all about the VR and NVR bollocks and it was gibberish to me), I would have had her in single tutoring sessions twice a week as I would have been as much use as a chocolate teapot at home.

Its just a another way for parents to argue about their choices.

Having done the old 12+ myself, I knew how different the questions and the exam format is to anything dd would have experienced. I’m old, so when I was doing it in 1991, my school did practice papers and mock exams in school time, so no one had extra tutors, it was all done in school time.

There was no way I was sending dd in, completely unprepared for what was in the exam. It would have been really unfair on her and setting her up for failure. Not because she’s not bright enough to keep up at a grammar, but because the 11+ questions are something she’d never experienced.

Oh, that's too bad, OP, I'm so sorry. Where we live near London all the parents start tutoring in Y3-Y4 - it's that competitive. I don't think there is little chance of a good career/wages in 10-20 years for our kids if you are not in some private school or in a grammar. Most of non-specialist office jobs will be taken by AI soon and it will be extremely competitive for everybody. Where we live there are 1000 candidates for 65 places in every grammar school. It's insane. We have spent over 3k for tuition/materials, but I know of parents who have spent ca. 10k.
Maybe manual jobs will be safe for a while...

If your child gets bored easily and is liable to start mucking about their likely to do better in a grammar school where they are constantly stretched than in a comp where they are able to coast.

I get bored easily and was always happy being top middle of the pack. But there's a big difference between doing enough to stay top middle of a selective school where you are in the top 25% of the population compared to top middle of a comp.

where they are able to coast.

More totally outdated assumptions about comps.

100% this. The school we are sitting is unique in that it has a sibling policy. There is no concern that once passing the test (which is extraordinarily competitive, 2000 odd students for 80 spaces) they’ll need tutoring or won’t be able to keep up.
There will be siblings in their class who didn’t take the test at all.

grammars should provide pastoral support to those struggling keep up the same as any other school.

parents know their school and know their kid. This sweeping “they’ll need tutoring” or “they should be able to get in without tutoring” doesn’t apply to every school or student but parents do know what applies to them.

Don't be silly
Only 5% of young people in England attend grammar schools. They’re almost unknown in Scotland.

The rest of the UK has plenty of young people doing very well, thank you.

These comments also totally disregard any special learning needs. Some children may be really intelligent but struggle with exam conditions. They are perfectly capable of thriving in grammar (where the relevant support will be provided) but perhaps not at taking the test. SEN does not = stupid.

Familiarity with content, doing past papers and exam technique over a shortish period of time versus hours of intensive tutoring over several years. Latter either won’t pass or will struggle once there. I think it’s cruel not do familiarisation/past papers if you are getting them to sit exam.
We are in a none super selective grammar area. Lots of children have once a week tutoring for part of yr5 - this is the familiarity/past papers type of tutoring.
I think where it tips over is when children are pulled from usual activities and spending multiple sessions a week at tutors.
I’m a guide leader and we have children who drop out to fit in more tutoring or won’t come to our session 4 days before exam as they are cramming. I can usually tell who is going to pass and it’s not the intensively tutored lot.

Grammar school isn’t a guarantee that you will be successful in life anyway. It’s not some golden ticket.

I went to one of the best grammar school in the country.

You’d not know it to look at my life, believe me 🤣 It’s actually embarrassing to admit where I went to school with how my life panned out, right from when I left at 16.

I am hoping the difference with my dd is a supportive family life, that’s what I was lacking (not my parents fault, my mum died horribly when I was 11 and my poor dad had a breakdown and was left with mental health issues for the rest of his life and we had no other family, so that was a massive factor in my failure to achieve).

For what it's worth, a grammar school place doesn't guarantee future success.

I grew up in an area that had got rid of the 11+ and gone fully comprehensive. But we lived on the edge of the county, and the neighbouring county still had a well-regarded girls grammar, and a similarly well-regarded boys grammar.

A couple of kids from my class (not me, I don't think it even occurred to my parents) sat the tests, but only one girl got in.
5 years later, a whole bunch of us joined said grammar school for A-Levels. We re-met this girl from primary school and compared GCSE results. There were about 10 of us, and we'd ALL out-performed her.

I didn't tutor DS for the 11+ because I don't agree with it and also because I didn't think he was anywhere near passing it. Birthday is the end of August, in the early primary years he was asked to go to several intervention classes for maths/ handwriting etc.

He sat the exam anyway. Hadn't even done any past papers (I offered, he declined) and somehow scraped a pass. I then worried how he would cope in a grammar surrounded by kids who had been tutored. He was never top of the class but didn't struggle. Several kids had tutors throughout, and many more had subject specific tutors for GCSE.

I personally think the teaching at his grammar was pretty crap and suspect he would have done better in a good comp. His school seemed to almost expect that children were still getting additional help. Homework was never collected and properly marked, there was a lot of "peer reviewing" or just checking they done it by glancing at their books.

If you are both happy with the alternative then I wouldn't tutor. Just see how they go and decide from there.

I understood schools were obliged to follow same county council priority rules re: looked after children and ECHP and that these criteria are prioritised before the test.

I understand lots of children with SEN don’t have ECHPs though

Yes, exactly. You can have a very clever child with, say, Dyscalculia who will REALLY struggle to pass the math paper (and would be unlikely to have a ECHP), but can get on with math just fine with the right adjustments once they are in a grammar school. But might score incredibly in all other areas.