Tutoring. Yes or no?

[SkinnyVanillaLatte]

Now we've come round to report time,it's got me thinking all about tutoring.

I'd like to know others opinions.

Do children who are tutored do significantly better? At what age should they start? How expensive is it? How many hours should they do a week? What subjects?

Or is it a waste of money and detrimental to a well rounded childhood?

I'm not sure what I think but I'm really interested to hear others views and experiences!

dd1 is at a selective grammar, we didn't have a tutor and it was pure good fortune that she happened to have a teacher in year 5 who was a maths whiz and taught her glass above and beyond the curriculum. DD2 (year 5) will be taking the 11 plus in September, we now live in a different area so she hasn't benefited from the same teacher as dd1. Therefore she has been going to a tutor for the last few months as maths isn't my bag and I suspected dd2 may need some help.

At parents evening last week I asked DS's teacher why DS got a 4a for maths, which is clearly very good at the end of year 4 and yet on the NFER test for maths he didn't meet the 'likely to pass 11 +' mark. The answer was 'there are things in the 11 plus that we don't teach.

All this made me think that we have done the right thing in getting a tutor for dd2 and will continue with the same tutor for ds for next year.

I honestly don't think that it's true that a quick familiarisation session with past papers is enough no matter how bright the child. Obviously you don't need to pay for a tutor if you have the time and ability to tutor yourself.

We got a tutor this year for our DD in year 3 as spelling has been an issue and she needs some extra help. She's not over the moon about it but she does the work and it seems to be helping.

My step daughter was tutored in year 5 and 6 for maths for no reason that we could understand - apparently 'everyone' was tutoring so her mother got her a tutor even tho' she was going to the local comp and was in top set.

Go figure...

Teta - that's what many think about the continuous tuition in Asia. The cliche is that the system churns out stilted robots unable to think for themselves. I have an insiders perspective (in Singapore at least) and can tell you that the best enrichment centres are incredibly creative. Local schools don't just teach by rote anymore. There are great art programmes and emphasis on the 'aesthetics' as they call them, fab sports programmes too. I think myths and misconceptions spring up as education is prized and valued so highly. It's just not generally seen as so vital in the UK.

Word - I am another outlier in that case :). I agree with all you've said.

Adrian - will PM you re: books etc.

I am a 'partial' insider too!.My dh is Asian and is working for an Asian company.Its his experience that asian managers are very able but not good at working successfully in international companies.He would rather employ asians that have studied and worked overseas and have more balanced viewpoints.
3 of my dc's were born in asia and i really do appreciate the work ethic and the can do attitude that's prevalent there.Of course there is a move towards a more balanced approach.My dc's went to an international school that taught a very broad range [but all the asian children had extra tuition whilst mostly the non-asians didn't].Consequently i think of tuition as being completely normal unlike most English people.I have been lectured by friends for tutoring my kids beyond their capabilities.Its really seen as a very non-english thing to do and seems to genuinely upset people.

IME as a tutor, tutoring usually works when a child is motivated to do well but is being held back by something else - lack of confidence, a mental block on some aspect of the work (such as just not grasping fractions or times tables), a disability that means they need to work at a slightly slower pace, etc. If the child isn't motivated, or is expected to achieve more highly than they are actually capable of, then it can be a disaster. Tutoring has to be something the child wants and is invested in, or it can seem like a punishment for not being "good enough." Children have different strengths and weaknesses and expecting all children to achieve highly at all things is really unfair and unrealistic. It's sometimes ok to accept that a child is not great at maths but has the basics and will get by fine with that.

IME of education, doing well at school doesn't necessarily equate to success later in life. What does help to ensure success is giving the child an opportunity to do what they really enjoy, to learn about themselves and to develop their own interests and passions. Making a child feel like academic success is the be all and end all is doing them a disservice because it really isn't. The most successful people in life are those who are driven and motivated because they are doing something that really suits them. Yes, a good education is important, but if in the process of achieving that you miss out on developing your personality and experiencing the world then the danger is that you won't have the people skills, the confidence and the street smarts to really make it.

CallinDana it seems you see tutoring to fix a problem rather than to enhance and increase attainment?

Why do you think expecting children to achieve highly is unfair or unrealistic? Do you think children can become 'great' and smash expectations? Genuinely interested not trying to be difficult etc.

Am with you that attainment at school doesn't necessarily equate to success later in life.

IME parents often influence a child's passions and interests. Parents are their children's greatest teachers (especially early on) and enthusiasm for a particular past time hobby or interest is often caught rather than taught. Motivation and drive are also often modeled by parents, for better or for worse.

I've seen so many perfectly ordinary children achieve the remarkable over the years it's caused me to revise my previous ideas - which were a lot like yours.

Really tired - I was interested to read your message because as a tutor I couldn't see the benefit of tuition at such a young age but I can see there are always exceptions.

Thanks Hamishbear. Look forward to receiving them.

taffeta 'DS (8, finishing Y3) will get a tutor for Y5, as we are in an 11plus area and if you don't tutor, you don't pass, unless you do the do the tuition at home yourself which doesn't work for us. Everyone I know round here (state school, Kent ) whose child stands a chance at 11plus will be doing the same.'

I guess you mean everyone who can afford to tutor their child? I imagine, in grammar school areas, there are a number of children who don't get into grammar school because their places are taken by middle class children who have been bumped through the pass mark by 3 years' of tutoring?

We are considering tutoring in maths for DS who is about to go into Y4...not because he's behind, he's meeting expected levels, but it is not a subject he enjoys or finds easy.

And we reckon he'd benefit from one-to-one attention from an adult who is neither (a) his class teacher (b) his maths whizz father (c) his maths phobic mother . Unfortunately DS has not inherited DH's maths whizz tendencies and we find it really hard to help him. His dad just doesn't understand why anyone doesn't understand maths () and I had such dreadful maths experiences at school that just the sight of a worksheet makes me feel slightly sick. Based on those reasons alone, I think an independent tutor would really help.

So no particular desire to hot-house him, or get him into a private/selective secondary, or anything like that. Would just like to help him see maths as something to be enjoyed rather than dreaded...

Seeker I do really like what you have to say on other threads (that sounds sarky, it really isn't! I think you've given the most cogent arguments against a selective system and one that was very much echoed by some friends of ours in Essex in a similar situation). I don't have my children tutored but I'm not against the principle. You're (not to make this personal) very educated and are a SAHM (I remember reading elsewhere) so could it be argued that a working mother who employs a tutor is trying to emulate the situation of a child with educated, involved mother who's at home. I know friends of mine who do and it's to alleviate some of the guilt they feel and also so that the time they do spend with their children isn't encumbered by the feeling that they need to be drilling their children in some way.

I'm a tutor. In my opinion, tutoring is worth doing if your child is a) behind in a specific subject compared to their relative attainment due to a knowledge issue, b) behind their peer average due to a comprehension issue - e.g. they take four or five times of explaining to 'get' a concept but once they get it can retain it, c) they/you wish them to do a subject they can not do at school or d) you have either a relationship or time reason for not doing necessary work with them.

I have so many parents who send their kids to me for silly reasons and get me to tutor them when 10 minutes a day of interesting activity with a parent would be much more productive! I sound so silly trying to persuade the parents not to give me the money but to read with their kids instead.

If you want your child to enjoy maths - don't make him go to a tutor - find ways to play maths games and have fun together with maths and do not talk about maths lessons AT ALL!!! In primary I believe you risk doing more harm than good by pushing things at kids.

blue - its interesting to read that opinion from a tutor (I think others have said not dissimilar things further upthread). Its very much what I think too, but useful to see it echoed from the 'other side'.

We are considering in the next year or two getting a tutor for whichever MFL DD chooses for GCSE - especially if its German, which neither DH or I speak at all - for 'conversational' type stuff, so that she can not just pass an exam but actually be able to really speak the language to a usable level. That's something we can't do with her ourselves and which school lessons don't usually do. I guess thats sort of a (c) on your list.

I would say extra practise for a language is a good reason for tutoring as long as the child enjoys it (no point pushing extra if they are not keen, but if they enjoy it, it will be worth doing).

I've had a lad come to me for English tutoring, he's not doing well at school. His two main issues are he doesn't concentrate in school and he never reads. I can solve neither of these problems. We have done lots of good work, he has learnt much and has improved many key skills - but he will still fail to concentrate in lessons and if he doesn't read at all his reading will not improve! I feel a fraud taking their crisp tenners - but I assure you I have told the parents all this. I will be able to stop him dropping too far behind on key skills but in a 45 minute session I cannot make up for hours of wasted time in school.

Hamishbear - to answer your questions:

Why do you think expecting children to achieve highly is unfair or unrealistic? Do you think children can become 'great' and smash expectations?
I don't think expecting children to achieve highly is unfair as long as those expectations are realistic. Expecting a child who has zero interest in reading and hates writing essays to get a 5a in English is basically ignoring the actual child and wishing for a different one who doesn't exist. All those expectations will do is make the child feel they are not "right" - that they don't fit with how their parents want them to be. Also, achieving a 5a in year 6 doesn't equate with "achieving highly" in my book - all it means is that at age 11 you fit with the curriculum guidelines on what a child of that age should be able to do in English. Seriously you could write utter shit and still get a 5a because "achieving" that just means ticking the right boxes - it doesn't mean you have a particular writing talent or that you're going to go on and write the great British novel or anything. I suppose it all depends on your definition of "greatness" - if you think getting high marks is "great" then tutoring might help a child to achieve that. But IME all intensive tutoring really does is teach the child exam skills that their peers lack. Those exams skills are useful but they don't make a child "great" they just make them better at exams.

"It seems you see tutoring to fix a problem rather than to enhance and increase attainment?"
If a child is able and goes to decent school then should be able to reach the "right" attainment level for their ability just from normal schooling, without tutoring. If the child has the potential to achieve more and needs tutoring to do that then that means there is something wrong - either the school isn't up to scratch or the teaching doesn't suit the child in some way. So what I mean to say is that tutoring can't push a child to achieve something outside their ability - nothing can do that. What tutoring can do is overcome problems the child is having in maximising their ability. Overall though, what I think is that children are in school 6 hours a day every day. If they're paying attention, doing the work and trying their best and they have no learning problems then why make them do more? They are working at capacity. They have only one childhood, why not let them enjoy it rather than constantly serving the future like some slave?

no point pushing extra if they are not keen, but if they enjoy it, it will be worth doing
absolutely. Pretty much the same test as you'd apply to any other extra-curricular activity such as music lessons for this sort of thing I suppose.

Update: I spoke to someone today who is planning to get their child tutored in a specific subject (not to pass an entrance exam, but not far below average either). I finally know an ordinary person who would do such a thing.

I think that if you have a specific goal then tutoring can be useful. I like the idea someone had on here of getting language tutoring alongside GSCE ( I have q dd who says that she'll be fine in Spain so long as somebody asks her what colour her bedroom is and what furniture she has in it, or if she needs to ask the way to the swimming pool). And dd has decided, with some trepidation that she wants to do physics A level ( not one of hr best subjects but she loves it) and we have agreed to get her a tutor if she finds it harder than she expects. But tutoring for the sake of it strikes me qs being a waste of money and childhood.

Seeker, you have a DD at grammar in Kent. Was she tutored for the 11+?

(My guess is she wasn't?)

No she wasn't. Apart from some speed practice at home. But neither was ds, who failed! So we prove nothing.

Yes, just interested, because someone upthread implied it was necessary.

FWIW, I know lots of untutored children at grammar schools. And plenty who were tutored who did not get in. (As well as tutored children who did get in, and untutored children who didn't........)

Dana, thanks.

If you really can write 'utter shite' & receive a 5a then there's something very wrong with our system IMO but that's perhaps another debate.

I think one of the issues is generally people take attainment at these levels to indicate ability.

I disagree in that I think ability can be increased, you can always push the boundaries & children can do more than we know. One to one, in my experience, with the right person can be incredibly inspiring and take a child to new heights & add so much value.

Agree that drilling a child to pass an exam may not develop intellect & could be counter productive. I've learnt a lot from the enrichment culture here. The best centres are incredibly inspiring & take a child way beyond the curriculum. Perfectly ordinary children take enormous strides in their learning.

There is a real joy in learning & I would want a tutor to instill this & inspire my child with their own infectious enthusiasm & passion for whichever subject taught.

As for the the thought study ruins childhood most of mine was spent watching TV & playing computer games. I wish I'd laid down good study habits as these would have helped enormously & hopefully meant not staying up all night for my dissertation ;).

To the tutor up thread that mentioned Bucks grammar statistics that was really interesting. I can think of a non selective Prep where around 90 per cent of their pupils appear to go to the most popular Bucks grammars & the rest to independent schools.

a dd who says that she'll be fine in Spain so long as somebody asks her what colour her bedroom is and what furniture she has in it
exactly! Mine would be fine in France so long as she was asked what she did on her last holiday. Except she'd be too self-concious to say anything to an actual French person.

Oh, and you can't write utter shite and get a 5a.