Two different tutors, two very different views of ds. Help me work out what's going on.

[tutorconfusion]

My son has been assessed by two tutors recently. We live in one of those crazily competitive school areas and his own primary isn't great, so we want to look at our options with other schools and wanted help gauging which might be right for him.

One tutor is an acquaintance who did this as a favour and because we could end up using her/ one of her agency people, the other is a tutor who we are also thinking of using.

So, tutor number one (the acquaintance) did 1.25 hours of assessment one morning at her house and said that he is bright but not super-selective material in her view. She said Ds' concentration was poor (odd as he has always had very good concentration at home, although I suspect he does get a bit distracted sometimes at school) and he seemed distracted (but she admitted there were goings on in the house which would have caused this).

She showed us the papers and e.g. in maths he had got only about four wrong but she said those marks meant the difference between two sub-levels (a c and an a) and the standardised scores she gave were quite mediocre compared to what I'd expect. I thought he'd made sloppy mistakes (they were ones I'd have thought he'd get right) and basing a whole year's worth of level of 4 errors was draconian. The test seemed to cover three whole levels so I don't understand how you can use 4 marks to tell such a big difference.

Again in another paper he got a handful wrong out of 30 or 40 but they seemed to make a big difference. He'd never done that sort of test before. Maybe if he was super super bright he'd have got them right though but again I fear he was not concentrating well/ not engaged that day (it was a Sunday morning not sure if that matters). So tutor 1 conclusion was bright, nice kid but not absolute top (which would be fine if true by the way!) and shouldn't bother trying for first tier schools but second tier fine. She did seem very professional and knowledgeable.

Tutor two did a slightly shorter assessment, more practical and covered maths, comprehension and non-verbal reasoning. She was then raving about him. She said he would stand a very good change with super-selectives near us, was clearly very, very bright, had a phenomenal memory, breezed through everything she gave him. She showed me some of the questions and they were pretty tough but he'd got them right. No silly mistakes evident this time. She said he concentrated unusually well (which seems more like the ds I know).

So....why are the tutors giving such massively different messages?

Which one do I believe (obviously I'd prefer tutor two's message!) or is this all much more subjective than it seems?

Really I'd expect most tutors to say more of the latter stuff. They hope you'll employ them, and if it's not a hopeless case will tend to "big up" your dc.

Assuming you hadn't done anything to annoy your aquaintance, or let slip that you were looking at another tutor as well (so she thought you were using her for assessment and not wanting to pay), I'd probably suspect that's closer to the truth.
Raving about your dc, unless he really is outstanding, sounds suspiciously like wanting the work. For example, I'm not sure how, in a short assessment of maths, comprehension and n-v reasoning you would discover a child had "phenomenal memory".

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. I'd go for the tutoring assuming he'd get into second tier, but not ruling top out at present. Some children really respond well to tutoring and it may well lift him, even if at present, he is not up to that level.

I would agree with DeWe.
The second tutor is flattering you to get the tutoring job. He wants you to think that your son is grammar/private school material, and that he can bring the best out your child.
The second sounds more truthful.

My ds (y5) has been tutored since Christmas. I would raise both eyebrows very high if the tutor started raving about him. She was honest about his level on the first assessment, told me that with her help she could possibly get her up to the level where he would get acceptance at a super selective. She told me her success rate, and said that he would also require to do extra work at home, in addition to the homework he set for him, to work through bond papers as well.

Do not let flattery get the better of you.

Tbh I would be inclined to go with the first acquaintances observations. The second sounds very much like the Standard tutor flattering you and your son wanting you to employ them. How she could judge a phenomenal memory etc on such a short assessment is beyond me. The first also sounds very sensible and aware of the levels and criteria-my mum is a headteacher and often has issue with parents whose tutors have flattered their children and who then find it puzzling and disappointing when they are tested against school levels and structures. The levels and tests themselves are after all narrow and subjective. Only my opinion based on your post-I home ed in part to avoid this

Very useful. I had assumed that tutors would go the other way and talk your child down a bit so as to say 'hmm they are a bit borderline but oh with my help they will get into x,y and z' so you hire them but I see what you are saying.

He does have a seemingly photographic memory to be fair to tutor two. Lots of evidence but I had not mentioned anything about it to her. He read a long passage and I think he then regurgitated it.

Not keen on her having gushed about him so much so soon or in front of him for that matter. Still concerned that he wasn't concentrating with tutor 1 and think that yes, the truth might well be in between. Suppose time will tell.

If that had been my son you were talking about, I would have concluded that Tutor one set him things that were really too easy for him to feel that he needed to bother so he rushed through - and got distracted - and really didn't find what she'd given him interesting and therefore had somewhat dismissed her as 'another boring teacher' whilst Tutor two gave him things that he actually had to work at, had possibly had a conversation or two with him during the course of the work that meant he felt that he/she knew what they were talking about and could be quite interesting and so he was more diligent and more focussed as a result.

I agree with Mistlethrush.I also really dislike it when teachers give you a snap negative judgement of a child after a short asessment.Children respond to positive teachers who seem to like them and are enthusiastic!.Purely for that reason i would get him tutored [if needed for the super selective tests] by the second tutor.Tbw i have 4 dc's and considerable experience of tutoring.

Mistlethrush

The tutors would not set work that was either too hard or too easy; they would be using age-appropriate NFER assessment tests, which are supposed to be objective. Not a case of just making up something for him to do in the lesson which would either grab his attention- or not.

Interesting then when the OP states that some easy ones with Tutor one were incorrect whilst the difficult ones for Tutor two were correct. Not quite sure how to work that one out. Perhaps you can let me know exactly which tests the two tutors gave her son so that I can make up my own opinion on whether they were hard or easy which the OP implied. Compare 'ones I'd have thought he'd get right' and 'pretty tough' they don't sound the same level to me.

Out of interest, how old is your son?

I don't know what was used- how could I? I just know that when tutors assess they usually used standard assessments. Different tutors can use different tests which is why the results can differ. Looking at it another way, if you want to chart progress after say 6 months, then a teacher would use the same tests ( or maybe the "B" version of it if they'd used the "A" version first time) next time, and not a completely different test.

Different reading tests can give different results but a test will give a "confidence range" which is shown as a percentage but also an actual resutl in years and months, means the true result lies somewhere in between the lowest or highest score.

So... if one lot was 'quite tough' and the other ones the OP thought 'he'd get right' but didn't, how come they are the same level?

However, you do say that tutors 'usually use' standard tests. Perhaps they didn't in this case? Which none of us know. So... how do you know that they were both using similar material (which your first criticism of my post suggested)?

Surely its better to see if you can really push a child a bit in an assessment if they appear to be managing the 'age appropriate' tests and see whether they do have the potential (which you have, in fact, been asked to find out about as part of the assessment)? This might not give you a baseline against which to judge them in say 6 months, but it isn't necessarily being carried out at this point for that purpose.

It wasn't a criticism at all- I was simply establishing a fact. When tutors assess, they don''t just ask a child to " do some writing or reading", such as from a text book they might use in class, they nornally use a standardised assessment test. Point being that the child is not usually influenced by how interesting they find the material- if they do, it is purely coincidence.

There are many different tests and although in theory they should all give you the same score, they don't.

Surely its better to see if you can really push a child a bit in an assessment if they appear to be managing the 'age appropriate' tests and see whether they do have the potential (which you have, in fact, been asked to find out about as part of the assessment)?

You can't push the child. The idea is that the child works alone, with no input- except to explain the instructions.

The tests have a set amount of questions which have to be completed against the clock. They are age appropriate. eg if a child is doing a non verbal reasoning test, then the tests by NFER work out the child's score by putting in the child's age in exact years and months- and their raw score. This gives you a standardised score which is a percentile, relative to all children the same age.

Its very strange that the OP saw two different 'levels' of maths questions then isn't it? Makes me wonder whether the 2nd tutor didn't use the 'standard' ones but was using their own experience to colour their judgement?

I'd get another opinion as having two such different views cannot be correct.

When DD took her school entrance tests for instance we got similar feedback from all 3 schools which tied with what her form teacher said at her present school.

I would not expect such a high deviation between two assessments unless the child was having an "off" day on one of them or the tutors were looking for very very different things.

personally, I'd trust the person you know. For the same reasons people have said earlier...

I think that they did test in slightly different ways. Maybe the concentration (or lack of) issue might be the key to this. One tutor said he didn't concentrate at all well and he didn't do that well for her. The other said his concentration was excellent and he did do well.

He can get distracted because he's nosy. So maybe if tutor two's room was more boring he got stuck in better? Obviously it's not good that he's so easily distractable.

Tutor one's results were a surprise if that helps get to the bottom of this, whereas tutor two's would not have been if her's had come first.
But I might be a deluded mother.

hers not her's. It's been a busy day....

If you take a child who has never done a verbal and non-verbal reading test before they will get a very different mark to a child with experience of doing these tests.I am speaking from personal knowledge with my children.I really don't see how a tutor is capable of asessing a child from an ordinary school and immediately deciding that this child is in the 'b' category.Some teachers instantly categorise children and this is very wrong to me.Each child is capable of massive improvement if confident and encouraged.

Sorry to keep asking tutor confusion, but how old is your ds? Pure nosiness from me as I'm in all of a dither about my son and what sort of secondary school might be suitable for him and I can't get that sort of advice from school. I was wondering whether I should pay for some sort of assessment just so I could have a better idea of where he stands.
Oh how I wish all children would just go to their local properly comprehensive comprehensive as I hate myself for caring about whether he's doing 'well' enough when I should just relax.

PP I have messaged you.
We live in a mad super-selective area and parents are forced to think about it earlier than most of us would like to. The exams are at the end of year 5 and people seem to be starting tutoring at the start of year 4 or earlier.

If you do get an assessment, I think the moral of the story is, it might not be very reliable as one of my ladies has got it wrong...or maybe they haven't and ds was very different on the day but if I'd only seen one of them, I'd possibly have quite a skewed view (as against the confused view I do have now!!)