If I assume that prep school means no need to tutor, am I being hopelessly naive?

[fridayschild]

DCs are in infant classes at a good state primary, but state secondary provision is awful. We'll almost certainly go private for secondary level but lots of children are educated privately from age 4 here, and so that would mean tutoring the DCs for at least their last two years of primary. If we transferred to the independent sector now, would I manage to escape the pressure to tutor?

For what it's worth, I am not talking about tutoring to get my little darlings into the top schools in the country. My ambition is to get the right school for the child, where they will be happy and thrive. The dinner party chat here in SW London is that if one is eccentric enough to start in the state sector, tutoring is needed even for a very normal private school (whatever that is!)

Views please, oh wise ones.

Tutoring in SW London is indeed just like the arms race. Everyone who tried for independent schools from DS1's state school last year was tutored, not just the 'borderline' children. Most were tutored in the favoured 11+ style: a year of tutoring, starting from January in Y5, to take them up to exams in January of Y6. It was specific exam tutoring - covering gaps in maths, dealing with comprehension papers, introducing typical reasoning paper formats.

DS1 was tutored and has started at his highly selective school this term. He's certainly not out of his depth in any of the subjects (apart from languages which he hadn't done before), so I think the whole "If you have to be tutored to get in, it's not right for you" argument is rubbish. If everyone is tutored, everyone performs relatively better in the exams and the bar is raised.

I know lots of children from pre-preps who were tutored for 7+ too, and, again, they're all fine at the prep schools.

Fridays, I know your dilemma well as another sw-london, state-primary mum. The whole tutoring business is a vast racket imo - and the private schools make it worse by telling pupils they have any worries about to get extra tutoring, in order to keep their perfect records intact. I'd originally planned to put my dc in a private prep but when I heard "everyone" there was tutored, I withdrew the application.

The "if you have to be tutored, it wasn't right for you" doesn't apply to the state system who doesn't gear itself exclusivley to passing the eleven plus, but it should certainly apply to children from prep schools (clue in name, as other say)

If your dc are happy at their primary school, then I would keep them there as long as possible - the extra hour or two a week tutoring they might need (actually they probably wouldn't need it but it will make you feel better) from year five will be nothing compared to the ludicrous amounts of prep some prep schools foist on their pupils. Good luck

Fridayschild, do you have boys or girls? If boys, I would leave them in state system and get them a tutor in Y5. My reasoning is that when they take entry tests for private schools at 11+ they are only up against other state school boys.

With girls however, it's much more competitive entry as both private and state educated girls will be competing for 11+ entry into the private system. I think the chances may be better coming from a prep school in this case.

A prep school is not doing its job if it tells you to get extra tutoring. It should be telling you to look at an alternate school!

As for tutoring in a specific subject to pass then I still think they are at the wrong school. My DC's are at non-selective boarding schools, no one tutors, they have ridiculously long holidays where they get no homework and they still get most kids into the most selective schools in the country.

missmeme Not sure what you base your opinion on ! Of course kids at independents outside London are tutored ! And some kids are tutored just to get them in at 7+ or even 4, then may continue to need it to maintain the pace - there are plenty of threads on MN about it . However you couch it - Kumon , private tutor, Kip mcGrath, paying a TA from the school to do extra, sitting down with a parent, student or even another child one to one - that is what it amounts to. Whether all parents who organise this admit it is another thing , but it certainly happens .

Around here many secondary schools take the majority of new kids, boys and girls, at 11 not 13 and few rely purely on CE results. It just depends on the school.

fridyschild - tutoring on top of Prep has become the norm in the South East and it is a disease.

I was talking to a prep teacher from one of the very best academic Preps in the country and she was saying how many children in her class age 8 who she knew were being privately tutored and she said it is absolutely not required even to get nto the very highest league table secondary schools.

If the child is at a good Prep they will get into a top private/state secondary school if they are able. The whole tutoring thing has become paranoia built on desperation.

If your DC is going to an OK private secondary school which is not a the top of the leage tables there is absolutley no need to tutor on top of Prep.

I am overcome cat64-not many people think so!
If you really want to read about the tutoring industry having gone mad there was an article in the Sunday Times here

Sorry will try the link again-don't know what went wrong.
Sunday Times

The VAST majority are NOT tutored and they still all end up in the same schools and with the same A'level results!

How on earth can you make a claim for all of the children outside of London? Surely at best you can talk about some local schools? Or do you have some research to back yourself up?

If you read my link it gives some of the statistics. e.g. not many parents in Wales employ tutors.

Anyone I know who has moved into London has been totally shocked about the tutoring culture that is going on. I don't think I'd want to send my kid to a London school - must be 80% full of unhappy stressed kids. Where is there childhood?

I'm sure it does go on elsewhere but it does seem a very Londoncentric thing.
Today I went to speak to a Head of a secondary I'm interested in and she said she could sniff tutored kids out at the interview stage.
Not that she then automatically turns them down, but it does colour her view.
Our Head's view is that everything is covered in the curriculum, they take regular exams so they are prepped. Nothing else needed.
I'm going to trust him on this but gulp...

Another head told a friend that sometimes he has to get students to leave at the end of year 7, becuase they've been heavily tutored but can't cut it when it comes to it.
That sounds dreadful no?

piscesmoon, the report that your link refers to only looks at state educated secondary school pupils. With the exception of a few grammars I suspect that many prep school pupils tend to end up staying in the independent sector. And the report doesn't address at all the question as to what percentage of independent senior school pupils have been tutored. Assuming that the majority of state schools are non-selective I would still view that a national figure of 22% of state senior school pupils having been tutored is very high, and on local experience I would say that the proportion of pupils in independent schools who have been tutored is even higher than for state schools, though mine are still at primary level, so this is coffeehouse rumour.

Missmem, my kids aren't tutored (yet!) but many of those who are being privately tutored locally aren't being over-stressed (the stressed children appear to be those being coached by their parents ). The tutoring consists of an hour one to one with a tutor without any homework. For children who have done swimming at 3, piano at 6, moving on at 9 to an hour of tutor on a Saturday morning is almost a natural progression. I don't see classes of unhappy children around tbh.

"Another head told a friend that sometimes he has to get students to leave at the end of year 7, becuase they've been heavily tutored but can't cut it when it comes to it."

I've often heard stories like this, but never have had a name of a school that does this? Would you care to share? Cos it is a fairly damning admission that the school isn't that great.

Given that in the prep schols they seem to get lots of homework, whereas ds is in y5 of a state primary where he gets none, so an hour or so of tutoring a week would not be onerous for him, but he actaully does not show any glaring or obvious weakness in any subject - maybe I am deluded . He will try for selective schools next year - if he doesn't get in, he will go to a less selective one... I feel rather sorry for the prep school kids, who are his contemporaries and are having to give up cubs, cricket club etc becaue they don't have time for those extra-curicular things any more. Now knowing they may also be having tutoring on top, I feel quite pleased we are not forking out prep school fees

Whatever the statistics, I think it so sad that children are on the treadmill of tutoring when they should be out playing,climbing trees, kicking a football around, learning to get on with others,take up hobbies and societies, play chess etc.
Selective schools are for those with intelligence above average. Most children are average (if they all had IQs of 130, that would be the new average and schools would be looking for the DCs above that).
People should look at their DC and find the school that suits the DC, not find a school and mould their DC to fit.
Prep schools are preparing their pupils for the next stage; if they are not doing it, they are either a waste of money or your DC isn't up to it.
If you read my link, someone comments that St Paul's Girls school are looking for things that can't be touched by tutoring and they want their girls to have gone on holiday, dancing lessons, played a musical instrument etc NOT spending spare time cramming.

missmem - as I said before it is not tutoring to pass but to be able to have an average across 7 subjects of a certain percentage.

It is called hedging your bets and not being in a situation where we would have to look to a school less suitable for the child (for a whole host of reasons, most not related to academic issues)or kicking ourselves that we could have done that little bit more to help.

The tutored subject can be dropped the minute the child goes to senior school so it is not a case of not being able to keep up - it is a case of jumping through the relevant hoop to get where we want to be.

It is VERY common even outside of London and if all those children do get where they want to be as a result then I say hurrah!

I think there are generally more senior school places than prep in any given area, which means that senior schools do anticipate a substantial intake from state primaries. For examples, many all through schools have a one-form prep school and two-form senior school.

This means that there should not be any pressure to tutor as they know exactly where you have come from and put your performance in context.

There may be some senior schools who use the Common Entrance Exam, and so expect most of their pupils to come from within the prep system. However, this does not mean that they will not look at other candidates or adjust expectations accordingly.

For any school, it is best just to ask what is expected. For English and Maths, state school pupils should be well-equipped. If they test for Science, they are really just testing junior school facilities, so will not have high expectations for pupils from schools that do not have labs and specialist teachers. Most senior schools will not assess on Science for this reason.

An area where primary candidates may be at a disadvantage is in talent-based scholarships (drama, sports, art, music), but they should have an excellent opportunity to try for an academic scholarship.

It is really important to practise Verbal and Non-Verbal reasoning before the assessment. It doesn't have to be a lot - just familiarisation with the format of the test.

Kittycorncake,

I don't know about the prep schools in your area but in ours they spend 2 hours a day in timetabled sports and another 1 hour minimum on extra curricular clubs within the school, not including music. There days are much longer because of this but they do not have to give up any activities. In a state primary, cricket may be an out of school activity once or twice a week but in our local preps it's compulsory for 1.5 hours a day, 5 days a week in the summer term.

I'm not saying these schools are better but just that they do not miss out. London preps may be different of course!

Ladymuck - is it okay to name and shame like that? Would not get MN into bother????

TBF I'm not sure that it does reflect that badly on a school. If parents tutor a kid to pass a stiff entrance test, it might take the school a couple of months to work out that the poor bugger can't keep up in class no?

If it is a fact that a certain school regularly gets rid of Year 7 pupils because they are not shaping up, then I can't see how MN would get into bother? If it is just unsubstantiated rumour, then of course that is different.

If a school is so limited in its teaching across all subjects that it regularly has to get rid of Year 7 pupils who passed its entrance test in just 2 subjects, then yes I would say that it wasn't a great school, or at least it didn't have good teaching. Many children develop and mature at different rates, and I would expect at least some children to dip in terms of their achievement or effort at some point during their teen years. A selective school that regularly gets its selection process so dramatically wrong would ring alarm bells. The only time I am aware of this happening in RL have been parents deciding that a selective grammar school wasn't for them and have moved their children into independent schools. And usually this has reflected the motivation of the children rather than their ability.

Piscesmoon, the various private and prep schools are totally aware of what the likes of St Pauls are looking for. Both dcs school reports from age 5 include descriptions of all their out of school activities and achievements as well as in school extracurricular activities to ensure that staff and parents are keeping an eye of the breadth as well as depth of activities. And you are making tutoring sound as if it is a non-stop relentless activity for these children, whereas in truth for most children we are talking about 40-50 hours stretched over a single year, leaving plenty of time for play, drama, music, sport, TV and video games.

The fact is that in some areas for some schools and even in some yeargroups entry into the secondary school of your choice is very selective, and in the same way that some parents go to church or move house to maximise their chances of getting their preferred school, tutoring is broadly the equivalent in the selective sector. To miss out on a grammar school place by a single mark surely doesn't mean that your dc is too thick to benefit, especially if they had had the same mark in the previous year they would have got in with ease?