Changes to 11-plus to stop middle-class parents 'buying' access to grammars by hiring tutors

[breadandbutterfly]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2241411/Changes-11-plus-stop-parents-buying-access-selective-schools-hiring-tutors-children.html

Similar article in the Times apparently but paywall.

The school is more selective. I did say in schools which were semi selective. If we take a DC at 3 we will not " weed them out" as you put it. The pupil can if parents wish stay untill they are 18 ( subject to paying the fees of course).

Not all pupils stay. Occassionally we will uproot a real weed ( someone who cannot fit in with our style of discipline mostly). These DC will usually pester their parents to leave us anyway. We do not try to stop them although we do not actively seek to remove them.

Not all independents will do that.

Why shouldn't people hire a tutor if they want to? A tutor will not suddenly make a child more intelligent. The tests are quite difficult and I'm sure a tutor would mainly come in handy to help a child know what they have to do, rather than tell them the answers, IYSWIM.

I have one child at grammar and one at comprehensive. I didn't have a tutor for them because I didn't want them to 'scrape in' due to the help and then struggle once they got there. But I cannot see the issue with people hiring a tutor for their child if they want to.

"I work in a behaviour unit, some of the kids have siblings in grammar schools. You can't generalise that it is full of middle class parents."

You appear to be generalising that children in behaviour units are not middle class!

His point was why would people pull their children out of private school to go to grammar if they could afford to go private?

I can possibly give an answer to this from my school prep. Prep fees are cheaper than senior school and can be within the reach of fairly modest incomes. As I said, we do not teach NC and that gives us the opportunity to offer a stronger grounding in the basics including those which will pass a DC through the 11+. The local state schools cannot do this and at least two of the local primaries are not choice ( if you get my drift). Its those parents that will pay for prep.

Mostly those DC leave at 11 having passed for Grammar School ( our schools job done - getting them there).

So bottom line - why go to grammar? Usually its about income and fees. If we get a really outstanding DC who we want to really really keep we do offer a top scholarship (100% fees) to try and keep them and we usually do.

I didn't say that seeker

I am one of those who took the 11+ "blind" in the 1970s. It was, as I remember, sort of assumed who would pass and fail before we'd sat the first test and the results bore this out.

Nowadays it seems everyone thinks their dcs should have a grammer (sic) school education and actively move to areas which still have them. I was looking at the house prices where I lived as a child and they are ludicrous. When I lived there there was a mix of people, now even an ex-council house is knocking £500K so if you have spent that kind of money on a totally indifferent property to get into the area then I suspect you are going to be heaping an awful lot of pressure on your kids to pass the 11+.

Yes, you did, notnagging. That may not have been what you meant, but it is what you said.

ponders
"In the bad old days of the national 11+ - before comprehensives, when all children in what is now Y6 sat the exam - there was no tutoring..."

Whilst I realise you're talking about pre-comp days, I have to say that back in 1976/77, I was tutored by my primary teacher for the 11+ - infact, the entire class was tutored, or rather, shall I say "familiarised"? I also know that others in my GS yr1 class were also "familiarised"at their primary schools.
EdithWeston is correct, Bond books for the 11+ have been available for eons and I can vividly remember standing in the queue in WH Smith whilst my Mum ordered several of them for me, after my teacher had recommended that she do so. So there you have it, tutoring and practice for the 11+ isn't anything new.

"You can't generalise that it is full of middle class parents."

Just compare the number of kids on free school meals. That will tell you which schools have more middle class parents. If someone can find me a grammar school that has a higher than average proportion of pupils on FSMs then I will eat my hat and post the video on here.

Letty, same for me. I think the big difference between then and now is the internet and access to information about schools. It is so easy now to get information about a wide variety of schools, which just was not available in the 1970s.

I'm not sure access to information is an improvement. I know I've spent far longer worrying about my ds's education than my parents ever did about mine. Back then there was just an acceptance about what your child was capable of. Like you, I knew whom was expected to pass and fail and there was no stigma or angst attached either way. Surprising when there was a big difference in opportunity between getting O levels and CSEs (our grammar didn't offer CSEs).

Piggy - I did the 11+ back in 76 too and I'd never seen any test like it before at all.
I still passed though and went to the grammar school.
Looking back I feel my DM should have been more on the case

• And got us some of those practice books from Smiths !

Never mind, no harm done

"In the bad old days of the national 11+ - before comprehensives, when all children in what is now Y6 sat the exam - there was no tutoring..."

I took the 11+back in 1965 and even then the dim but parents could pay got in private tutors this was in addition. Schools also tutored (many had also pre selected those who were destined to grammar school long before at the tender age of 7 in fact).

Independent preps most certainly tutored back then

Tutoring was as widespread as it is now as was the issue of postcode allocation to grammar school, even though therewere no post codes.

I recall the tss pot Head of my last primary selecting all those who went to grammar school according to their addresses. Middle class professionals only ( he occassionally made a mistake and sent a w/c kid from a two up two down on a fold who hadan address in a middle class posh boys area! Fool and tsser are too gentle for him. I hope he is rotting in his six foot under grave.

As for preps - well I can tell you of the dim young lady who tried to tell me I was not grammar school , let alone Oxbridge material. She spent five years in grammar school and couldnt must two bloody O levels. She failed CSE maths. Her only pases were Home Economics and Art. She went on to teacher training college ( god forbid!) and is now probably teaching your kids.

I should have added - thats what happens when you get parents with money and a good tutor. Dim dim dim get the places. Still applies today.

Pretty sure she isn't, Ronaldo.

I would have thought you'd be in favour of the system you outline - keep the working class kids away from the RP lot? Sounds to me very much like your own ideas about education!

"Just compare the number of kids on free school meals. That will tell you which schools have more middle class parents. If someone can find me a grammar school that has a higher than average proportion of pupils on FSMs then I will eat my hat and post the video on here"

I'll join you, playschool. I have a nice wooly one here.
You only have to look at the list of first names in my grammar school dd's class and compare it to the list of first names in high school ds's!

"In most cases, tutoring for the 11+ is not about teaching children something useful. It is about teaching specific skills which apply to this particular type of test only. If you want to get 100% innthe maths, there will be topics that will probably not have been covered by the time a child sits the test, but apart from that it's just teaching them how to jump through the hoops very fast indeed."

Not in my experience. I haven't tutored to the 11+ but to 11+ type entrance exams and we used 11= practice papers. It is ludicrous to say that children being tutored do not learn anything useful. Some of it is new, some of it is reinforcing n a way that's never been done at primary school, some of it is deeper understanding. It is certainly an increase in a child's knowledge and ability.

If you think that's bad - and a lot of people obviously do - then go ahead and ban tutoring. I think it's a really, really stupid idea. I really don't use that word lightly.

Then OSN that is where you are completely wrong. You clearly havent really read what I believe in - or not.

PS OSN U hope she is not teaching your DC but how do you know someone similar is not? People like her were common place and it was the standard stock of most teacher training institutions back in the 1970's and she would only be around 57/58 now. Possibly could be a HT even. You really do not know.

Well, this is what I've surmised from your posts over months: tell me what I've got wrong.

You do not wish your middle class son to have to cope with non-middle class - or middle class of the wrong variety - children, as such children do not talk correctly, mock anyone who doesn't watch X Factor, don't value achievement or effort etc.

You consider that education and teaching in state schools, particularly state schools with a broad range of ability, is generally lacking and discipline poor.

As such, you think that selective private schools, HE or grammars are the only way forward for bright middle class children.

As such, I would have thought, a system which chose who got to go to grammar school by postcode would probably suit you quite well!

Can I ask approximately how much tutors charge? And how many sessions would an 11+preparation 'course' take? I'm just wondering how affordable it is for people on normal incomes, as the thread title implies that it is the sort of thing mc parents can afford. We don't seem to have tutors around here (no grammars, indies or private schools). Do teachers at state primaries prepare puplis for 11+? Ours concentrate on sats in Y6 ages 10-11.

Teachers at our comp willingly offer extra help outside of lesson times to pupils who ask, whatever level they are working at, so we have never felt the need for a tutor.

Well they have a male HT, for a start, and I can only think of one female teacher in her late 50s that either of them has ever had at secondary - and she's just died of breast cancer, so even if it was her, she isn't teaching them now.

I do know that if they've had any teachers with similar educational backgrounds to the woman you describe, these women must have done something in between to up their games.

I have said
a) I want my DS to attend a school where there is homeogenity of variance. Where other DC are like us. That is not necessarily the same as "being middle class".

b) I do think discipline is a big issue in state schools. Correct.

c) Your conclusion . No.

Oh, it's just you mention your middle classness a fair bit, so I thought it might be quite an important aspect of the 'PLU' business.

"Homogenity of variance" Classic

What does that mean ? Diverse, but not too diverse ?
Just like us really ??

I do know that if they've had any teachers with similar educational backgrounds to the woman you describe, these women must have done something in between to up their games

You think so? Sorry to disillusion you. Many such teachers went into training in the 1960's and 70's. Even in the 1980's/90's ( even now I woulda say even if the anti is upped and the qualifications seem higher)

I can take you to a number still teaching now. I know they havent changed any. I know their qualification base. Not all of them are really bad teachers to be truthful but if you think teaching is full of the bright and the best. Think again.