Why is tutoring such a big deal with some people?

[APMF]

We downloaded some past papers. We 'tutored' our DCs in standard test taking techniques ie watch the clock, skip a question if you are stuck and return to it later, recheck your maths answers if you have the time and so on. Now, if parents want to pay someone to tutor their DCs in such obvious exam techniques then my rates are quite reasonable :)

After listening to so many presumably working class parents harp on about middle class parents buying a GS place for their dim? DCs, I wonder if the said parents realise how stupid they sound.

I mean, there is no secret technique that is known only to the Secret Brotherhood of Tutors. Some parents haven't the inclination to do the above and so they hire someone to do it for them. This hardly gives their kids an advantage over yours.

I get it that some of your DCs didn't pass the 11+ but why blame others for the fact that you didn't do your part as a parent or that your DC wasn't clever enough to pass?

Not upset at all- I'm always delighted to answer questions!
"Aplogies seeker if upset you and being nosy just trying to understand your veiws but its hard.

When parents look around schools grammer or comp they make a decisions based on facilities, subjects, ethos pastoral care , distance ect on if it appeals and it if be suitable for their dd before applying and sitting the 11+.

So what im asking is what attracted you to grammer even before the 11+? assumed you looked around and liked the school?
yes we looked round. Dd is also musical and theatry- so that was important.
And as she is a top set person academically, I wanted her to have the opportunity to be in a big enough top set to make learning challenging and interesting

Doid you look around all local schools?
how much choice did you have?

was it grammer or modern?

Yes, we looked round all the local schools. We had a choice of 2 grammars and 3 high schools

are you near the border of lea that does have true comp?

No. That would have been our choice had it been possible.

Do you have privates that offer scholarship or bursary if hes very talented at sports/music and academically bright?

Yes, but not an option for us

Glad to hear your sons happy and doing well at his new school.
Is their option for him to do drama/music locally outside of school as our local church has a choir.

he is about join a youth theatre, and he plays the guitar. It's just sad that other children at the school don't get, as the do at the grammar, the opportunity to try out things that they might not even know they are interested in. The grammar is good at this, the high school isn't. And in most cases, it is far more important for the high school kids, whose parents might not be in a position to show them new things.

I cant speak about secondrys as mines in primary no 2 but both have been leafy affluent areas with mostly middleclass parents-nothing special about just grammers. Also as you dont have playground so much possible you not seen all the parents maybe more even mix than you think.

*It isn't. We've been at the school for 5 years now- and it holds lots of events parents come to. There is a practically 100% Boden quotient.

25%private mean 75%state schools get in sounds good.

Do you regret now not tutoring do you think the margin of error was small or big? did sons freinds all get tutored?

I don't rationally regret it. But I do kick the sheets in frustration at 4 in the morning sometimes! No, only ones of his friend's who passed was tutored. Several of the ones who failed were though. My ds failed so catastrophically that I don't think tutoring would have helped him on the day- it was just one of those things

@seeker - You may want to deny people a choice but they don't need to justify WHY they want that choice.

'm sorry, APFM- I don't understand your last post.

Seeker - just out of interest was your ds ill on the day of his exam ? when he came out how did he say it went ? i'm asking because grammar sch. debate aside it sounds really odd that a boy deemed very bright would then fail catastrophically, it just doesnt make sense. I dont live in a grammar area but do you get to see his paper's at all if requested ?

Thanks for claififying.

I assume out of 3high schools you picked one you liked best and academically do well?

Do the other high schools have music/drama?

Reason I ask is is it worth the high schools working together in partnership to try and provide more for the 3high schools?

Have you spoken to head of your school, made suggestions.?
Thourght about joining pta pt govereners and trying to improve provision at the high school?

Any musical parents who can volunteer their time?
any outside providers? even for small cost some parents maybe interested maybe questionaire to parents what provision they want.

We have parent volunteers doing clubs at dds primary.

music itself is expensive as instrument lessons are private and cost of instrument so immediatly excludes some I wanted to but my single parent mum said no couldent affoird it yet my younger sister could yes im bitter about that.

how many of sons primary year went to grammmer ? do a lot go hih school.

As for the test sounds like wasent meant to be and grammer wouldent have suited him academically even if did have better extra curricular activities.

Have you wrote to your mp?
set up a campaign pressure group?

if you so anti grammer what you doing to change the system?

could any parents set up a free school?

A good friend of mine who lives in Kent sent both her DDs to an independent primary, where they received an excellent education in small classes and loads of extracurricular wot not.
Her eldest also had tutoring, and has a place at a super-selective state grammar. Little sis is likely to follow. She is a great kid and will do really well, but it makes my raw inside with rage, which I am careful not to show .
I feel angry and dreadfully sad on behalf of the other kid; the one who is equally or more bright, went to the state primary and had no tutoring, "failed" to get into the superselective and is at the iffy comprehensive skewed towards the lower achievers, purely due to the fact that the brightest and richest kids got creamed off. That system stinks. And I don't blame the other kid's parents for not downloading papers off the internet! Or really my friend. It is the shitty system.

I think the issue here is independant primarys are relativly cheap compared to senior school.

nearest prep here £1400 a term =£4200 a year
£29400 over course of 7years per child of course fees may go up so round it up to £30k for entire primary.

independant senior £11,000 a year
£77,000!

so 30k to get child into selective free grammer looks like money well spent.

If had one child and worked fulltime I could have gone down that private primary route.
I know a fe normal not very wealthy familes who opt private primary as copared with private day nursery fees of 800-1000 a month its cheap as was paying £9000 a year when worked fulltime just on nursery.

So only real alternative for level playing feild for state school is tutoring sad but true its lots more compatative these days.

That's the point. The playing field will never be level. That's why changing the system is the answer, not tutoring or private primaries. Or both...how ridiculous is that?!

I have no problem with selective education from age 14 on as as at this age, the parental influence is less apparent. Kids have made their own minds up whether they want to work or not and exams (rather than an exam) at this age would have much better merit along with a report from the school on attainment and behaviour (all along a governed format and not a written reference. What I object to is an exam (one exam that can be tutored for) at 10 which is too young to start splitting children up from each other. I would rather see an elementary, middle and high school system with a choice of high schools. Basically they could use the existing structures with comprehensive until 14 and have technical colleges, sixth form colleges and grammar schools providing the 14+ education. By 14, you know whether someone has a good IQ and is going to use it whereas at 10 a high IQ could be there but no work ethic and it is too young to see this.

Oh and to avoid the private school advantage at 14 I would do what the NHS does when you start going private and then want to opt back in you go to the back of the waiting list. Therefore all of the local schools would have first choice at each of the three alternatives at 14 from within a set area, then children from state schools outside the area and then private school children living in the area. Really by this age kids have a better idea of what they want to do and which career path to follow and proper LEA funded career advice should be given at this age when choosing their GCSE or vocational qualifications with more input from the school than the parents to give wc kids the advantage of having proper advice from people who know the system.

By the way Mam those fees are reasonable. For preps near us it is about £9500 per year and therefore with more than one child out of reach for most. Plus the ones I looked at were not that great. Thought about it when DS (only child at the time) still in full-time nursery. We seemed to be paying only for small classes which is not the best idea.

@seeker - to use your word, I was being a bit 'petulant'. You was asking someone to justify why they were choosing a GS. The way that I see it, if someone wants to take away my right to choose I would rather that THEY justify why I shouldn't have the choice.

Good point about work ethic up thread. Some Grammars select just on VR. So, you could have a bright, articulate child with a wide vocabulary (who will likely pass easily) that's also likely not to bother to work very hard and who is disruptive. Why do they deserve state funding for an academic education ahead of a child with a smaller vocab - perhaps less well read, English a second language etc? This child could fail. This child might also have an incredible work ethic.

@losing - We considerered 13+ as a means of saving money by delaying the crossover to private. Then we looked at the test papers. At 11+ they test ability as opposed to subject knowledge. Is that a true test of ability? The jury is out on that one. But at 13 they just wouldnt be able to compete against those that were attending highly academic prep schools.

If you think that the odds are stacked against a 10 year old that is not at prep school or an academic primary then the odds will be even worst at 14.

Hence why private kids would go to bottom of the list.

"@seeker - to use your word, I was being a bit 'petulant'. You was asking someone to justify why they were choosing a GS. The way that I see it, if someone wants to take away my right to choose I would rather that THEY justify why I shouldn't have the choice."

I don't think I was, was I? I try not to let this be about individuals.

I think private fees depend where in country you live.
we have loads of independants and drives down price.
Also I suspect that private preps grammer areas may charge more as people use it as shortcut to passing 11+.

Privates doable for us just with 1 at prep but would struggle with senior fees. we have 3 so have to play the state system.

dd used to go rc primary only small %went onto rc secondry as so far away from where we live our lea has no faith secondries so kids have to travel long distances.

Find it slightly comical that we in non grammer area that seeker may consider it educational nivarna/mecca we have proper comprehensives but we also have some of worst secondries in uk and I dare say compared to some of inner city academies the secondry moderns probably quite nice in comparision.

Unless we very wealthy , bursary then couldent afford private and we not rc so wont get that school. The 3weel performing academies are chance, the new free school out catchment and miles away and the coe would need to go church more to stand a chance.

out of interest whats the gcse pass rate for both schools seeker?

whats the value added and %of brightest cohort?

losing trust -interesting idea-maybe we need a middle school as some areas like windsor have them.

or maybe we need entrance exams at 11, 12 and 13 so people get extra chances?

@losing - Your solution is to leave kids in an all ability school and then at 14 select the smartest for GS just in time for GCSES???

Do you really think that after coasting for the last couple of years, two years in an academically demanding GSs is going to have a measurable affect come exam time?

The reason why the selective school model works so well from an exam passing viewpoint is that the hard work starts at aged 11 and not at 14.

Comprehensives are all ability schools, but they do not teach in all ability classes. I think this is where the misunderstanding is coming from.

@seeker - I think that most people are aware that comprehensives don't teach all 100+ kids as one.

I think some are deliberately choosing to misunderstand, seeker.

Oh of course all children in comps are coasting and to be honest under the system there need not be gcse's

losing - You are in favour of GSs but with selection at 14. Implicit in that is an acceptance that comprehensives aren't as academic as they could be. Otherwise, why bother transferring to a GS at 14?

The bright kid will therefore be 'coasting' because he won't be challenged.

Anyway, if at 14 the kid is clever enough to pass the test for GS then isn't that proof that the school he is already at is a good school?

It's a Catch 22 situation. You should only be offered a GS place if you pass the test at 14. But if you can pass the test then the school you are at must be good so you don't need a place at the GS so the place should be awarded to someone with a greater need. But that kid must first pass the test.......

Sorry losing. Back to the drawing board.

Go back and read. My issue is with selection at 10. No account for late developers or hard workers.

@losing - I did read your post. If you had your way and selection was at 14, my skinny white graduate affluent ass would ensure that my DS is better tutored than the bright working class kid. So back to square one ie bright kids being pushed out by well off tutored kids like mine.

At least at 11+ the bright kid isn't at such a big disadvantage as at 14. Does testing at 10 mean late bloomers are overlooked? Yes but it's not going to get any easier at 14.

IMO testing at 7+ is much fairer. You can tutor a 6 year old in maths as much as you want but your returns will be negligible :)

But, even if 7+ testing was acceptable,once again your typical MC toddler will probably be more literate and be better at maths (according to various studies) so back to square one ... again.

Instead of pulling down selective education shouldn't people focus on making non selective schools better?

All I hear is that by having pushy parents like me and bright kids like my DC at your school everything is going to improve for you. That is not a solution.