tutors - anyones kids have them? what do they do? have you seen a marked improvement?

[PSCMUM]

primary level, lots of kids seem to be having them at the mo. Im not sure. views please!

DD is 13. The September of yr 5 we had a parents evening; she had scored low on her Sats test the previous week (rehashed yr6 ones ifswim) She had also done an old Cat (IQ) test and had scored high. She was made to resit them (a different set IYKIM) she again had low Sats and high Cats. We decided to wait until Easter to see how things progressed; Easter came and no change. So we got her a Tutor, by the September she had the Sats and Cats again she scored much higher than the previous September, but more importantly the Cats and the Sats were the same marks for both tests . We decided that if we had gone from Easter to September we would stick with the tutor until Jan when the kids sit their 11+, she passed it. She was offered a place at a Grammar School. I didn't want her to go, feeling that the Tutor might have given us an untrue sense of dd IQ. The tutor had finished in the January and DD started the Grammar in the September (as usual I lost!), by the December we was asked if she could be added to the G&T list for Science. I have to say In hindsight I am glad I got her a Tutor because she leveled her Cats and Sats results and managed to show where she really was supposed to be in the yr6 class (3rd from bottom to second from top). Her confidence and self belief sky rocketed and as far as I am concerned The Grammar place and G&T crap were incidentals gained from DD having a Tutor. DD needed a Tutor so she could fulfil her 10yr old potential, she needed that push. By the way she is still doing brill, top stream etc and hasn't had a Tutor for two years.

we ddn;t get sats results at end of year 3, only at end of year 4. do they do them every year?thought it was just year 2 and year 6. am i completely wrong? again?

No, they only do sats officially in yrs 2&6 , some schools sit papers every year and some do predicted,...but at the end of every year the school will have a good idea where they are and should tell you. If not, ask.

Well FWIW I'm in South London and according to the HM of a local state school one third of pupils are tutored in Yr3 and by end of Year 5 that rises to two thirds. And even then I suspect that the remainder are being tutored by their parents (mc school where you typically have to pay £££ to move into catchment).

LadyMuck, those statistics doesn't tell us whether the tutoring gives value for money though, does it? People may do it to keep up with their neighbours and because they believe they would be at a disadvantage if they didn't, but would they really be?

I was mainly illustrating that it isn't isolated to North London - the madness goes further.

I think that trying to assess "value for money" in education is always diffcult but you can't assess the alternative outcome that accurately. Most parents here are trying to ensure that their children have mastered the basics in order to do well enough either to eventually pass 11+ or junior entrance, or to be able to hold their own in the top streams in local comprehensives. As more parents tutor the standards are driven up.

But I live in a borough where only 55% of children got their first choice of state secondary school, and some of the secondary options are truely troubling.

Ah, I see your point now. Mine was more for the benefit of those who, like me, can't afford tutoring.

I'm not sure what "percentage of children who got into their first choice of secondary school" really tells us - I didn't feel DS1's first choice was by any means a certainty, and would not have felt deeply aggrieved if he hadn't got in (though I was glad he did, obviously).

"I'm not sure what "percentage of children who got into their first choice of secondary school" really tells us"

Well locally it means that most parents are going out of their way to avoid certain secondary schools. And the remaining schools have quite a mixture of faith and other selection criteria so many parents will have thought carefully about their choices.

But if your child is consistently ner the top of the class there is obviously less advantage to be gained from tutoring than for someone who is struggling or appears to be underperforming in relation to their potential.

If you get a tutor, get a good one. If in N London use this agency

www.londonhometutors.org/

if your child is going to sit competitive exams for secondary school (ie one of the few Grammers and/or a selective independent) a tutor is essential.

If not, not so important, or even needed, with the special exception of mathematics, which is both often not well taught and benefits much more than any other subject from one to one tuition.

LadyMuck, it's a statistic that means completely different things in different places, and even different things to different people in the same place. The presumption that everyone who doesn't get their first choice is going to be bitterly upset about it and will suffer terribly does seem a little overdramatic (though, knowing where you are, I can see your point). If all schools were exactly the same and nobody had any reason to prefer a school that was not their local one, and all schools had enough spaces to accommodate all the children for whom they were the local school, then we might get around 100% getting their first preference secondary school. But would that really be a good system?

nlondondad, essential??? What, really, would a tutor do that a reasonably intelligent parent couldn't?

If the child is being tutored for entry to competitive examinations, at what is a terribly young age really then a person with relevant experience is an important thing to have.

Otherwise, for general support, if the relationship with the child is right, then a "reasonably intelligent parent" can do lots, particularly with maths. You are moving more into home education type stuff. Works really well for some children.

I was so forthright because people do not always realize the staggering level of competition for state (iee non fee paying selectives - at least in London ) Unfair to enter a child at all without good preparation.

If you are entering for the fee paying sector then you can afford a tutor - so get a good one!

I don't know if you've seen from other posts, that I'm moving my ds's from their small (under performing) village school to a much bigger one (high performing)in the nearest town in September. My 2 are having tutoring as 1 is very bright and underachieving and ds2 has dyselxic / dyscalculic tendencies that are not being addressed.
Anyway met the new Head yesterday, who mentioned he knew ds's were tutored and asked why. I explained and his response was....
I don't think any child in this school, with supportive parents needs to be tutored. However if you choose to continue, we would expect to be involved with the work they are doing to make sure, the parents, the school and the tutor are singing from the same hymn sheet.
I was very impressed... What do you all think?

nlondondad, my DS1 is at a state grammar school, which he managed to get in to despite my being unfair enough to enter him for the exam without tutoring. (I'm not unique on here in that respect btw). Are you a tutor yourself by any chance?