angered by tuition for grammar school 11+

[kelway]

i was curious but does anyone else here feel the same in being frustrated with overly pushy parents who get their offspring heavily tutored (ie 3/4 nights a week after school for at least 2 years before taking the 11+). I constantly hear of girls getting into our local grammar school who were not as clever as other girls in the same class at school but who were overly pushed by their parents. Subsequently it feels like the local grammar school has been almost 'hijacked' by such people who can afford extra tuition. I always understood that grammar schools were for the more gifted student that perhaps had parents that could not afford to send them to a private school. Our local grammar school has become very elitest. i get the impression that the way i feel is pretty standard of most mothers of girls where i live (if your child isn't tutored however bright they are they stand no chance of getting into the local grammar school).

God sorry. That read a bit DM.

Also, I wan't "making excuses" for my children. My children have a lot of books and we would be considered middle class.

Yes very DM

Ok, alpinePony - I give up. You're right.

"The rich man in his castle, The poor man at the gate". People are only poor because they want to be - if they wanted to read books they could always get a lift to the library.

All's well in this the best of all possible worlds.

Having just been through the horrible process I just wish we'd moved to a different area.

Bucks CC admits that external coaching for a period of over 9 months makes a substantive difference to a child's 11+ performance.

There are some state schools round here which get excellent 11+ results - talking to a parent with a child in Yr2 who has already enrolled her for preparation classes starting in Yr4, this is completely the norm at that one particular school.

And while yes, it would be marvellous if every parent were able to access the resources around, their own educational level does also have a huge bearing. One child I know who entered (and failed by a long way) was the first in her family to ever do it. Her parents do not have a particularly high level of literacy, the odds were stacked against the child from the start.

I don't know if Bucks has a figure on how many children eligible for free school meals get through. I'd be very interested to see it.

The council's argument is that the appeals system is there to redress any inequalities. Well that assumes that children have sat it in the first place and have parents clued up enough or motivated to go through with what's a very intimidating process.

depressing report from Sutton Trust

From memory, 2% of children at grammar schools are on free school meals, against 13ish% of the school population.

I agree with OP.

Lots of the usual cliches are coming out about pushy middle class parents etc, but it is not that simple.

We live in an area where state education choices are grim. This means that many people, rich and poor, scrabble around trying to find somewhere where their children can be educated and feel safe. Being middle class does help. It means you have the resources to move house, to rent a flat somewhere else, perhaps have children "live" with grandparents somewhere more leafy. It also means you are more likely to be Christian and to take the State School route or to pay. Or you can tutor your kids to the nines.

Tough if you are a newly arrived asylum seeker or migrant who is already worried about raising teenagers on an inner city estate and does not know enough about the system to play it, yet desperate to use education as a route to a better future for your children.

Though mine tried for a couple of selective schools (including Tiffin) we did so without tutoring and, honestly, they got nowhere. They did get into good selective London day schools where they are thriving. I know one child who got in, via the wait list, without tutoring though with lots of home practice, and she is not only towards the top of the year group, but is also the only one of her friends who was not tutored. Some exceptionally bright children (major scholarships to top schools) do not get Tiffin.

Though fees are a real struggle, the combination of a long daily commute to a grammar and the two or three years of daily VR and non VR practice did not appeal. Education should be education, not exam-technique, childhood should be childhood, and out of school activities should be more than test papers.

Ironically if my children stay where they are within their year groups they can be predicted to do better than many at Tiffin. Some of this may be down to smaller classes, or more resources. However it suggests that if Tiffin is really selecting without bias and taking the brightest, they are not doing very much with them once they get in. (There are about 600 girls out there who did better than my daughter in the test and also did not get a place!) Or that places go to the most prepared not the brightest.

As well as possible language and class bias there may also be a cultural bias. The system may favour large extended families with the experience and ability to support preparation, above say the child of a single mum who is already working two jobs to keep heads above water.

I don't know if the solution is not to get rid of grammars, as they represent an opportunity to some who would not otherwise have it - and clearly people are desperate for that opportunity. The mad tutoring phenomenum is more a symptom of concerns about the alternatives.

The system is now so deranged that it almost represents child abuse. The OP is right to be angry. Children are spending two, three, or four years practising VR and non VR when they could be reading books, playing, taking part in sport, learning an instrument or a language. What happens when they get in? Or if they dont?

Having educated middle-class parents is usually a huge determinant in educational achievement. Education is valued, children are read to and encouraged yadda yadda yadda

Grammar schools used to be the way of levelling out those sorts of inequalities, because everyone was prepared for the 11+. Social mobility has massively decreased as a direct result of abolishing them. It's richly ironic that the socialists who abolished grammar schools have decreased social mobility.

I see the report that there are fewer socially disadvantaged children at grammar schools than there are at comprehensive schools. But it seems to me that those socially disadvantaged children at grammar must be more likely to achieve a degree of social mobility than they would be if they went to comprehensive schools.

So I think the answer is to have more, not fewer grammar schools; for the 11+ to test ability rather than knowledge; for the exam to become more widespread and for preparation for the 11+ to be undertaken at state primary schools.

If all the kids are tutored why would they then 'struggle' when they get to GS? Makes no sense - the teachers do not teach to a aribrary level regardless of the abilities of the pupils they are teaching - they will teach the children they get. Tutoring is not a foolproof, magic bullet you can buy to enable dim children to pass an exam. This idea of 'struggling' is just congitive dissonnance on the part of peopel who want to kid themselves their child is a genius who just 'was robbed'.

If you are Christian you can take the Church School route....

(Our local comps are also those closest to Downing Street. Apart from Jack Straw whose son went to Pimlico, I do not see politicians of either party doing anything other than what local people want to do, which is to find alternatives.)

I honestly believe that this tutoring for years for VR and NVR papers is an urban myth.

Would any parent who has shelled out for this step forward on this thread?

Just because I cannot believe anyone has done this.

If you sit through the practice papers, which I did with DD, they are not difficult. DD is only averagely bright. i distinctly recall that the first time of doing the tests she scored around 60%. By the end of the 4 practice papers she was scoring 93% plus. What on earth form of good would tuturing do for VR and NVR papers?

I am convinced it is an urban myth. If it is not an urban myth then both parents and children are being robbed blind. Parents of their money and children of their time and energy, which would as others have said, be much better spent learning an instrument or playing.

I repeat. In my dd's very socially diverse primary school - in the catchment of an area of significant social deprivation, ONLY middle class children of graduates passed the 11÷. And they were by no means the brightest 12 in the year.

I don't doubt that Seeker, and you've produced research to demonstrate that your experience is widespread.

But your solution is to abolish the grammar schools, no?

And how would that actually improve social mobility and access to tertiary education? Because you're just closing another door, aren't you? Why not simply ensure that the exams only test ability and ensure that children/parents have equal access.

I was not expecting them to struggle. More that you might have a group whose "education" to date had been based around VR and non-VR and who were behind on things they had not spent time doing, such as play, sport, essay writing etc.

There will be some very very bright kids, and I have heard that especially towards the top of the school and in the top sets, it is a great place to be. Indeed for a bright girl perhaps easier than an indie where levels of affluence and sophistication can be overwhelming. However part of the cohort will presumably be children who are there because they are well prepared, and will be taught accordingly. However perhaps a duller cohort that kids who have had more time to do other things and who have not spent two or three years focussing on an entry exam.

(Dare I add that we have come across one or two rather arrogant Tiffin boys, who genuinely seem to believe that passing the test at 11 means they are cleverer, and perhaps better, than their peers!)

(I might also add that it would be great not to pay those fees, so allow a level of sour grapes!)

Quattrocento,

Where do you live. Certainly not Kingston.

Read the Tiffin thread.

We know people who were delighted simply because their Y4 child was accepted by one of SW London's top Tiffin tutors. The tutor tests before accepting a child and then it is assumed the place is guaranteed.

I don't know if you tutor to get the tutor!

Move to South Bucks and see if it's an urban myth then Quattro. I can name any number of children who have been very heavily coached in the very specific questions asked in the local VR test. Yes they are being robbed blind, there are some companies and tutors doing very nicely indeed out of it all.
Personally I would see grammars abolished. I grew up in area with good comps - far fairer.

I don't live in Kingston. Reluctant to state on a public forum where I do like. I am aware that the Tiffin schools do VR and NVR and I think you are all utterly bonkers to coach.

If you're coaching for VR and NVR then the child's ability must be in question IMO

Stubborn as a mule, but then again I have practised these papers with DD and there can be no benefit in intensive coaching for them. None. Parental paranoia gone mad.

Horrible to see the levels of parental anxiety on this subject and worse to imagine the impact on the children.

I think OP said she was angry about it.

This is reasonable. However part of the solution has to be to acknowledge there is a problem. The schools cannot as they must continue to assert their system is fair.

I think there has been enough on this and other forums, especially on threads on how to tutor, to suggest it goes on. Indeed there is a whole website on eleven plus exams.

Simply suggesting that it is parental paranoia gone mad is not sufficient. The paranoia has a firm grip in SW London. So many children sit the exam that one mark off means twenty places down the wait list. The exceptional child may be OK. Tutoring may be seen as the way to ensure the more ordinary score every point available.

The bigger question is why are so many people chasing across London for a very small number of schools. This is the cause of the problem. Facile to simply blame parents.

Okay, so what's your solution then? Seeker wants to abolish all grammar schools. I think there should be more of them, with more information/support for access available in state primary schools.

Quattrocento - of course students who have learnt how to do the question types do better than those who have never, ever done a similar test. How can that be urban myth? Your own child went up c 30%. And a child whose vocabulary was poor due to limited reading could easily improve more.

Don't forget that not all GS entrance exams are just VR and NVR - many have maths too, which covers the whole year 6 curriculum, which no child in a state school will have covered by the start of year 6 when the tests are sat. To give a child a good chance in an 11+ maths test is virtually impossible without tutoring - whether by a paid tutor or by parents.

And English 11+ papers too in some cases - again, reading comprehension skills and creative writing skills can be improved by intensive long-term tutoring, too.

FWIW, I'm v against tutoring for 11+ exams personally, but v in favour of grammar schools (I went to one myself, and agree with the comments about incresed social mobility in the past as a result).

Should add was shocked to be told by a parent in my DD's class last year that half her year 3 class had private tutors! What on earth for! (most of these would not be tutoring for 11+ and their primary school is perfectly good).

I assure you it is not an urban myth I have a couple of friends who have given up teaching in schools to tutor children for the 11 plus. It is very higly paid job and some people start their children in year two.

Increase the number of grammar schools by all means. Increase the number until there is a grammar school place for every child in the country. Then there will be a proper comprehensive system. Which is what everyone wants, surely. Nobody can really like a system that tells 75% of children that they are failures at the age of 10.5. And, just as bad, tells 25% that they are better than the other 75%

I agree.

Quattrocento, your experience with your daughter is interesting but anecdotal. The Bucks study linked to earlier shows that tutoring significantly improves the chances of getting into grammar school. It's particularly true with the superselective schools like Tiffin, where children are taught by intensive practice instantly to recognise the question type (what do I need to do here?), to know how long to spend on each question type (is this worth more than 3 seconds?), taught speed techniques for certain types (on Type 16, eliminate by doing x,y or z first) and given advice even on what to do if they run out of time.

Children who aren't tutored, unless exceptionally bright (and of course every year there will be some) simply aren't fast enough or accurate enough.