Tutoring - in Year 4??

[hatsybatsy]

A friend told me that she intends to get her son tutored from the beginning of year 4 for the 11+ exams. She's aiming for one of the major independent schools close to where we live. I just find this OTT- our kids go to a good school and seem to be doing well.

But I seem to be alone- rumour has it that most parents are getting their kids tutored by the end of year 4. I know I'm going to find it really hard not to follow the herd. Please reassure me - no need to tutor brright kids for TWO years before the exams???

Imagine what they'd get up to together

if minecraft were a part of the exam then ds would be a dead cert!

ds is definitely stubborn - there is no way I could spend any time trying to prepare him with VR and NVR papers (so DoitJulia yout method simply wouldn't work for us) - if he is going to be tutored it would have to be by a 3rd party outside the house.

Am genuinely surprised by all the responses on here - I really thought people would come back shouting at me not to be so daft and ranting about how bright kids don't need tutoring - and that hasn't happened. Are we representative of MN as a whole? Or just the portion that overthink our children's education?

Am pleased to hear that tutoring can be a fun experience. There is one woman locally who everyone goes to so I'll find more out about her. But failing that, there's one of the teachers at ds's school who tutors..... (now that is a whole different thread.)

We are in an 11+ county and it used to be the norm to tutor for a year before the exam. However, I know of at least 10 children in DSs class that started their tutoring in Y4.

We start in a few weeks, beginning of Y5.

If minecraft were part of the exam, we would have the opposite problem, wouldn't we?

"No more tuition tonight ds, thats quite enough"

I think part of the problem is that we are talking about the preparation needed for different exam systems and from different school environments. OP however is at a private Prep school. I know many many children who have passed indie school exams whose parents have not caved in to the pressure to tutor on top of the extensive preparation the schools give them. I have never known a less clever pupil get in because of tutoring.

The indies around here have a range of exams. The most selective go to a great deal of trouble to have a selection process that gives them a very full idea of a candidates strengths, weaknesses and abilities including setting Maths problems that test familiar concepts in unfamiliar ways so that they are tests of logic and creative thinking as well as the Maths curriculum, and investing in reasoning tests/ questions that are constantly being changed and developed so that they are not predictable and tutorable (in the same way that the commercial world does in the tests that they use in recruitment. Good tests of reasoning are not tutorable beyond some basic practise over a maximum of 10 tests to familiarise the candidate with the format and timing, but they are expensive). They place a great deal of emphasis on the interview, and the school reference. I had some interesting discussions with DDs school when they got in. DD1 came from an International School, which was the equivalent of a good state school, and they wanted feedback on how her attainment had compared to UK schools. However the school said they were not making the selection primarily based on attainment, they had a basic level of attainment below which they felt they could not support a DC but that was set low because they have an ethos, as many of the most selective schools do, of wanting to attract pupils with ability from whatever background, and therefore aimed to consolidate on the Year 6 curriculum to bring everyone to the same level in Year 7. It certainly was achievable from a state school. The decision on who was given a place was based on the full picture of the candidate, their abilities and their talents and their personal qualities and whether they felt they would thrive and gain most benefit from the school. There was no finishing post that you have to get first past as with the state grammars. I have one DD who is a Scientist and struggled with the empathy and creativity that my other DD excels in (but struggles when it comes to logic and non verbal reasoning.) The school had built up a very accurate picture of my DCs. I would say from the DDs who are successful that they are pretty good at spotting who has the potential to succeed. Of course what they can't know is what baggage and issues these clever kids bring with them

The less selective schools have more straightforward entrance test but that is because they are less selective, but again they evaluate the individual based on all the evidence they have.

There were parents at my DDs prep who couldn't comprehend why their DCs had not got in after they had so thoroughly prepared them with additional tutoring. Since the process is opaque it gives rise to Chinese whispers as to what is required, and of course ambitious parents want it to be a first past the post examination of attainment because it enables them to invest in doing whatever training is necessary to get their DCs past the post. However they are kidding themselves and would do well to focus on supporting their DCs to grow up as confident and interesting individuals.

Here's some common sense advice from the former Head of an Indie www.theguardian.com/education/2003/oct/08/schools.uk5

This is off topic for OP, apologies, but whore whenever a thread appears on here about tutoring for state grammars you will get any number of people claiming their DCs have been tutored over many months, even years, and have increased their scores on reasoning tests throughout. That really is not consistent with using the latest testing methods, actually even the methods being used by commercial organisations in the 80s, in the development and maintenance of effective tests. I assume that is because the schools don't have the money to throw at it.

I am sure every child who gets into Grammar School is "clever" but I am also sure that the tests do not absolutely reliably identify the cleverest in what are sometimes huge cohorts of applicants. In the case of our local superselectives they get 2000+ applicants for their 150 places. I am not sure any test could be that sensitive in identifying reliably the top 7% of what is a self selected clever cohort to be tested, probably effectively the top 1% of the population, there is always a statistical margin for error +/- but the fact that tutoring seems to make a difference suggests that not only do the tests have the normal margins for error, but they are also predictable, and they shouldn't be. I am sure they do a cost benefit analysis in terms of investment in tests, they get clever results and motivated pupils however they play it BUT it makes them responsible for a huge tutoring industry, which is too often a miserable negative experience for the DCS.

Why I wonder do the pupils score only 90% A/A at GCSE whilst the most selective local independent which is open that pupils should fall in the top 5% of the whole population (not a self selected clever cohort) in reasoning tests score 95% A/A and indeed out perform the Grammar on A*s by 10%. Their results are matched by the top sets in our outstanding local comps as well. Obviously there are lots of variables that creep in between 11 and 16, and being in the top 5% of the population for ability should enable a pupil to gain the highest grades with the right attitude but it doesn't suggest to me they creamed off the best.

And of course what is wrong with this is that they are not just selecting on whether children are clever, they are also selecting on whether the children's families have the resources to support them. Coming from a family where the opportunity of a Grammar School education for working class children changed lives and led to clever people having a chance to make a long term difference to society in successful careers I think that is sad, and an immoral use of state funds.

I think you should start now otherwise you'll just be worrying the whole time that your child is missing out (well, I would anyway!). It can't do any harm, can it?

I had tutors for my kids when they were in primary school. Tuition was meant to be a short term boost, but they both absolutely loved going and begged me to carry on. So, one of mine had tuition from year 2 to year 6! A lot of the teachers at school were against it, but I'm so pleased that I didn't listen to them.

Going back to the OP....the tutor dd had for a term back at the start of Y4 (not for 11+ purposes) said she tutors kids for anything between 6 and 18 months for the 11+. Most need a year, in her opinion (she is very experienced, and tutors kids towards entrance into some of the top London indies as well as grammar schools in the next Borough).

11+ around here is in January of Y6. So starting in Y4 would be premature for most, in her opinion.

Personally, I have no idea. I watched my niece go through it, I'm now watching my nephew go through it, and I still think the entire 11+ process these days seems utterly bonkers. When I took it, I did no prep, enjoyed it thoroughly, had almost no idea what it was for, and did very well indeed (but didn't take up the place I was offered). Those were the days...

Elibean, indeed those were the days - my scholarship exam to secondary was the first exam I ever sat (series of state priaries before that, nothing more formal than a spelling test since those were days well before SATs). No prep whatever, I seem to remember my parents dropping me off at the school with my asthma inhaler, a tube of gloucose sweets and a cheery 'have fun'..... I don't think that a similar approach these days would lead to a full scholarship to what was then a very, very academic school....

Thing is, its lovely to give them relaxed confidence. I want dd to have it too, and the term of tutoring she had has given her that instead of panic (not 11+ related, as I said).

But when I took it, I was equally relaxed and there was no pressure or tutoring at all. And, I imagine, the test really was a better judge of potential as a result.

Good that its not too hardcore, though, WoftheW...that's something, these days, I suppose.

When to begin to tutor very much depends on how much material your child will need to cover and how rapidly they can understand and absorb new teaching material. Tuition started over the summer / last term of Year 4 will usually be ample for those children in the top sets for maths and English. That said, I've tutored children who've started with me later (Easter of Y5), who were state school educated, very bright and whose parents worked with them under guidance. They did very well - although it was a rather intense experience for them, as is often the case towards the end as work tends to crescendo just before the examinations.
It isn't really two years of tutoring to commence in Y4, since the exams fall either at the end of the Y5 holiday (state school selectives nearby are early September - as Y6 commences, and before they've had any teaching input) or January for the independent sector (just 12 weeks into Y6).

However, since motivation and self-confidence are so very often tied to a child's success relative to their peers, it's understandable that many jump on the wagon of finding a tutor in schools where many pupils in the class are being tutored.

My DD started with her tutor in November. She is in Year 5.

DD2 will be starting tutoring for 11+ in January, she is yr4.
State school with NO prep for 11+
Even the head told me last year with DD1 that no matter how bright they are they don't get in if they are not tutored. saying that DD1 passed the 10+ with only 6 hours of tutoring and a batch of bond book practice. She is however much more academic than DD2 who will need all the help she can get.

around here even kids in the very selective academic preps have tutors. how are you supposed to compete with them when your kids are in a non selective state school with 30 in a class focusing on getting them all level 4 in their SATS. As much as i hate it, and the extra work DD2 is going to have to do from January onwards, on top of her school work and hours of dancing she does, i don't see we have a choice.