Private school AND tutors, what am I missing?

[ChocChipHandbag]

Just came back from a drinks eve with some fellow Year 1 mothers. Our children are in an independent primary that goes straight through to senior so no need to do 7+ or 11+. The school is high ranked and academic. Additional kids join at Year 3 and year 7 after doing entrance exams.

Several of the parents are paying for their kids to do extra maths with tutors. These are not kids who are behind in maths, they are the bright ones. The rationale seems to be that the 7+ kids joining in Year 3 will have been intensively tutored so the “straight through” kids need to be at the same level.

My DS is really really good at maths. Teacher says he is easily the best in the class. I kind of figured that was good enough, the school knows what it is doing and he’ll be absolutely fine in junior school. What are all these parents scared of- am I missing something here? They are not even 7, GCSEs are years away.

It's barmy and a way for tiger parents to say '"look what I'm doing , I'm ahead of you".
Why on earth would anybody pay for private school and a tutor to compete with a kid from the local primary for senior admission ?
I have experienced private school as a parent and I consider it a huge mistake and now cannot understand why I sent them, perhaps other than snobbery.
They are both now doing well at Uni but I am convinced they would have done equally well at the local Comp and I wish I had saved the money to buy a house for them to live in whilst at Uni instead of improving the sales figures for next year's mistaken intake.

Teacher says he is easily the best in the class.

😅

Tutors at year 1? Unless they are really struggling, that's just batshit. Why do so many parents see it's a competition? Treating their children as pawns in some kind of game, seeing who comes out top.
Let them be children ffs, let them play, learn and grow. Let them find their own place in the world, whether that's academically, vocationally or socially.

Poor kids and their competitive parents.

Well, how else are the "high ranked and academic" independent schools going to achieve their stellar results if they can't rely on selective entry and competitive parents who are willing to hothouse their children? That's the business model.

A friend runs a tutor agency. She says about half of her kids actually need the help, the other half have parents who want their already bright and able children to gain the upper hand to be top of the class. People are very competitive, perhaps the sort of high earners who can afford school fees are more so than others.

Maybe they want their kids to go to a different school and they need to sit entrance exams?

They still don't need tutoring aged 5 and 6!

I can't believe that any teacher would say little Johnny is the best in the class at anything. Surely that is hugely unprofessional and inappropriate?!

Why is it unprofessional to tell a child that they are the best in the class at a particular subject? Some children lack confidence and have no idea that they are really good at something- why shouldn’t they be told?

I wouldn’t tell a child who was going to tell everyone else (or their parent was going to!!). But a diligent, quiet child - absolutely!

Private schools are not necessary for most cases. The same goes for private tutoring (for most children in private or state schools).

If you can afford the service to give your child 1:1 time with a teacher/tutor AND your child enjoys the experience, why not?

If your child is behind, gifted, special needs etc, some of them might have that kind of opportunity in school. 1:1 intervention, small group pull out sessions etc. That doesn't mean only those handful of kids benefit from 1:1 time so let focusing on them.

I think that kind 1:1 time is valuable for kids. Again, not necessary but nice to have. An opportunity to ask questions they might not feel comfortable asking in a group of 30 or 20. An opportunity for parent to hear about their child for more than 10 minutes per term. An opportunity for busy parents to not feel guilty about not being able to give that space for their children every week. It doesn't damage the kids as long as it's done in a fun way and moderately. It doesn't have to be specifically for kids academically behind. It's all about achieving each child's potential and that's different for every child.

If it's 60 pounds an hour (30 weekly lessons a year), it's about 7-8% of most London private school fee. If 40 pounds an hour, it's about 5-6%. So, although it is not necessary, it's not shocking that some people would spend/invest that amount?

@inappropriateraspberry they might for 7+? It’s not something I would do, I’m just trying to think of why someone would. My DS has support for his SEN needs but I don’t and wouldn’t tutor him to pass the 7+.

I feel I need to bookmark this thread to show every private school parent who hops aboard the controversial private v state threads, and who claims private is fine because it's state parents who pay for lots of extra tuition.

It's not and never will be. There's a Sutton Trust report which i can't be bothered to find which says it's overwhelmingly private parents who pay for extra tuition.

So your story does not surprise me, OP.

She told us, at parents’ evening, not him. There was context that is irrelevant here so I won’t go into it.

No, I asked that and they want to stay at ours. One has older siblings in the senior school who joined at 11+ .

She shouldn't be telling you either! Wholly unprofessional regardless of any context!

I've said this on threads before.

If I was paying thousands for private school I'd be very disappointed if I felt a need to pay for additional tutoring on top. Totally ridiculous.

In European countries children don’t even start school until year 2. They start with very little formal maths and English teaching, as did my DD. It’s a much better system in my opinion. She is now in UK secondary and is in top sets for all subjects. It didn’t make any difference academically but she did have a lovely childhood.

I think private school is a waste of money and definitely private tutors for year 1’s is a complete waste of money esp when you’re already paying thousands. I think private schools are laughing all the way to the bank.

This is absolutely a thing. My dcs have a wide mix of friends through their out of school hobbies - so, from local comps to Westminster, Harrow, Habs etc. State school parents seem to tutor to top up where needed, if a child is struggling with one subject, or to give a bit of extra confidence. At primary age, it was mainly for 11 plus exams.

Private school friends had an entire schedule of tutors for most subjects. Their argument was that the schools were so ridiculously competitive, they needed to do everything they could to give their child the edge.

University destinations were largely the same in the end.

@Lemontango private schools don't make a profit. Any excess fee income is ploughed back into the school.

Oh ok fair point. The tutors are on to a good thing though!

It’s the children I feel for, let them have a childhood without all the pressure.

As a side note, this has always surprised me as an expat in the UK: why this unwillingness to let parents know where their child sits compared to their peers? … except at sports of course, where sports day will not only show who is first or last but do it in front of all parents

more money then sense.
out of the 30 or so people who went to private school, not a single one of them earns more then the local gyspy doing gardens down the road from me and he never even went to school.
if they feel their child needs extra tuition on top of their already ridiculously high school fees then they’re beyond help.