Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

4+ with no tutoring... doomed?

64 replies

caracaralina · 20/09/2014 20:12

My DD is due to sit the 4+ for a few ridiculously oversubscribed North London independents (and St Albans girls too). She's obviously a totally amazing 3.5 year old - happy, crazy, loving, imaginative, funny. But she's in a v laid back state nursery and I am a bit ð??® by the idea of tutoring so young so in practical terms doesn't know all her letters & double figure numbers, can't reliably write her own name etc. She can also be quite quiet in new situations.

We're doomed aren't we?? Anyone with recent experience of children that got into similar schools at reception? Anyone know anyone (own DC, your friend's neighbour's second cousin's colleague etc) who wasn't reading and writing/ outgoing and super confident but still got in?

Not looking for a state/ private debate tho - we're not set on private it's just both my DH and I had very happy experiences of selective private educations (which I know I'm sure would have been equally happy in good state school!!) so we are exploring our options.

TIA Thanks

OP posts:
Coolas · 21/09/2014 09:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Methren · 21/09/2014 09:22

Heels is right - if a school is over-subscribed, they have to make a selection somehow. The first-come-first-served, names-at-birth approach isn't fair as it biased against summer-borns. A lottery system might seem fair, but the school might end up with a class of personalities that don't mix well.

However (and I say this as a parents whose DCs have done 4+), I don't agree with basing assessments on "academic" skills such as reading and writing either. Precocity isn't a reliable marker of future academic success, and it seems wrong to brand 3-year-olds as failures simply because they aren't precocious.

OP, are you doomed? Not necessarily. I think it very much depends on which schools you are sitting for and what they are looking for at assessment.

DS1 sat 4+ at two schools, one of which is reasonably academic. One was a group assessment, and instead of lining up nicely with all the other children to go off to the classroom (minus parents), he flatly refused to go and had to be carried (by me) amid much protest to the door of the classroom and handed bodily to the teacher. He came out 45 minutes later beaming having had a great time. Assessment tasks were along the lines of problem-solving and group interaction, with a bit of counting and colour recognition thrown in, rather than testing lots of formal academics. Having read MN horror stories, I assumed he had blown it for refusing to leave me to go into the assessment. No - he was offered a place and several years later is thriving in what is definitely a good fit of school for him. I think the crucial thing was that the school were (and still are) very understanding of perfectly normal small child behaviour, and didn't penalise a 3-y-o for behaving like a 3-y-o.

The second assessment was an individual one. DS1 wanted to wear his favourite dress-up costume. I let him - thought the school might as well see the sort of child they would be getting. Assessment test were simple language and reasoning tasks with a bit of phonics and counting thrown in. Again he was offered a place.

We didn't do any preparation for the assessments other than taking DS to some free museum group activities for kids to familiarise him with the situation of answering questions and taking instructions from a strange adult and interacting with kids he didn't know. Certainly no tutoring, and his relaxed Montessori nursery didn't specifically prep for assessments afaik.

I think at some level you have to trust in your choice of schools, and that if the school is right for your DD then hopefully she'll get a place. Please don't tutor her. That's just buying into the madness - and how on earth do you explain it to the child without them becoming aware that they are going to attend an assessment? Neither of mine had any idea they were being assessed - as far as they were concerned they were just going to play at big school to see what it was like.

I wish your DD the best of luck withe assessments (and you too - it is far more stressful for the parents than the children, believe me!).

Coolas · 21/09/2014 09:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hakluyt · 21/09/2014 09:38

"We're doomed aren't we??"

No your're not. You child might not get into that school, though.

AuntieStella · 21/09/2014 09:43

Sibling priority applies at most schools.

They aren't really testing ability. They are checking to see that the child has no obvious problems and falls within 'normal' developmentally.

The rest is covert assessment of the parents. Not by how far they live from the school, but by what sort of impression they make when they are there.

Methren · 21/09/2014 09:57

Coolas, lots of schools do have sibling policies, but what about first-borns or only children? Why is distance any fairer? We live a fair distance from school but it is very close to my place of work, which works well for us as a family.

Hakluyt's point is very valid - not getting into a particular school at 4+ will more than likely have very little longterm impact, as long as a child has parents who remain engaged in their education.

Methren · 21/09/2014 09:59

Covert parental assessment isn't universal. The last 4+ assessment I attended, parents were left in a room with coffee and biscuits to chat amongst themselves - not a staff member. in sight

Coolas · 21/09/2014 10:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BravePotato · 21/09/2014 10:04

The key will be to try and not get her stressed about it.

In not telling her "how to act" and "what to say".

I imagine.

You are not doomed, you could always leave that crazy crazy rat race in London Wink

Coolas · 21/09/2014 10:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Methren · 21/09/2014 10:25

Coolas: clothes - neat but not fashionable, jewellery - don't wear any, accent - non-UK and not one that is regarded here as prestigious, postcode - definitely not prestigious, behaviour - reserved but pretty normal (I hope!).

We may well have been checked out in a "spot the extreme high-maintenance parent" way, but I am 100% sure that parents were not vetted for their wealth/background/social prestige. Not every school is hunting for the snob value. Some just want to know that parents are going to be engaged in their child's education.

Coolas · 21/09/2014 10:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Methren · 21/09/2014 10:42

Well, I won't convince you that we weren't vetted so I'm not going to argue the toss.

OP, not every school places enormous weight on parent "assessment". We deliberately avoided schools where it seemed this would be likely - those that scheduled a parent interview as well as an assessment for the child, for example. You should just be yourself, and so should your DD.

FabulousFudge · 21/09/2014 16:19

If you like the schools, she may as well be entered for their assessments and then you can take it from there. If she doesn't get offered a place, just think that it's because she wouldn't be happy there and thrive in that environment. You can then find somewhere more appropriate for you daughter and try again at 7 or 11 if you wish.

ChillySundays · 21/09/2014 22:02

I am absolutely gobsmacked! 4+ - seriously

Greenfizzywater · 21/09/2014 23:20

Most selective private schools have minimum sibling policy, certainly girls ones. In N London, Highgate and UCS give significant priority to siblings, NLCS I think guarantees them a second interview and none of the others have a policy other than something like "in the event of a tiebreak between two absolutely equal girls for one place we would favour a sibling".

Greenfizzywater · 21/09/2014 23:22

cara we are now sorted after a later entry but a tutor was involved and my younger son is at a much more focused preschool. I should add that actually, I don't think the laid back nursery did her any favours at all, she was bored in the last, year. Retrospective view is a fine thing!

LEMmingaround · 21/09/2014 23:25

4+ ???

This is actually a thing?

Sad
LEMmingaround · 21/09/2014 23:29

People are advising the op on what to wear?? Have i entered some sort of dystopia?

Methren · 21/09/2014 23:38

Don't think anyone was advising the OP what to wear, LEM.

Coolas was trying to convince me that parental attire is always under scrutiny at 4+ assessments. I was trying to point out that not all schools care about this, and that I didn't believe that my fairly ordinary high street outfit (def non-Boden) afected the 4+ outcome in my DC's case.

Methren · 21/09/2014 23:40

Good thing they didn't test my typing though...

affected

AmberTheCat · 22/09/2014 07:49

I'm intrigued by the idea of a 'much more focused pre-school'. Focused on what?

Greenfizzywater · 22/09/2014 10:55

focused meaning that they do plenty of free play but also some time where the kids feel they are playing but they are learning at the same time - a bit more focus on numbers and letters - children who are ready to learn to read and write before starting school encouraged rather than advised to wait until school.

DontDrinkAndFacebook · 22/09/2014 11:01

Personally I would be swerving any school that wanted to test my child at only 4 years old, and either accept them on advanced ability or write them off as 'not suitable.'

And I say that as someone who has sent her DCs to private school.

One of my children would not have got a place ANYWHERE if tested at four. He's now on course to get mostly A and A* at GCSE.

Hakluyt · 22/09/2014 11:04

"I'm intrigued by the idea of a 'much more focused pre-school'. Focused on what?"

Focused on getting into the right pre prep.............

Swipe left for the next trending thread