Tuition from year one and grammar school chances

[squashpie]

Couldn't think what else to call this question. DS is in year 1. He seems to be in top third in the various subjects. A few of his classmates have tuition/ kumon, which I'd always been dead against. Now I've discovered today that two of those tutored/ kumoned kids have extra maths to stretch them because they are clearly excelling.

We live in the London area and competition for grammar schools is fiercer than fierce and the local non-selective state schools are dire. It is our dearest wish that, if he were capable, DS would get into a grammar school. But how much of an advantage are the tutored/ kumoned kids getting. Will they be that far ahead when it comes to 11+? I've read on here that pupils level out but I can't help thinking that those who are so far ahead they are getting extra maths because they are already ahead of their year group are just going to maintain that lead. Do non-tutored but bright kids get into grammar school at 11?

Sorry for long post.

The thing is, tutored kids will have parents who care about education (this is not saying that all people who don't tutor don't care) and so are likely to succeed in any case. I do think you can have too much of a good thing (extra tutoring could put children off work for example) and if a child isn't struggling at school & finds school work quite easy, then ignoring 11+ passing issues, I'd suggest that exercising their brains in other directions, ie: extra curricular things, would be better than tutoring. There is evidence that shows that children who do more extra curricular activities achieve more highly academically than those who don't - I suspect that learning a broader range of skills could well be better for you in the long run than just focussing on Maths & English.

What are you calling 'intelligence' Cortina? There's obviously academic intelligence which gets you the exam passes and yes to a certain extent I agree you can learn that. But what about emotional intelligence which is more what snorkie's on about?

I remember watching a Robert Winston programme ages ago about how children learn. And I remember the biggest factor in predicting a child's educational success was the level of education of his/her mother. Not whether parents worked. Not whether the child went to prvate school. Not whether the child started school at 3 or 7. And not the education level of the father (which surprised me).

Oh and not whether or not they got extra tuition at age six.

Strix, I think that's the kind of propaganda that they would like us to swallow. That way we can just get on with it at the local sink school and not ask too many awkward questions. Most of our grandmothers probably left school at 16 or earlier and didn't benefit from a great education and most of our mothers probably didn't go to University.

I'm sure that is true Strix and actaully not very suprising, but mothers who were in the top 30% whose children are therfore likley to be in the top 30%, are then striving to give their children a bigger advantage by pushing them as high up that 30% as they can go to get into the best schools, get best exam grades and go to best unis they can.

Also mothers who were in top 30% but whose child is is bottom 50% (like me) get all panicky and see this as something they need to address so start tutors/kumon/opt for private in an effort to boost them, and get them into top 30%.

Children with high acheieving mothers do well beasuse high acheiving mothers(parents) will want them and expect them to, and will do what they think is necessary to acheive this. It's not just some osmosis or genetic thing.

Also I'm sure that the child doing Kumon/tution is also likely to be the child who is also doing ballet/violin/tennis, and the two things are not mutualy exclusive.

Bridges, you made me laugh. My DD who does Kumon allso does ballet, tennis, violin. (although she gave up tennis in Jan for violin so not all at the same time)

Of the 2 un tutored girls, one has passed anyway but has the girls grammar as 4th choice! Mixed grammar, ashford girls, local comp then girls school

The one with the level 3;s, that's fior yr 5 sats as they are mid yr 6 now, of course it doesnt matter what her sats are or will be - she PASSED the entrance test (the Kent test/11+) so they dont look at her sats. She gets in.

The other un tutored girl is very behind, some form of dyslexia, she uses what my dd calls a "lexia" program at school.

As for the comments on grammar not being always the right school, I went to the one we will appeal for her to go to, I moved into the area from a 13+ area (comps til yr 9 (3rd yr!)) and therefore had to go to the local comp for 2 yrs. Oh my word, what a difference

oh and

passed/HT appeal - 6

Appealing - 2/3
(my dd's yr 5 sats were 4a 5c 5c (5c for sciences too)

going to comp - 7/8

going private - 1

I think around year 4 would be the appropriate time to start tutoring for various exams - be they 11+, Common Entrance etc (and that's if you want to go along that route).

Year 1 is far too early in my view. The teachers at my childrens school have advised all parents not too start to early. It can actually be detrimental as children can become bored and resentful of tutoring for so long.....

What are you calling 'intelligence' Cortina?

Good attitudes and habits of mind are capable of being strengthened. 'Intelligence' is a broad concept and is learnable in every respect.

Just to add to the mix, my dad has been a secondary school teacher for 30 years (in italy), and thinks that children who do extra curricular activities, especially music, tend to be the brigher/achieve better grades. I was surprised to hear this, but it's probably because they have parents who are a little more interested in their education, rather than doing the extra curricular things per se? (in order to do an extra curricular activity such as music, for example, you generally need a parents willing to be a taxi service, pay etc)

Clary - we went to the free trial sessions. DD is doing fine at mahs but lacks confidence. So she achieves expected levels, but feels she can't do maths for some reason. We had hoped Kumon would be good for the confidence thing. But honestly - the starting level was so basic, little more than preschool stuff, and stuff DD had been able to do for years. She was so demotivated n seeing how "babyish" the work was and we were concerned it would just be confirming her believe that she can't do Maths. So, have had a look and no - we won't be doing it. She has some workbooks aimed at her own age/ability and can do 5-10 minutes of them every other night instead - much more appropriate IMO.

I agree with Hulababy. We did kumon for a few months with dd and frankly we all found it boring. We do work books instead which she really enjoys and asks to do.

Also for the price - was £50 a month here, plus a registration fee - I would expected qualified teaching staff, no sixth form adnd university students as tutors.

It's obviously not for everyone. But, I am a big fan of Kumon. It has been really good for DD. I has gotten her into a routine and helped her learn how to concentrate on something for more than 6 seconds, and that helps her in the classroom too.

Maybe it is a coincidence and she wa always going to excel in math. Or maybe Kumon has given her that extra edge.

As for cost, you can pay a lot more than £50 per month for tutoring.

It is about lots of repetition, and there are some things it doesn't teach. I expect when DD gets to higher levels of math like algebra and geometry it might not be the thing. But, for now, in her early years when math is largely about memorising things like times tables it is great.

One thing Kumon does not do is align itself with the school curriculum which was a bit tricky earlier this year when she moved onto multiplication at school but was still mastering addition at Kumon. But we stuck with it and because she really knows her addition and subtraction well she is doing really well with the bonds they are practising in class now -- much better than her friends who were put at a higher table at the beginning of the year.

Maybe it isn't due to Kumon. But, for now, I am a fan.

There's a fairly deprived junior school in London emy (not sure exactly where) that was given a huge amount of money to be spent on music education. So all the children have access to free top class instrumental lessons etc, many of whom would never have had the opportunity otherwise. A side effect was that the school's academic results went sailing upwards, so maybe there is something in your dad's theory even though generally speaking learning music is very class restricted.

"Perhaps we'd like any future government to provide more selective schools and for them to be particular to that area (which is not the case in London, as mentioned above), so that we can indeed give our children back their childhood and parents aren't lambasted for trying to do their best for their children in the area in which they live."

NO! I wouldn't , actually, I would ask any future gvt to reduce both school and class sizes, ensure good teaching in all secondaries and stream for individual subjects in community comps. I don't see how your proposal addresses your problem, anyway: afaik, even in the old days, grammars were for about 10% of the school population, and now muct be fo about the top 1% of high achieving kids because of the competition. You cannot possibly be sure by Yr 1 that your child is grammar material anyway.

I am aghast at the presumption by so many parents (generally - not saying you, OP) that their child will naturally be a grammar ability child.

I'm more aghast by the presumption that we all want out children to be a 'grammar ability child'.

They seem little more than education factories. Are they the best educators? They start with children who seem, from this post and others and from my own experience of living in a grammar school area, to have been 'pushed', 'coached', 'spoonfed', given extra work (however you want to describe it) from a very earlier age so there is no excuse for even an adequately competent teacher failing to get very good results from them.

That is evidence of parents' involvement and commitment and not the quality of a school.

Strix, I'm really pleased that Kumon is working for you. I personally don't agree that repetitative learning like Kumon is effective at teaching kids on a long-term basis or getting them to actually enjoy learning. I think it bores them and switches them off! Did you see Dispatches last night 'kids don't count'?, it said that children should do much more practical learning to understand more fully what things actually mean. I'm pleased that Sir Jim Rose is changing the National Curriculum next year to make it all practical. I know this is what really works for my DS in Year 3.

random aside but OP, are you totally sure that all non-selective schools in the area are terrible? Clearly, a very small proportion of local kids get into tiffin, for example, so there must be some other options. Not sure exactly where you are but as you mention Sutton, I have a v close friend teaching at Glenthorne who says it is a great, mixed ability place with all the broad sport, music etc you would want and good results for the brightest and good value add for less bright students (in maths, I know that for certain not sure in all subjects). So, the whole grammar shebang may not be as essential as it currently seems...

Grammars are not always the best option IMO. I will certainly not be tutoring my dd or encouraging her to apply for the grammars here.

belsizemum,
I agree with your points on practical learning and the repetition may not be an effective long term strategy. Kumon doesn't replace the school curriculum. But the repetition does sharpen her mental maths and she is more able to do well in the class room, and that boosts her cinfidence. I agree that math needs to be fun, and 11 year need to understand how it applies to the real world. But, right now in year 2 we are still laying the foundations. And, if those kids at Barton Hill had memorised their times tables and basic addition and subtraction to say 20, they would have found the subject matter much easier.

So, you may be right about the long term strategy, but for now it seems to be well worth £50 per month.

cat, the admissions people at 2 schools DS1 is looking at for 7+, which have senior schools consistently in the top 5 every year, said the same thing. Interestingly, the head of the 7+ process at DS's school also said that the most successful candidates were those who weren't tutored.

i dont get this tutoring big time for kids who only get a level 4 at year 6 sat???

I would imagine all grammar school kids to be a steady or high five or level 6