I realise I'm going off an a bit of a tangent here but I've been following this thread and I'm beginning to wonder what 'intensive tutoring' actually looks like in practice. Is it a tutor once a week or every day? Is it just teaching of the curriculum one-to-one or is it teaching things that the curriculum doesn't cover ? Genuinely intrigued and if anyone has any experience please do share!
Different areas/schools will require different approaches. Some areas have 3 or 4 multiple choice papers and no interview. Other areas (usually super selectives) have an interview and written papers rather than multiple choice, so are far harder (due to sheer number of entrants and high competition) and are said to have "pass" marks of 90%+ needed in every paper. In those areas, realistically, an untutored child (by a professional or a knowledgable parent) hasn't a chance. That's the unfairness and where money comes into it.
In other areas, it's far more "normal" like it was back in the 60s - in our area, the grammar was half the size of the town's sec mod, so a third of kids went to the grammar and two thirds to the sec mod - hardly elitism! Pass mark for our local schools now is said to be in the 60/70% range, with a good mark in one paper making up for a lower mark (below pass mark) in another as they add all three marks together. Ours were just 3 multiple choice papers. There are only 2 or 3 applicants for each place, so not as much competition, hence the "easier" 11+ papers and lower "pass" marks. Realistically, tutoring isn't required in our area and few kids are tutored. The main local tutor does a course of 1 hour every two weeks for about 3-6 months, so maybe 6-12 hours of formal tuition which covers all three papers. Other tutors do ad-hoc tutoring by the hour covering specific problem areas and areas not yet covered by the school. The most popular thing locally is a mock test done by one of the tutors where he hires a church hall for a morning and gives a mock test exactly how the real test would be, i.e. exam desks, equipment & silence rules, loo breaks, refreshments, etc., just to get the kids some experience of a formal exam setting which is something they just don't get at a primary and which can really affect some. He also includes a short presentation about conduct in the exam room, i.e. ignoring other kids if they wet themselves, start crying, run out, or any other destractions, etc., and also tells them what to do if they need the loo, feel upset, need their pencil sharpening, etc. Really puts their minds at rest. 9 out of 30 kids in my son's primary class went to our local grammar, most of whom didn't have any formal tutoring at all, and we're in a deprived, low income area!
I do think that the money/intensive tutoring required in super selective areas really clouds the issue and fuels this idea that only the super-rich can afford a grammar education. That's not true in a lot of the areas outside London and the SE where it's a lot more normal and low pressure and "normal" bright children can get a grammar place without having money thrown at them!
) I didn't know that. Does it have something to do with average household income or the like.