Middle class access to grammars via tutorproof 11+ part 2

[boschy]

May I do this? only there were some contrasting views at the end of the last thread which I found interesting.

One was mine (sorry!): "I think fear actually drives a lot of those parents who are desperate to get their child into GS, so they can be 'protected' from these gangs of feral teenagers who apparently run rampage through every non-selective school in the country.

Because clearly if you are not 11+ material you are a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who likes nothing better than beating up a geek before breakfast and then going to score behind the bike shed before chucking a chair at the maths teacher and making the lives of the nice but dim kids a misery."

And one was from gazzalw: "If you had the choice would you opt for a grammar school or a comprehensive that has gangs?"

Soooo, do people really think that all comprehensives have vicious gangs, and all GS children are angels? Or that only those of academic ability adequate enough to get them through the 11+ should not have to face behavioural disruption of any kind? If you are borderline, or struggling but still work hard, should you just have to put up with disruption because let's face it you're not academic?

PS, re the knuckle dragging Neanderthals I mention above, should have said - "and that's only the girls"

In my opinion, clever teachers can do a fantastic job with the National Curriculum. Box tickers can make a pigs ear out of it, because they can't cope with too many ideas at once. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it!

I would just think you are looking at poor schools,Brycie- I don't recognise the ones that I know from your descriptions.

What is over-involvement of parents? If schools try to get more parents doing what, apparently, most middle class parents are already doing without the school's encouragement, is that pressing for over-involvement, or trying to make more parents aware of the difference they can actually make, themselves, so as to even the playing field a tiny bit? Seems to me, you are damned if you ask parents to get involved and damned if you don't.

I am baffled by this. All the national curriculum is, is a detailed list of the minimum that q child should know/be able to do at particular ages. There is nothing about fun, or how it should be taught or parental involvement- it's just a framework. I think there is lots of daily mail type conspiracy theories about it. It was introduced as a way of making sure that teachers didn't get away without teaching the basics- or bringing their own prejudices qnd social intrwts intonthe classroom.

It's a sort of neutral thing- I don't understand why people get so angry about it.

Private school parents often go on about how wonderful it is not to follow the National curriculum- but they never say what is it that they don't wan their children to learn from it. Which bits do they want left out?

That's a lot of poor schools then. Some of them with a pretty amazing demographic.

" repeating the same topics again and again (I did the Romans 4 years on the trot), of not touching some subjects at all in primary"

yes, teacherwithtwokids, we had that. Also low expectations - there was no subject where a poster was not deemed appropriate homework, inculding at secondary. Music lessons where the children designed CD covers. Projects where little or nothing was taught in class and little benefit accrued from the work (which most parent ended up doing themselves). Early reading - one letter sound a week. Maths lessons where nothing was consolidated but a bewildering array of methods taught for the children to p"practice at home and see which suits best". Childish homework - colouring in for ten year olds. Little or no reading practice in class. English lessons where focusing on the structure of language was discouraged and tedious comprehension was obsessively pursued. (It is more effective to establish comprehension by asking students to change sentence structure and get the same meaning, use different words to get the same meaning, change the meaning by changing the punctuation etc instead of asking dippy boring questions about "how do you think Jonny felt when the park closed for maintenance?".) General sense that consolidation was not for the classroom; teach the method and you've done the job. Failure to recognise the importance of instant recall; so long as they know that 8 x 6 is eight lots of six that's all they need, apparently. Large amounts of time spent on non-academic subjects like nutrition (never done properly) rather than er say maths consolidation which there was no time for, or reading practice which there was no time for. Topic - God how we parents hated "topic". So called integrated work with no focus, always involving a project, always involving too much parental input. Failure to correct in order not to upset the children and/or stifle their creativity - even in literacy? Low expectations combined with setting children up to fail with ludicrous expectations - write a poem homework for five year olds. It just went on an on.

I've got three bright children. All had national curriculum primary education. One I had to revise times tables with for IGCSE - simple task that raised his mock U grade to a B. No joking. No teacher had realised what the problem was. Two others who I'll be giving punctuation and spelling tuition to to prepare for IGCSE because they didn't learn this in school.

It just goes on. It's unsatisfactory.

If teacherwith2kids is right, and I believe she is, then improvements have been made and some of the worst problems eliminated. However parents I know with children STILL in primary are complaining about similar issues.

Rabbitstew: over involvement of parents means that parental involvement is required for children to have a good grasp of essentials. This works against social mobility for disadvantaged children.

And there are children still arriving at secondary school who don't know their times tables. This is really shit. How the heck can you get confidence with early maths if you don't know your arithmetic? How the heck can you start with fractions and algebra, ratio, probability?

I can't get on today again so if I don't respond I'm not being rude

I think that you are misunderstanding the NC- it is, as seeker says, just a framework. You haven't actually said which parts you want left out and I would bet that private schools are teaching all the things in there anyway. It is nothing to do with how it is taught.
Tables are a good example. Tables are taught, and practised, in school but the DC actually has to learn them with instant recall- no one can do that for them and the supportive parent will make sure that they learn them. The child isn't just an empty vessel for the teacher to pour it all in! The DC had to make an effort and want to learn.
A very good example of the effort needed by DCs is when I was doing one to one tuition with year 6. I had 6DCs who were very weak in maths. One boy was the most promising, he knew his tables, however he didn't want to be singled out for extra help and he made no effort- taken back to basics he had the bored attitude of 'I know that, I know that' with the subtext of 'you are wasting my time' - unfortunately, because he closed his mind he then missed the connection when I used it as the basis for something else. In comparison the other 5, who were much weaker, valued extra help and put a tremendous amount of effort into the lesson. The only one not to get the level4 was the boy who didn't want to be there. A couple of the parents approached me afterwards for private tuition- it wasn't something I wanted to do, but I did resolve that if I did it would have to be DCs who actually wanted to make progress and not the parents who wanted it. The parents if the boy who wouldn't make the effort were one of the ones wanting private tuition and I wouldn't have taken him, without a huge change in his attitude.
Teaching is a three way thing, the teacher, the child and the parents. It is well known from research that supportive parents have the most influence on how a child will do at school, you may not like it, but it is true- even in the private sector.
I would still like to know what there is in the NC that you don't want your DC taught (when you have time) because all the things mentioned are not in the NC- you are muddling it up with how it is actually delivered, which is completely different. The NC is specifically to ensure that you can't do the Romans four years on the trot- something that often happened before NC. I wonder if you have actually read it, Brycie?
I can't imagine why you would do one letter sound a week- I would also challenge you to show me where it says that in NC. I would also challenge you to show me where NC says that 10yr old should spend lessons colouring in.

For anyone who has stated that grammars are unneccessary. That top sets in comps can achieve the same thing...there's a current thread about comps whihc don't set. Go figure.

Brycie- the things you outline are just the sort of thing the NC was designed to prevent!

Are you saying that your child "did Romans" 4 years on the trot and didn't learn his tables? If so, the school wasn't following the National Curriculum! I think you are describing a crap school, rather than a crap curriculum.

Word factory, I don't think there's a single "anti grammar" poster who doesn't say they should be replaced with comprehensives with proper setting.

Yes but if comps don't have proper setting...

But most do. And any comprehensives formed from combining grammar and high schools in my ideal world certainly would.

wot seeker said at 9.41 re the ideal world...

Bit of social observation from the carols at my DDs' SM last night. I got chatting to another Mum, there with her DH and a boy of about 10. The boy was in a strop about 'boring carols, boring place' etc so her DH took him off, and we exchanged mum-like glances. Then she said "He can't understand why we're here, he thinks its beneath him because he's not even coming to this school, he's got into the grammar".

THAT is just one of the reasons I think GS are divisive.

I don't know why folk need to complain about other folks' engaging private tutors...given all the books you can buy, and access to say, maths lessons online, I don't think at age 10/11 tutors can really offer anything you can't do yourself as parents with DCS if you are willing to sacrifice the effort and the time, so you if you want a level playing field, you should just put in the time with DCs.. including over the holidays.

I work full time in a professional career, so I think if anyone has an advantage, it would be the DCs with one stay at home parent who has more time and energy to put in more work and tutoring straight after school ...but no-one can outlaw that can they? I don't pay for a tutor as I feel at pre 11+, no subject is complicated enough to justify it (may get complicated later at senior school) and DIY can be just as good as tutoring if you are willing to get enough hours in.

I also have a view on those that say prep schools give DCs an advantage when applying for grammar school places...again,...most prep schools are not gearing up for 11+ but for 13+...this means children have to do exams each year in many different subjects to be placed in sets )(twice a year in DS's case) ...whereas a state primary school child aiming for grammar is likely focus very heavily on just VR, NVR and maths for 11+ for the year leading up to the 11+

...there are many factors to this equation - but don't underestimate the importance of parent involvement at home as this is likely to be the biggest overriding factor, and like it or not, a lot of pushy middle class parents are likely heavily involved in their DCs education (especially revision) at home.

What is interesting of many the "child geniuses" of the type that get publicity on TV programs and in the new, is in fact they were home educated often with a parent giving up everything to basically give them full time ONE to ONE tuition (and hire private tutors to supplement)...and sometimes those parent was themselves qualified in the field their child was a "genius" at ...while not decrying the amount of effort that must be put in, their genius is most likely due to literally thousands of hours of one to one tuition and fast tracking in a particular field like maths ...which is why they are literally years ahead of their peers in schools and end up going to Oxford or Cambridge at say 14. But who is crying out that home education gives them a spectacular adavantage than say a comprehensive school child in mixed ability class of 30?

...which is why they are literally years ahead of their peers in schools and end up going to Oxford or Cambridge at say 14. But who is crying out that home education gives them a spectacular adavantage than say a comprehensive school child in mixed ability class of 30?

Many people, thinking of Ruth Lawrence for example, question whether she was given a 'spectacular advantage' by getting into Oxford at 14, or was it 13? Many would say that although she was good at Maths, she missed out on a lot of what university life is about.

Where are these mixed ability classes in comprehensives that everyone keeps going on about? Academic subjects are almost invariably set; the only mixed ability seems to be perhaps in Art, PE, and such like.

Amber- but what about all the children whose parents don't have the ability, the time, the education, the confidence, the understanding, the interest or the inclination to do that?

Brycie

If a child does not know his times tables by secondary school, you really have to blame the parents more than his primary school...you certainly don't need a private tutor for those... even at DS's expensive prep school they tell us to make sure they know these in the holidays ..it's really an abdication of parental input to say I will leave my DCs education entirely up to the school unless they are at boarding school!

And surely nobody thinks that going to Oxford at 14 is a spectacular advantage?

Doing things early, whether it's potty training, riding a bike, getting grade 7 clarinet, doing GCSEs or going to Oxford seems to be the only measure of success for some people. Which I think is missing the point, rather.

I think most comprehensives set for a lot of things, some for all - I thought that thread was more about whether or how much one should worry when there are subjects which aren't set.

Whether it's the whole top set in a grammar getting a*s, or 50% of the top set in a comprehensive, or 2% in an unset group in a comprehensive, if it is the same children - but in different rooms in each scenario - then it makes sense, surely?

Amber2: Very interesting point about how it is the SAHMs that have the real advantage. I never thought of it that way.

Both DP and I are in full time employment so it should be me that is claiming unfair advantage :)

It kind of make the excuses even more lame. I mean, not only did we arrive home tired, we also had limited one-to-one time with our DCs and we still managed to home tutor them for entry to two highly selective schools.

Seeker

You would be surprised...I travel in wide circles, and know Eton parents, but also know two brothers whose parents who were illiterate immigrants who still haven't mastered English after many years of living here ..their parents never had the opportunities and were sent out to work at a young age...but for their sons they put a huge emphasis on them at home on the importance of a good education ...and both sons got into Cambridge...so I do think it depends a lot on how much emphasis you put on education at home. I work full time yes, but I do put in a lot of time myself at weekends DS's age - thyere are many social sacrifices on my part and I also have always steered him towards books rather than computer games (though he gets to play as an occasional treat) ...and he is top one or two or three in many of his subjects without any private tutors ...but I make sure he does the work at home...we also try to go on educational holidays (at least half of them) .....I am not decrying the use of private tutors,..just saying you really can do the same thing yourself and even up the playing field, so someone who uses a tutors two hours a week is not given an adavantage you can't possibly match...at least pre-secondary school level. Just depends on your priorities. There are so many resources online also now, so I really think anyone can do it themselves up to GCSE level at least. As a parent, I have forgotten much of what I did as GCSEs but I find myself relearning it to help DS keep ahead of the curriculum.

seeker: You was going on about how your DS was getting an inferior education at the Sec Mod because they didn't have a decent orchestra like the one at the GS.

So isn't it a bit silly to go judgy pants on parents who use music as a measure of success?