can state primary education plus tutoring = equivalent of private?

[wheelsonthebus]

we planned to privately educate dc, but dh lost his job and now dc is going to a state primary - downgraded from good to satisfactory by ofsted . if we have dc tutored from yr 1 say, can we get up to standard of a private school(with a view to moving dc if our finances improve - possibly at 7, but definitely at 11). Can an hour a week really achieve anything? Anyone done this from early on? Interested in any views. I now work f/t so doing lots of stuff with dc after school myself is not really an option (except at weekends). I'd be interested to know when tutoring shd really start. My friend said her primary school gets great league table results but that's because most parents pay tutors. Also; what do most people get tutors for - maths or English or both?

frogs - thanks for your advice too. not tutoring at y1 will save a fortune - tutoring is £35 a session round here. One woman charges £45.

oh I'm not saying they are better katie. I always leave my children to do their homework (may guide them but certainly wouldn't do it for them) and I believe that's far better (they also hardly get any tbh and that's the way I think it should be at primary school!).

The difference in breadth of topic, I believe, comes from having a far smaller class and also having the freedom to cover topics differently (as compared to state school).

Interestingly wheels, both these private schools claim that their children are approx 2 years ahead of where an average state school child would be.

Looking at all our children, I don't think that's correct at all. While they may know more about certain subjects, it doesn't change how naturally bright a child is anyway!

two years ahead - agh! (sends me into another panic)

Well the privare schools would say that wouldn't they !!Would be interesting to know how their 'raw material' compares though to get a meaningful comparison.

verbal and non verbal reasoning are designed to test potential rather than attainment and the benefits of coaching have found to be limited .If the private school kids are doing significantly better on these I would say it is down to them being more naturally intelligent.
I think private schools come into their own when it comes to extra curricular activities they can offer and small class sizes.Although some rural state schools have very small class sizes too.

AGree with foxinsocks.

The privately-educated kids of my acqaintance get faaaar more homework, but most of it seems to be either very routine (pages and pages and pages of practice in letter formation for a reception child to be completed over the halfterm for eg) or sufficiently complicated to require major parental input (eg. Y2 child being expected to spell words that they couldn't possibly have any practical use for such as 'secretary', 'protracted', 'concede'. And endless endless drilling on times tables.

Obviously these kids may, on some measures, be two years ahead of their chronological age, but pushing a child beyond their ability is not ultimately sustainable, nor is it particularly useful. And it takes up a lot of time in which kids can be doing more fun and independent things.

DO NOT BE FAZED by people whose kids are/seem to be performing way beyond your dc. As long as your dc are learning to read well, and to learn basic maths, everything else is mostly fluff and can be easily replicated at home by taking them to museums, castles and the theatre. Give them lots of books, and talk to them a lot. That way you end up with dc who may not be quite as impressive in terms of joined-up writing, but have lots of ideas and things to say for themselves, often a bit more left-field than the more intensively-taught kids but none the worse for that.

Truly, do not stress about it. And remember that people who are paying £12K a year for a primary education have a vested interest in believing that the system they're buying into is better, so develop a good bullshit filter for some of the wilder claims you'll hear.

Agree with fox it is the breadth rather than subjects themselves and the scope for discussion. By end year 6, ds (who joined year 3) had done 4 years of French and 2 of Latin, dd(started Reception) will have done an additional year of French. Subjects like English are taught in specific weekly lessons for grammar and comprehension. Subjects like science are increasingly taught in purpose built labs. Games and swimming take up a larger part of the timetable using on site facilities and so on.

ds is entering year 7 and is staying at his prep for 2 more years, although about 1/3 leave for senior schools at 11. So you also can have an option according to the maturity of your child.

If you feel you may want to integrate your child into a private school at a later date, encourage the extra curricular activities (might be worth seeing what the strengths of particular potential schools are) so that they have instant common ground, as well as the academics.

'eg. Y2 child being expected to spell words that they couldn't possibly have any practical use for such as 'secretary', 'protracted', 'concede'. And endless endless drilling on times tables. '

That's exactly what my two had in state primary!

The homework they have since swapping to private schools has been far less fiddly: no more making crafty projects. They just finish work or do some sums to check they've understood something. Or they learn vocabulary for a test.

Again in my state primary we expect Y3 to be able to write simple sentences in French. Children begin French & Spanish in nursery. They study Dickens and Shakespeare in depth from Y4. Our children are taught to debate and are more than able to express their opinions. We have lots of free after school sports coaching and extended writing is the norm from reception. My reception children do daily dictation and can write a minimum of half a side of A4 and reading at levels above their chronological age.

frogs - thanks. you are making me laugh (in a good way) which is not something that normally happens when the issue of education comes up. In fact dh and I had a row about it this morning. I'd live in a tipi if it meant paying for private school (he, clearly, would not).

Laughing is good, wheels.

It's what I try to do in response to the madder comments from my privately-educating acquaintances and their dc. I find that some people are genuinely astonished that state schools actually educate children not to mention giving them loads of extra-curricular activities as opposed to (presumably) being some kind of sub-nursery/ social work unit (primary schools) or a holding pen for teenagers not quite old enough for prison (secondary schools).

Recent gems include (I swear I didn't make these up):

"OMG you go to a state school? But don't they all smoke and take drugs?" (16yo cousin to my dd)
"At the comprehensive kids get beaten up for taking their violin in" (Friend)
"Oh, but he's so sensitive, she couldn't possible send him to a state school, he'd get bullied" (my mum about my nephew)
"Well what do you expect, he went to a grammar school" (my mum about her friend's dd's husband caught having an affair)
"Well there's a lovely primary school in the village with very good ofsted and all that, but he'd have no chance of passing the exam for a secondary school if we sent him there" (friend, wtf?)
"Did she really get offered a scholarship to XX? But I thought she was at a state primary school?" (friend of my mum's, about my dd1)

You have to just [eye roll] and let it wash over you. Have fun.

OOh, have to say that DS does not have dreary homework at his private school; in fact (just about to go into Yr 2) for the past two years the only homework he's had has been reading (which I don't count as homework, IYSWIM) and ten or twelve spellings to learn each week - and all very useful words indeed!

Wheels, I can't possibly improve on the advice Frogs has given, but one thing I would like to add is that you need to be very sceptical of this 'two years ahead' business. An 'average' state school child is expected to achieve level 4b in their SATs at the end of year 6. My DD1 was working at level 5a in English, Maths and Science at the end of year 6 last year - that is two years ahead of average, and the highest that can be achieved at at KS2. At the end of Year 7 this year, she was working at level 7 in Maths and Science and Level 6 in English. In theory this means that she progressed by more than two years in Maths and Science and up to two years in English and that she is now working three years ahead of the average for her age group. Of course that's nonsense, she was probably working at level six by Year 6, but they don't measure it.
DD is a bright child, but not exceptionally so, and several of her friends will be achieving the same. None of them has ever had tutoring of any kind.
So take this two years ahead thing with a pinch of salt, in every state school there will be a significant group of children achieving the same or better.

I love Frogs comments. We experienced them all too.

My mother spent years putting up with comments from friends who were privately educating their children.

When I was at University there were some privately educated students who actually thought that you couldn't take GCSEs in state schools!

They were shocked to discover that us state schoolers had achieved very good GCSEs and A'levels and had been able to take subjects (such as Further Maths A'level) that they hadn't been able to do.

My comp. even arranged special classes to allow some of us to do Russian GCSE (much use that was...have never been able to persuade anyone to come to Russia with me)because it couldn't be time-tabled.

Agree with Lady Glencora - in my Y5 class two thirds are already above 4b as they move into Y6, some considerably above. So they are already 2 years ahead of average in a state school.

I also agree with LGP.

My DD has just finished Y7 at a state comprehensive and - like LGP's DD - is working and achieving L6/7 (as are many of my DD's state primary-educated peers). There are several pupils in DD's year group who came from private schools and plenty of them did NOT get put into the top sets at the beginning of Y7.

So I would say to the OP, don't unnecessarily worry about extra tutoring, your DCs will probably not need it.

I imagine parents pay for extra-curriculum activities at private school. Because of the dedication of staff, our state school offers (from Y1 onwards): tag rugby, football, athletics, cross country, orchestra, 3 x recorders, gardening, lego, hand chimes, drama, modern and country dancing and maypole. Next year there will be a film club, special Y6 voice training and mini choir as well.

Also, when we do science, we go outside on the field and in the woods to investigate things rather than use a purpose built lab. Why do you need a lab with little children?

Totally agree with TrickerG on the extracurricular stuff. It actually makes my blood boil when I see people come on here and assert that children at state schools don't get the chance to do these. At our primary school they have on offer (and totally free)
Gym club (school competes and does well at county level), football, netball, cricket and athletics. Art, cookery, construction, choir (which take part in many local festivals), orchestra, Recorder, French, Italian, Latin, International, Movie making, Drama and probably a few more I've forgotten. All run, as Tricker says, by staff or parents on a voluntary basis.
There are also peripatetic music teachers for keyboard, brass, guitar, strings and drums.
This is a totally ordinary state primary school in a not particularly middle class area and fail to see how anyone can say that this is inferior provision to what you might get at a private school.

Same at ours - we have a policy of keeping clubs free, partly because we are in a deprived area. We have free music lessons (clarinet, flute, drums, violin, trumpet, guitar), French, Mandarin, chess, drama, music, cricket, rugby, netball, dance, gymanstics, football, girls' football, Art, Rock school, orchestra.

Oh to live in one of these areas with these fab state primary schools with lots of lovely activities!!!

My local primary (in a nice, leafy suburb) has two out of school activities - football and French - both of which have to be paid for.

Just because your state schools offer alot of extra curricular activities it's naieve of you to assume that everyone elses schools offer this aswell.
Ds's old school had a choir, a chess club, gardening and football. That was it, for a large school (300+), this was pretty poor to be blunt.

by the same token just because your child's school doesn't /didn't offer all these things don't assume all other schools are the same which seems to be the case with many posters.

Of course mrz. I am though. There appears to be a very big difference in the state schools all over. Quite sad really.

Absolutely FluffyBunny - it's amazing that some schools offer so much and some so little.

HT at the local primary works on the assumption that most parents can afford to organise and pay for music, drama etc away from the school so why should she organise it?

I didn't say that all state schools offer this range of extra curricular activities, FluffyBunny, although many do. I was pointing out that many posters here whose children attend private schools assume that no state schools do. Which is not the case.

"It actually makes my blood boil when I see people come on here and assert that children at state schools don't get the chance to do these. At our primary school they have on offer.."

I really hate cutting and pasting posts LadyGlen.