Is it the norm to have tutors for primary school children these days?

[Sugarbeach]

I didn't think it was the norm, but it seems that it is the norm in some part of the country (or the world even). DD is progressing well and is happy at her school, she is about to start Yr 3 where the work is expected to be more formal and there will be a ramping up of the homework I imagine. I was going to just leave the school and teacher to do their job, and not intervene too much unnecessarily. I'm paranoid and thinking whether the majority of children get lots of tutoring at home, so that it seems to be a good school or whether it IS a good school.

So..
is tutoring the norm in your opinion?
Is it mainly done for struggling subjects, or to hot house, or for 11+, or to make up or the lack of teaching at school?

I'm interested to know, it's so different to my days, I feel like I've been living under a rock....

The discussion on here is about whether you need to pay a tutor to cover the subjects your child is learning at school in addition to having the teacher cover them and you help your child where necessary. Adding in whether you should pay someone to teach your child something that the school doesn't teach at all is just changing the subject...

"even if they really excelled at it and loved but the pool time in the school sessions were limited?"
One of mine do go to a club and compete but I find that different to say having private lessons to swim recreationally. That is there hobby and interest, their outlet. My youngest excels at maths and the school has been brilliant and we work with him but do not feel he needs a tutor but he does go to a kayaking club I believe specialist areas are different to academic.

And surely, the answer must be that it is not the norm or necessary as a matter of course to pay someone to cover what your child is already learning at school? I can see that people may consider it necessary in certain circumstances, but not that people may consider it necessary in order to get anywhere in life, regardless of the child, the parents or the school??!!

I think its necessary in areas where every other kid is getting tutored

otherwise, its just nice to have the extra help IMO. Its not so vital where I live now, where I lived before it was, and where I went to secondary school it was as if you didn't get it you were going into the exam having had less teaching than 95% of your classmates!

I think its worth trying the help from home option first, but if that's not right I'll get tutors

Tutoring round my way seems to be the norm - either for getting into selective schools or struggling with a subject.

My DS had a tutor for Literacy as he struggled with subject - now getting up to speed but we need to keep onto top of it as he has now finished with tutor.

Started local secondary school today.

Don't see the need for tutoring for any other reason than above - although not necessarily agree with tutoring to pass selective exams - as when they do get into the school who helps them then - more tutoring ?

I don't think a tutor can make a student poor in a topic appear to be in the top set. I thnk they help with the difference between 2 grades, so will help you to get a pass if you're failing, or will help you get an A if you are A or B material. I don't think they will make a child appear to be able for a school they're not able for

Alot of tutors round here specifically tutor for the entrance exams - so they pass entrance exam then what next ?

Agree Tuna and that is what I was trying to say in one of my posts. In a couple of weeks I am going to have a load of graduates with excellent results who somehow do not live up to their exam result and will drop out. It is a shame and as uni we do all we can but that is where my term "spoon feeding" came from they just cannot live up to their results with all the tutorials we offer in the world. That is a bigger failure to the education system than a child who worked hard and not got an A* but enrolls on a course that is suited to them and excels. Much better for their confidence and for our economy.

It's a complete fallacy that if you have to tutor a child to get into a selective then they will always struggle once there. Some will, yes, but the selectives we qualify for demand almost 100% over VR, Maths & English and my DC's primary gives no help or guidance whatsoever (even regarding the state selectives). DS1 is very bright (tho his English is weaker - still 4a at the end of yr5 tho) so would have absolutely no problems in keeping up but until we got him a tutor he had no idea of exam strategy etc. Also the tutor has given him a framework to cope with the English exam which has given him confidence. Over the summer we were away, so no tutor, & I had to do papers with him. I didn't mind, but DS1 got really huffy whenever I went through his answers with him, felt I was telling him off! But he will take it from the tutor. It really is like teaching a family member to drive, as someone posted earlier.

you did papers over his Summer hols !

Had to: first exam was on the 3rd September! We only did one or two a week, 50 minutes each time; it wasn't exactly taxing &hewouldotherwisehavebeenonhisipodsonogreatloss!

what exam in year 5 ??

Entrance exam for a state selective. And he's just gone into year 6 today. Secondary applications go in end of October.

Scampadoddle - I don't know of any child who was going for a selective / independent school that didn't have a tutor - regardless of their true ability . But as you have said yourself - some will struggle when they get there - which will do no good for the child's confidence or self esteem.

Ah yes we choose by end of October but 11+ in January down our way. Hope it went OK .

Honestly Tuna, I do hear what you're saying & it must depend on the schools in any particular area, but in our area the competition is so ferocious only the bright kids get in, and not all of them at that. How many kids do you know could get an average of say 97% over those 3 subjects, in tough exam conditions, at the age of 10? You'd have to be pretty clever, tutored or not. For the school I'm talking about there are usually 2,500 applicants for about 200 places (perhaps fewer, as there's a sibling policy).

And for this school, if you don't score a certain amount in the first (VR) paper, they don't even bother marking your Maths & English which you do a week later!

And if I'm brutally honest, I don't think the school is worth the hype. I mean, it's good, but it ain't Westminster...

I have read about half of these posts and will finish reading them but I feel compelled to add my two pennies worth.

A number of people have commented that it is the uneducated immigrants who are paying for the tutoring as they do not know how to tutor children at home what with their limited knowledge due to lack of education yadayadayada.. (breadandbutterfly)

The parents I know who tutor are immigrants from the sub continent but their written and spoken English is certainly better than the British born neighbour. They are also educated at a very high level. Certainly higher than the middle class stay at home British mums who leave everything to the teachers.

The immigrants are tutoring to ensure they are giving their children the best start they possibly can. Also, they come from a tradition of hard graft pays off thought process. They learnt their times tables from 1-12 by 6 years of age. They knew their Pythagoras Theorem at 10. They have Engineering and Economics degrees. They work (both parents) full time to pay for the nice house in a nice suburb and the tuition. They spend their time taking their kids to the museums, parks etc etc. They pay for tuition because they do not what their kids to go to secondary school with the dodos child next door who is a bully as he is bigger (naturally) than their kid in size. They want their child not to have to struggle in life due to lack of education/drive.

Now, what I do not understand is, why do middle class mothers say they dont teach their child anything but the child 'figured out' how to read at the age of 2.5 all by themselves? Atleast the immigrants are honest.

Why are the schools failing the children? If they were not, there would be less tutoring surely? (basic supply and demand?)

As for only middle class people having brains to talk to their children about things is bullshit spoken by a dumb uneducated middle-class SAHM preveledged enough by inheritance or marriage to be able to be a SAHM while the immigrant pays (by paying taxes) for their benefits.

Come at me, but please, one at a time, I wear glasses...

I think our children are going to have to compete with the Indian and Chinese children very soon. The British schools are failing our kids in basic English and Mathematics (IMHO, the backbone of education).

You can take the child to as many museums and muddy play areas as you like. It is not going to teach them hard graft and that boring things have to be done too. It is not going to teach them what 74*98 is without using a calculator (not that this is required, nor it is a sign of intelligence, but it surely is a good workout for the braincells).

I think we should be asking WHY schools are failing our kids rather than why there is an increase in tutoring.

scampa funny you should mention Westminster...my DS's prep school did all the spade work for his entrance exam, but for any boys from schools not as adept, they would have needed a tutor. Or hardcore help from parents.

I don't tink one is morally superior to the other. Or one makes the boys better prepared for the school and its academic rigour. All much of a muchness. And no one is crashing and burning withoin weeks of arrival.

To be honest there is no evidence of DC crashing and buring, unable to cope etc due to tutoring...just a few anecdotes on MN.

The only thing I disagree on is the comment that an immigrant is paying the benefits of a SAHM privileged enough by inheritance or marriage to be able to be a SAHM. Surely, if said SAHM is privileged enough to have an inheritance, she isn't on benefits, so she's not living off the hard graft of immigrants, unless her dh or benefactors were hard grafting immigrants...

I agree we should be asking why so many schools are apparently failing our kids, as I do not think it should be necessary to pay for private tutors to do the job a school is supposed to be doing, or to give your child a work ethic you ought to be able to pass on yourself.

As for hard graft - as I've already said, I don't think a lot of schoolwork is hard graft (although some people obviously do) and don't think my children need a tutor to learn their times tables, how to do mental arithmetic, etc - that's just easy, repetitive work that you learn through practice. As for working out what 74*98 is without using a calculator, that's the sort of thing my ds1 will do for fun. He considers setting the table to be hard graft... Lucky me that what is work for some is play for others...

rabbitstew, free schooling and NhS are benefits.

I agree with you rabbitstew that why is school work seen as anti fun?! And museums and muddy puddles seen as fun?!

But the family of said SAHM will be paying for those benefits through tax - and then there are the families with SAHMs who do not opt for free schooling and NHS care where they can avoid it, anyway. I don't see a SAHM as a separate unit from the family she comes from or married into. You could say it is an exceptionally sensible way of operating if you are lucky enough to be in that position: one part of the unit earns the money and pays the tax, the other part does the unpaid graft of tutoring the kids and bringing them up, or is the kid etc... it's not as if looking after the children has no economic value, given that plenty of people are willing to pay others quite a lot of money to do this work for them so that they can do other work, instead. It's only a lack of trust of other human beings, human selfishness, inadequacy and self-centredness, a peculiar view of what is and isn't of value, and the weakness of the average UK family unit that can make this a risky option.

rabbitstew, In my experience it is generally the poorly educated lucky by chance SAHM who make such uninformed comments on immigrants and people they feel are beneath them. The working mum generally has no time to think about these things. It is these mums (atleast the area I live in) who seem to hold very narrow views on education, immigration etc.
I know a mum who was laughing at a little girl who started year r being able to read. She thought it was rather funny that all the children ended up at the same level at year end. I find these types of comments really offensive. It's great that the children ended up at the same level but this is nothing to feel sung about. I am struggling to put
Words around what I feel re this type of attitude.